Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

GreenAnder t1_j6xurft wrote

I'm an avid cyclist but I don't really see the City getting better for non-drivers until there are more non-drivers. People are obsessed with cars because our transit is such a damn mess, they need to extend the subway ASAP. It's criminal that it hasn't happened already.

6

ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j6y11at wrote

It's a chicken and egg scenario. You won't get more cyclists or micro mobility users (scooters, ebikes) until they feel safe doing it in the city. That means safe, protected infrastructure. Lots more people would do it if they weren't constantly threatened with death.

But there isn't widespread support for those infrastructure changes bc there aren't enough current users.

13

baldude69 t1_j6ytfnd wrote

I’ve become really pro-electric scooter because I see anything that’s getting people out of cars and onto other modes of transit as being a positive thing

7

[deleted] t1_j6yymjo wrote

[deleted]

1

baldude69 t1_j6yyt3o wrote

I don’t ride one and yes, they belong in the bike lane or with traffic. I like seeing them because they hopefully will help encourage expansion of bike lanes as well as getting people out of cars and onto alternative e transportation methods

2

GreenAnder t1_j6yas71 wrote

It's not though. The conversation always focuses on protection, and we need it sure, but what we really need is for there to just be less cars on the road. That means making public transit a convenient and accessible option.

3

ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j6yjj24 wrote

Hmmm... I'm not sure where we disagree.

Both in terms of environmental impact, and the fiscal health of the city we need to move away from relying on car-centric infrastructure. We need to build out infrastructure for and encourage all other modalities. Extending subway lines, establishing bus rapid transit with dedicated lanes and signal priority, expanded pedestrian and micro mobility pathways that are grade separated or protected from car traffic. Protected bike lanes on regular streets is just one small step for sure.

Without the infrastructure changes there will never be enough people willing to risk their lives on the streets as they are currently laid out. Same with public transport, people won't take it until there is more frequent service, safer service, and more rapid service.

3

Fattom23 OP t1_j6yl85x wrote

My only disagreement with any of that is that, even if frequency, safety and speed are all improved, people still won't take public transit as long as driving is more convenient. Driving will always be more convenient as long as city government as a whole refuses to enforce any meaningful limitations on driving. When you can just drive where you want running every red light, blowing every stop sign and just throw your car on the sidewalk when you get there, that's going to beat a bus every time. Then, instead of paying for storage of your car, just put it on a bus loading zone at night or throw out a cone so that other users of the street are afraid to take "your" spot.

Actively making driving more expensive/harder is part and parcel of improving other transit modes.

2

ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j6ynnfu wrote

Haha for sure. The amount of hidden subsidies we give for drivers and car culture in general is infuriating.

Driving should NOT be the most convenient way of getting around a big city. It isn't in most cities in the world, and isn't in NYC. Driving has it's place, but the vast majority of it can and should be replaced in a city like Philadelphia. It's a whole mind shift though.

4

MoreShenanigans t1_j6ztxex wrote

I think if frequency, safety, and speed are improved (also gonna throw in cleanliness), transit will become more convenient in center city even with the lax traffic enforcement.

Safety is a big one. There's a lot of people who just will never get on the El right now, but would if they didn't have to worry about safety.

I agree that asshole drivers will break rules, and there are too many of them. But they still aren't the majority. Most ppl in center city will park legally for example, if they're gonna be parked for hours. And that usually means paying for a spot. Which also takes some time (finding a spot & walking to the destination if the lot isn't right next door).

If you have a safe, clean, train that comes every 2 minutes, that option is suddenly a lot more convenient.

Outside of CC, I agree with you. Transit is too sparse, and easy/free parking is too much for it to compete with, even with the upgrades.

1

Fattom23 OP t1_j6zumxl wrote

I take a both/and approach, but your example of Center City is exactly what I'm talking about. In the areas where there's actual enforcement, people behave better and it's overall more pleasant to walk/bike/exist. Sadly, because of all the baggage that goes with them, that area is almost entirely patrolled by the PPA, who are monumentally better at enforcing parking violations than PPD. If we could get a comprehensive enforcement division as efficient as the PPA that wasn't up to its eyeballs in political corruption, we'd really have something.

Instead, we have a city where the powers that be have decided you can just park wherever you want as long as you remove your tag and cover your VIN first.

2

Glystopher t1_j6yhvxg wrote

I’m still doing it anyway, besides injury and death. Have already accumulated titanium in both legs from being run over on the sidewalk, and I’m gonna continue to roll the dice. Fuck driving unless I’m going to the next state/county

2

ConfiaEnElProceso t1_j6yjr14 wrote

I'm with you. But i don't begrudge anyone who would rather not risk life and limb on the insanely dangerous streets we currently have.

3