[HN Gopher] How Paris Is Taking Back Its Streets from Cars
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How Paris Is Taking Back Its Streets from Cars
        
       Author : jseliger
       Score  : 51 points
       Date   : 2023-04-28 16:32 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.distilled.earth)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.distilled.earth)
        
       | julienreszka wrote:
       | I visit Paris regularly for business and it's getting worse every
       | day don't believe the hype, it's transforming into and dystopian
       | hellhole
        
         | tmp20230324 wrote:
         | Would you mind expounding on how it's getting worse? I'm not
         | questioning that it is not, but most of what I hear about Paris
         | reduce car traffic seems to be positive, and I'd like to hear
         | more about your view point. Are commute times going up
         | considerably? Are commutes less enjoyable? Is there more
         | congestion of people (crowds) or bicycles, that has come in
         | since the car reduction? Or is it something else that I never
         | would've guessed? I really would be interested in hearing your
         | point of view.
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | eigenspace wrote:
       | Really impressive how quickly they've done this. I'm sure there's
       | been lots of growing pains, but I hope they can keep it up.
        
         | baud147258 wrote:
         | Considering there's been plans to reduce cars in Paris since at
         | least Delanoe's time in office, so since 2001, I don't think
         | it's been going that quickly; though for sure the city did use
         | the reduction in car traffic during the Covid lockdown to do
         | some more work on bike/bus lanes.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | decross wrote:
       | My hunch is that in the first picture there was at least one
       | person inside each car and they seemed to be going to work. In
       | the second picture, there are a lot less people and they are
       | definitely not going to work. Are they getting rid of people and
       | jobs?
        
         | epistasis wrote:
         | Weird hunches....
         | 
         | How do you know what the people in cars are doing? How do you
         | know what the people are doing?
         | 
         | Cars take tons of space, and traffic means that they take it up
         | for longer, and use the space even less efficiently. Cars are
         | an inherently space-inefficient transport mechanism. Replacing
         | cars with bikes improves street throughput several fold,
         | removing that traffic. Removing cars mean that the same
         | physical street can serve the transportation needs of more
         | people, and let them travel more quickly.
         | 
         | We have to start to realize that the failures of car
         | infrastructure result in less jobs, less leisure time, less
         | living.
        
           | stackedinserter wrote:
           | > Cars are an inherently space-inefficient transport
           | 
           | It is time efficient and convenient though.
           | 
           | > We have to start to realize that the failures of car
           | infrastructure result in less jobs, less leisure time, less
           | living.
           | 
           | How come? Having a car, I can reach tons of places in ~40km
           | radius, without planning ahead too much, in any season. I
           | would have to chop significant portion of my life if I were
           | not able to drive anymore.
        
             | Equadex wrote:
             | That only works for the select few, not for the many. In
             | dense cities it falls apart.
        
             | epistasis wrote:
             | There are only certain medium size densities for which cars
             | work. They are only convenient and time-efficient for a
             | very small range of traffic, and only at very low density
             | of interesting places to go. Look at how much space is
             | devoted to parking on a satellite view of any sort of
             | suburban shopping center, and you'll see why cars only work
             | for low density of interesting places to go.
             | 
             | You seem to enjoy the number of places that you can reach
             | in a car. But if the destinations are man-made places of
             | interest, such as businesses, friends, shops, services, and
             | social meeting places then cars' space inefficiency limit
             | how many of those you can visit. Because each has to spend
             | a massive amount of space on parking. And transport has a
             | failure mode of creating traffic jams whenever demand for a
             | certain route tips over a critics point, causing a phase
             | change from free flowing traffic to a traffic jam, that can
             | only be cleared by long periods of far lower number of
             | cars.
             | 
             | With trains and bikes and walkable cities, you can achieve
             | far far higher densities of interesting destinations, with
             | a <40minute travel time. There is really no comparison.
        
         | Swenrekcah wrote:
         | I'm curious why you would think people in the first picture are
         | going to/from work but not in the second.
        
         | eigenspace wrote:
         | 1) Those photos are probably taken at different times of day,
         | so the destinations can differ a lot
         | 
         | 2) The second photo may have less people in it, but it's a
         | *much* more zoomed in perspective. It's pretty clearly at least
         | a higher density of people.
         | 
         | 3) What makes you think these people aren't going to work?
        
           | tzs wrote:
           | 1) Assuming that this is a one-way street for cars and the
           | direction has not changed between the two pictures, it does
           | seem approximately the same time of day based on the shadow
           | angles.
           | 
           | But that doesn't tell us anything about day of week which
           | could be a huge factor.
           | 
           | 2) Assuming at least one person per vehicle, and assuming
           | that the first stories of the buildings are about the same
           | height in both photos in order to compare scales between the
           | photos, the first seems to have a higher density of people.
        
           | mden wrote:
           | 4) Throughput is probably a better metric than density and
           | that's hard to guess from static images.
        
           | comte7092 wrote:
           | Clearly, if you aren't in a car, you aren't a serious person
           | doing serious, important things. /s
        
         | Pearse wrote:
         | In the video he specificly says that that road was reduced from
         | 6 lanes to one to make room for bikes.
        
         | cwoolfe wrote:
         | During the same time period, working from home probably
         | increased due to COVID
        
       | 64operator wrote:
       | Is this another walkable 15 minute cities PR puff piece? How
       | exciting and fresh.
        
         | systemvoltage wrote:
         | The goal is to become dependent on gov services in some kind of
         | a socialist nightmare version of Venezuela. With so much crime
         | in cities, unable to get a CCW permit, there is no way to ride
         | public transportation here in USA without jeapardizing personal
         | safety. Not to mention terribly run public transport with lazy
         | employees that cannot be fired, trains/busses constantly
         | running late, filthy stations and coaches, etc.
         | 
         | Public-transportation is a religion.
        
