[HN Gopher] Designing transport for humans, not econs
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Designing transport for humans, not econs
        
       Author : agronaut
       Score  : 20 points
       Date   : 2021-11-18 20:21 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (behavioralscientist.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (behavioralscientist.org)
        
       | cultofmetatron wrote:
       | I've been watching a channel that really opened my eyes on how
       | terrible urban planning is in america.
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8RRE2rDw4k&ab_channel=NotJu...
        
       | reidjs wrote:
       | I strongly agree with "The greatest fallacy is that travel time
       | is wasted time, so the only option is to speed it up or cut it
       | out."
       | 
       | Most people probably don't mind spending extra time traveling
       | somewhere, especially if:
       | 
       | - They can zone out, use their phone, or talk to friends while
       | traveling.
       | 
       | - They feel safe and strangers won't bother them
       | 
       | - Comfortable climate (heating/cooling)
       | 
       | - It is clear how to get to the destination, e.g., clear signage,
       | GPS integration with a phone app, etc.
        
         | sokoloff wrote:
         | I'd agree with that to a point. It breaks down when the
         | difference in time is greater than an hour. I'm not leaving
         | Boston on a train to Las Vegas or a boat to Aruba.
         | 
         | It also breaks down when the alternative transportation
         | (typically an alternative to a car in the US) doesn't provide a
         | key function that the car provides.
         | 
         | If I'm going to play a round of golf or softball game after
         | work, my car doubles as a secure (enough) locker for that
         | equipment and transportation directly to the sports location.
         | If I'm going to a town 30 miles away, my car serves as a
         | conveyance not only for that 30 miles but also for local
         | transit while I'm there. My car is likewise ready for me in 5
         | minutes of walking to, unlocking, and starting it. I never
         | "miss" my car by it leaving without me and once I'm there, I
         | never have to wait for my next car to depart.
         | 
         | If it was easy to displace cars, more progress would already
         | have been made, because they're expensive already in terms of
         | fixed costs. Once the fixed costs are covered, the apparent
         | cost per incremental trip seems very modest.
        
           | tuatoru wrote:
           | You make very good points that I have not seen "shared
           | mobility" advocates address. The idea that people will give
           | up owning cars... well, it presumes a whole lot of other
           | lifestyle changes have happened beforehand.
           | 
           | Cars _must_ be very valuable. In a blog explaining why
           | hydrogen will never be a transport fuel,[1] the author
           | mentioned in passing that cars average well under 4%
           | utilization, and the average fill frequency is once per
           | month.
           | 
           | To have something so expensive and little used, the option of
           | being able to use it on demand must be _highly_ valuable. And
           | as you say it 's secure storage and portage.
           | 
           | 1. In a month, a steel-walled 200 bar hydrogen tank with 10
           | mm (0.4 inch) thick walls will lose over 80% of its hydrogen
           | through its walls.
        
           | reidjs wrote:
           | How would you feel about public lockers near high traffic
           | areas as a potential solution to that? I know that there is
           | the potential these will get robbed anyways, but cars get
           | robbed all the time anyways (SF).
           | 
           | There is definitely maintenance and cultural expenses for
           | public lockers, but there's no way it's anywhere near as
           | expensive or time consuming as maintaining roads.
        
             | kristjansson wrote:
             | Not public, but gyms/athletic clubs fit this description in
             | some cities. If you have a private, permanent locker at a
             | gym/club close to your office, you can stash clothes,
             | equipment etc. to avoid hauling everything back and forth
             | on transit.
             | 
             | Doesn't really solve for sports like softball and golf that
             | GP mentioned since those are in lower-traffic areas
             | basically by necessity.
        
             | sokoloff wrote:
             | If would depend on the details whether or not they were
             | competitive with a car's trunk.
             | 
             | Can they fit a golf bag? Can I know that I'll get one when
             | I show up? Is it roughly on the way? If I'm wanting to go
             | home to office to golf to dinner/drinks to home in a day,
             | how different is it to go home to transit to transit/locker
             | to work to locker/transit to transit to golf to locker to
             | dinner to locker to home?
             | 
             | Before kids, I'd play sports 4-5 nights a week. These
             | fields often take up a lot of space (it's obviously hard to
             | fit a golf course in a high density area) meaning public
             | transit would never be robust to get to them.
        
         | SkeuomorphicBee wrote:
         | I also strongly agree (with the original statement, and your
         | own items). It is incredible how many urban planers and/or
         | transport engineers subscribe to that fallacy, and consequently
         | how the tides of consensus in planing forums/reddits/... are
         | turning towards sub-optimal solutions. One thing that irks me
         | on those forums is the resurgence of the idea of focusing on
         | buses (as opposed to rail) in urban mass transport. No one
         | seems to understand that buses are much more uncomfortable, and
         | doesn't allow you to zone out because:
         | 
         | - All kinds of strong accelerations (stopping on intersections,
         | turning right angles, jumping around on hills or potholes),
         | impossible to read anything without getting motion-sickness,
         | and in extreme cases sometimes you have to use gym-equipment-
         | like strength to just keep yourself from falling. - The time
         | spent waiting for a bus at the stop or connection doesn't allow
         | zoning out, you have to keep constantly on the lookout for the
         | right bus among other buses and other traffic (while in a metro
         | station you can completely forget about the world and still you
         | won't miss a giant train arriving and opening its doors).
        
           | tuatoru wrote:
           | The best transport is no transport.
           | 
           | The rules for residential zones need to change to require
           | sidewalks, playgrounds, and parks, and to encourage low-
           | traffic service businesses such as co-working spaces,
           | professional services (e.g. accountants, lawyers, real estate
           | offices, ...), convenience stores and small cafes (up to 10
           | seat). And then there are lot size, lot coverage, and off-
           | street parking rules to be abolished...
           | 
           | Hand in hand with that we'll need new bank regulations to
           | force them to finance suburbs that work for people and
           | communities.
        
             | agumonkey wrote:
             | Beware, what you described sounds a lot like what France
             | and other places did with projects in the 70s. Every thing
             | was in reach, but for some obscure reason it collapsed in
             | less than 20 years. Not saying it's a bad idea, but it's
             | sociologically subtle.
        
               | jltsiren wrote:
               | When you build a new residential area, people move in
               | with kids. After 15-20 years, kids move out, population
               | collapses, and local services die. The best way to avoid
               | this is building within / next to existing areas instead
               | of building completely new areas.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-11-19 23:01 UTC)