Thought it said “cats” for a second.
We could learn from China as they’ve been solving this problem with EVs. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AomxytSwrkY
Cars will never go away due to the current city landscape, but things like these would significantly improve transport and livability.
I regularly transit between Heathrow and downtown. It’s about 13 miles or so. Regularly 45 minutes to an hour and a quarter, and as much as an hour and three quarters if there was some event letting out at the time. For such short distances I don’t think I’ve seen any US city compare. Sure, some have bad hours or short segments of regular congestion, and I’ve driven from one side of the country to another, but London takes the cake for shitty driving most any hour of the day for such a short transit.
This is insane. 13 miles for 45 minutes to an hour plus. Bike, scooter, electric something. All those cars running just to sit and wait.
Have you seen Top Gear’s race across london from 16 years ago? Now it’s even worse
This times 1000 any dense cities with sufficient transit should be car free.
If you banned private vehicle use in cities without sufficient transit, overnight such transit would, as if by magic, suddenly appear. Private bus services are a thing.
Never forget Top Gear’s episode racing through the center of London. Results as follows:
- Bicycle
- Boat
- Tube (public transit)
- Car
It wasn’t even really close.
For the lazy https://youtu.be/CkOzNK4l8KY
James May added: “The thing that really bothers me is road sectarianism. Quite a few people in cars seem to be somehow offended by people riding bicycles because they’ve paid all this money for a car and think therefore they should be rewarded for it, but often they’re just not using the car very intelligently.” 👍
I have to admit I’m a bit guilty of this, but from both sides. I bike more than I drive, and when I’m driving all cyclists are a menace and are in the way, but when I bike all drivers are reckless idiots who are trying to kill me.
The rule of the road is that any one going slower or faster than you is a menace, this applies to everyone with pedestrians being at the bottom of the food chain.
Bit too absolutist imo, people with mobility issues exist, i’d say most cars don’t belong in cities, and it would be solved by good design, traffic restrictions etc.
when I was a kid almost all kids took the bus and walked to school, now I live opposite of an elementary school in a “socialist block” in middle europe and in the morning there is a huge line of cars dropping off kids, the school literally has a roundabout in front of it’s entrance to make it easier, it’s awful design, not to mention there is literally a bus stop on the other side of the school.
There is 0 reason for kids to be driven to school.
Mobility issues are the first dog whistle of car pros, and the first point to be dissected entirely.
Handicapped people have tools they use to navigate an office floor, and they use those same tools to cross from their apartment to the corner store. Building pedestrian-friendly cities and encouraging low-speed transport like bikes and trams helps them too.
Many handicap users also can’t drive cars, meaning public transit options suited to their common routes are a godsend. Advocates of bikes often encourage having that whole setup, so people can pick between walking, biking, or trains as needed.
With you first point i disagree. I think public transport is often just fine or even preferable for people with mobility issues. If they are wheelchair bound then they cannot drive. And public transport has come a long way in terms of supporting disabled people such as most trains trams buses from were I come from now support wheelchair access.
Although I would be interested if there are any examples were taking public transport is infeasible or unhelpful to specific situations.
Sure no problem, let’s say you live in a village that’s next to a small town and then you are sent to an appointment to another doctor that’s only found in a nearby city, doing all that stuff is a lot of travelling, exhausting
Let’s say you live on the moon and need to reach earth for the funeral of your Aunt who rules the underground city of Uthrangon.
You are discussing edge cases. Urban planning should consider edge cases but not base the code design of a city after them.
I disagree. I think disability access should be one of the most important things considered when designing public spaces.
Its something that I (an American) honestly took for granted until I spent some time in Europe. I’m fortunate to be completely physically and mentally (for this conversation lol) capable, but I have friends who are not. But going around Europe, especially outside of big cities, it was shocking to see how many buildings aren’t wheelchair accessible, how roads crossings aren’t designed for people with vision impairments, how little braille there was, bathrooms without mobility bars, and countless other little things.
And the argument I heard a lot was either “but they’re old buildings” or “it’ll cost too much money” and honestly those are some BS answers.
Idk the US does a lot wrong, but the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) really does seem to be the global standard. And it’s an incredibly good thing.
I am not discussing edge cases I provided the example asked for, I agree with James May that cars in cities suck and we should plan cities better and reduce their numbers as much as possible, I just dislike the absolutist nature of the headline it’s the exact type of headline that opposers of good urban planning will point to when accusing people of wanting to taker freedum and their cars
He’s always been the one that’s not as much of a cock as the other two
Oh, right, I didn’t remember which one he was.
Agreed. Also dog’s do not belong in cities.
I know that James May was always the hippie of the group, but I’m still happy he said it.
Could not be more correct. Public spaces and transit, cities need to be for the people that live there. Not for suburban commuters
