• grue@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    They are cars - Obvious to most here, but better public transport can vastly improve the situation, regardless of how the car is powered.

    Zoning for walkability is vastly more important even than better public transport, as is infrastructure for biking. The “EVs” we should really be talking about are e-bikes.

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

      The big thing is that you need to plan for end to end integration.

      Walking > Bikes > E bikes > Trains > Busses > EV vehicles > ICE vehicles.

      Most will likely be needed (e.g. someone needs to stock the inner city supermarkets, and you can’t do that by bus), but we should be optimising for that whole chain.

      • grue@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        First of all, I broadly agree with you. The following is meant to be a “yes, and,” not a “no, but.”

        (e.g. someone needs to stock the inner city supermarkets, and you can’t do that by bus)

        That statement has a car-centric assumption built in: in a properly-designed city, grocery shopping isn’t necessarily done in “supermarkets” to begin with. Smaller stores, in turn, could be restocked via smaller vehicles.

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

          You will still need shops, and they will still need stocking up. That means delivery access. Larger delivery vehicles are a lot more efficient, and so less are needed. You likely will always want a controlled way to get transit sized vans in and out. I would rather that was planned in, in a controlled manner, rather than left to big business, or bodge jobs. E.g. by back delivery roads. Underground would be perfect, but generally isn’t viable.

          You also need access for construction and maintenance.

          Unfortunately, these requirements also make a vehicle centric model easy for cities, and so, by extension, car centric. Many places default to this. Finding a viable solution requires getting a balance (enough road access to keep places supplied, but good enough support and incentives to keep unnecessary cars out).

          • grue@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            The idea that pedestrianized streets are always blocked off to literally everything (including emergency vehicles, construction vehicles, overnight deliveries, etc.) is a common misconception – or strawman argument – but it just isn’t true. Lowering or removing a bollard for access by vehicles with a good reason to be there is an obvious no-brainer.

            • Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yeah, and importantly, a lot of these deliveries can be done at night, when there are far fewer pedestrians around. And long-term, I bet things like local freight rail or cargo trams could be used to deliver to larger, higher throughput stores: