zlacker

>>amathe+(OP)
The issue of quiting cars is nowadays far from just a matter of values as the article seems to be implying.

Cars are by now a hard to reverse environmental and urban planning disaster across the world. We are stuck with them. As a mode of transport it has grown uncontrollably at the expense of all others (except the airplane) and practically everything has been shaped to accomodate it.

Reversing that development, limiting car traffic to where its really needed is like trying to perform a complete heart and arteries transplant on a living person. Even if there was a will (which there is not) it is not clear if there is a way.

In the best scenario it will be an excruciatingly long transformation (~50 yr) as car oriented cities (or city sections) get slowly deprecated and the car-free or car-lite segments become more desirable, more livable.

>>nologi+Mz1
The shift to trains/bikes is harder, but the shift to buses is not as bad from what I've seen, because it re-uses car infrastructure well, and can be improved with minimal construction (often, just signage making a lane bus-only or similar).

>>kerkes+eS1
adding bike lanes can just take paint on largish streets. thinner roads also make people drive slower, so it's a win win

>>bippih+1T1
Take a look at the paint next time you drive by. Is it marked with black streaks from tires crossing it? Would driving habits change if, say, some large rocks were lined along the paint stripe?

Without at least bollards the road isn't actually thinner, so people don't actually drive slower. And without at least bollards, I wouldn't let my kids ride in a bike lane— which means many other people won't feel safe either. It's unfortunate that politicians get away with this willful disregard.