       | ShadowBanThis01 wrote:
       | This may work in a traditional city like Paris; but selling this
       | vision in L.A. is a tiresome and offensive ruse to line
       | developers' pockets by deleting parking requirements from
       | building projects, and other handouts that reduce the quality of
       | life for existing residents by shifting burdens onto them without
       | commensurate rewards.
        
         | mchusma wrote:
         | I do think removing parking restrictions is hugely beneficial
         | for communities (allowing developers to add more or less as
         | they see appropriate for their situation). I'd recommend
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_High_Cost_of_Free_Parking for
         | some more background here.
         | 
         | Congestion pricing is another thing that really does overall
         | improve the quality of life.
         | 
         | The problem with offering free public parking or trying to
         | force developers to make free parking is that it is not free
         | for the community at large.
         | 
         | My own parents (who I love) live by the beach in LA, and they
         | have 3 cars for 2 people. The only reason they do this is
         | because parking on the street is free. Parking is crowded, and
         | 1-2 cars can't park at the beach because my parents are taking
         | 1-2 slots they could have. And this is multiplied across the
         | whole community.
         | 
         | I also am against parking maximums, which are starting to pop
         | up. People should be able to decide what is the right amount of
         | parking for their home or business.
        
         | contingencies wrote:
         | I lived in LA for a year around 2010. I don't drive. LA has
         | some amazing qualities for cycling: (1) Really damn wide
         | streets. (2) Excellent weather. (3) Buses that let you throw
         | your bike on a flip-down rack at the front. (4) Awesome nearby
         | scenery and great views.
         | 
         | My understanding is, since living there, LA has embraced
         | cycling. Good on you LA!
         | 
         |  _In life, there are two kinds of people: some people drive,
         | and others are driven._ - Non-driving successful executive and
         | friend of the CEO of the first and only public company I worked
         | for.
        
           | ShadowBanThis01 wrote:
           | That on its own is not informative. WHERE in L.A.? Buses are
           | subject to traffic like everything else, and they don't go
           | everywhere at all hours.
           | 
           | Blanket statements like yours are not applicable to L.A.,
           | just as the aforementioned fantasy-based excuses for
           | eliminating automotive infrastructure are not.
           | 
           | Of course, that doesn't stop the shamming and scamming.
           | Here's another developer handout: Developers are now allowed
           | to demolish a single house and replace it with 10 units of
           | housing, no permits or review required (or possible). That
           | means more trees cut down, more ground paved over and not
           | retaining water, more blight. Meanwhile, massive Macy's and
           | Fry's stores sit boarded up in dying malls in the center of
           | vast parking lots that are growing weeds.
           | 
           | And developers get even more handouts under this legislation
           | (SB9/10) if the neighborhood they're wrecking is near a
           | "mass-transit corridor." You know what counts as "mass
           | transit" under this fraud? ONE ZIPCAR in a four-block
           | quadrant. One.
           | 
           | No word on what happens if that car gets wrecked, stolen, or
           | otherwise removed. Do they tear the giant monoliths down?
           | 
           | I am up for bikes as legitimate transit, make no mistake. But
           | that's another fun thing about L.A.: They put in poorly-
           | executed bike lanes (and I do support and use bike lanes) but
           | the lanes go for a few blocks and then just... disappear.
           | You're riding along and then POOF. No more bike lane. Years
           | later, nothing has changed in those spots. That's even more
           | offensive: local politicians pander to NIMBYs with
           | initiatives like "Vision Zero," then half-ass it and publicly
           | congratulate themselves. Actually, that's too much credit;
           | they quarter-ass it at best.
           | 
           | Oh, and the result of "Vision Zero?" INCREASED pedestrian
           | fatalities: https://www.kcrw.com/news/shows/greater-
           | la/pedestrian-deaths...
           | 
           | That's because nobody has the balls to ruthlessly combat the
           | real threat to cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers: TEXTING
           | while driving. It should be a DUI-level offense with the same
           | penalties.
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | It's amusing that their bike lanes have an occasional Jersey
       | barrier. That prevents vehicles from running through the plastic
       | dividers.
       | 
       | New York City had a problem with that. They did something
       | similar. They used some anti-terrorism funds to upgrade some of
       | the plastic dividers to anti-terrorism grade bollards. Not all of
       | them. Just some of them. The ones that will stop a runaway cement
       | mixer are not marked.
        
         | epistasis wrote:
         | Traffic engineers in many places in the US are hesitant to
         | install life-saving infrastructure if it risks scratching the
         | cars of careless drivers. So kudos to NYC for being braver and
         | making better decisions.
        
         | toomuchtodo wrote:
         | > They used some anti-terrorism funds to upgrade some of the
         | plastic dividers to anti-terrorism grade bollards. Not all of
         | them. Just some of them. The ones that will stop a runaway
         | cement mixer are not marked.
         | 
         | This is a clever, cost effective mechanism to encourage
         | compliance without breaking the bank.
        
       | baud147258 wrote:
       | > The city's transportation policies have been very popular. In
       | 2020, Mayor Hidalgo promised to continue her bold redesign of the
       | city during her successful re-election campaign.
       | 
       | it has been popular for people living in Paris, but people from
       | the suburbs who either have to transit through Paris by car or
       | who have seen an increase in car trafic because people have to go
       | around Paris aren't big fans of her; but they don't really have
       | their say in this (because they don't live in Paris, they don't
       | vote in the municipal elections)
        
         | truculent wrote:
         | Honest question: for whom is it easier to travel into Paris by
         | car than by transit? Having been to Paris only a couple of
         | times, I found the transit options very convenient; although
         | generally localised around the city center
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-04-28 23:02 UTC)