• LemmyIsFantastic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    You absolutely do not have numbers and do need to consider what hills to die on. Otherwise you’d have basic crap like bike infrastructure in those cities.

    • daltotron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ehh, lot of “those cities” are getting better, if you wanna get more specific as to which one, you know, less general terms, we might get into it and how there are different, you know, ruling party apparatuses that people have to maneuver around and population demographics, I dunno. Mistakes into miracles of covid was that a lot of streets could get shut down and turned into temporary pedestrian streets for limited run studies, or for some amount of days of the week or what have you, so that’s kind of shown people what’s possible.

      A lot of it is also that people who live within city limits and benefit from public services/would benefit from stuff like this kind of lack political will. The drive among most urbanists is less to compromise with drivers and is more to educate/appeal to the population who lives in these cities, is what I’m saying. Which, you know, it’s a safer strategy, those are easier people to convince, you’re having to compromise less on goals. I’d generally agree that maybe things like larger traffic engineering standards in these cities need to change, because standard practice is what tends to shape the built environment rather than one-off projects or even kind of broad legislation like banning right on red, but you’re seeing those happen rather than changing standards becaude one of those tends to be much easier.