Editing 2832: Urban Planning Opinion Progression
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
==Explanation== | ==Explanation== | ||
− | + | {{incomplete|Created by a DUTCH BOT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}} | |
− | + | This comic follows Cueball, Megan, Knit Cap and Ponytail as they begin to favor pedestrian-centered design. In the first panel, Cueball and Megan complain about the common problem many car-centric cities face about not having enough space for all the cars, and give the naïve suggestion of making more space for cars. In the second panel, Knit Cap mentions how she is going to visit Amsterdam, a city known for its {{w|walkability}} and bike friendliness. Ponytail expresses concern over the popularity of cycling in the street presumably because cycling in the street is dangerous where she lives and so she expects it to be dangerous in Amsterdam. | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | The ''' | + | In the third panel, Cueball discusses another problem many car-centric cities face which is that there are not a lot of bike paths. Since there is a limited amount of space on a street, cities face a dilemma on how much space they should allocate to pedestrians, cycles and vehicles. Car-centric cities often allocate the most space to cars, leaving less space for bikes and pedestrians. The default for cities is to just let cyclists cycle in the street with the cars, as the road vehicles they are. This, however, is considered by some to be significantly more dangerous than a city having dedicated bike lanes, which is why Ponytail was likely concerned in the second panel. (A recent study reported that painted bike lanes are more dangerous than no bike lane, and only protected bike lanes are safer: <span title="Conclusions: Protected bike lanes and buffered bike lanes had estimated protective effects on segments between intersections but estimated harmful effects at intersections. Conventional bike lanes had estimated harmful effects along segments and at intersections.">Garber, Michael D., et al: ''[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214140523001056 Bicycle infrastructure and the incidence rate of crashes with cars: A case-control study with Strava data in Atlanta]''. Journal of Transport & Health, '''32'''. September 2023: Received 13 February 2023; Received in revised form 10 July 2023; Accepted 14 July 2023; Available online 11 August 2023. doi:[https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2023.101669 10.1016/j.jth.2023.101669]</span>) This danger was discussed more in the fifth panel as well. From a wider perspective, however much you attempt to segregate different forms of transport (at junctions and other bottlenecks where space cannot be reserved), you'll always need to bring bicycles and traffic back into contact, briefly, and in circumstances where motorised traffic has become unused to sharing the roadspace with the lighter vehicles. This is unlike a more integrated and less segregated place like Amsterdam where you are rarely going to be surprised by the presence of bicycles, overlook them and therefore cause an accident. |
− | + | One editor found that Megan's comment in the sixth panel may be referring to lifted pickup trucks in addition to regular trucks, and related that pickup truck owners care a lot about the distance their vehicle is off the ground and so they will either purchase a pickup truck with a high ground clearance or raise it themselves, resulting in what is known as a lifted pickup truck. The belief is that a vehicle with higher ground clearance will keep them safe on the road, but that this comes at the cost of potentially hurting others who are in smaller vehicles or no vehicle at all. Another editor learned the opposite, that the elevated center of mass reduced safety due to reducing the stable tipping angle, and has only seen high clearance useful when driving on unpaved roads. The comment may refer to many large tractor trailer cabs or garbage trucks that if you move directly in front of the cab you can't see the driver and they can't see you. It is particularly dangerous for children. | |
− | + | {{w|Induced demand}} is an economic theory in which increasing the supply of a good or service causes the demand to rise faster than the increased supply, worsening the shortage. The most common example is traffic: some US cities have tried to alleviate traffic jams by widening the roads and highways, which incentivized more people to take up driving, more vehicles to route through their streets, or took potential funding from other transportation solutions, worsening the traffic jam problem. Conversely, other cities have tried removing traffic lanes or converting them to dedicated public transit lanes, and have reported a reduction in traffic congestion, due to people choosing other transportation options. Among urban planners, this is known as the {{w|Downs–Thomson paradox}}. | |
− | + | Cueball's comment in the second-to-last panel that "anything that makes a city a worse place to drive in makes it a better place to live, short of scattering random tire spikes on the road" is a slight exaggeration. <!-- TERRIBLE EXAMPLE For example, a city that allows potholes to go unrepaired will make it more difficult to drive in, but could also make it more difficult for pedestrians to safely cross the street. PEDESTRIANS CAN EASILY NEGOTIATE INTERMITTENT GRADE CHANGES AND AWKWARDLY INTERUPTED SURFACES THAT VEHICLES HAVE MUCH DIFFICULTY WITH, E.G. STEPS OR EVEN LOW FENCES. UNLESS YOU MEAN "SHELLHOLES", I THINK WE REALLY NEED A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT EXAMPLE HERE. EVEN UNTO SOMETHING LIKE WILD BULL ELEPHANTS ROAMING THE PLACE LOOKING FOR TROUBLE/MATING OPPORTUNITIES! yeah a lot of the explainxkcd prose often seems written by people who disagree with the comics --> | |
− | + | The title text references a cyberpunk book called "{{w|Snow Crash}}", by Neal Stephenson. An early scene in that book involves the equivalent of a skater using a magnet on a cable to attach onto the back of a pizza delivery vehicle. He swerves in order to dislodge her, she taunts him and attaches stickers to his vehicle. | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | The | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
=== What makes a city walkable? === | === What makes a city walkable? === | ||
− | + | As all of Europe{{actual citation needed}} agrees, urban planning (or zoning) must be seamlessly integrated with public transport planning. The central truth is that everybody is a pedestrian for some time, which also includes car drivers. Crucially, the average pedestrian is willing to walk about 2000 ft from their home to the next public transport stop, and an additional 2000 ft between the last public transport stop and their workplace. Opportunities for shopping and eating should exist at every connecting station, with the connections scheduled in a way that it both allows changing to the connecting train/tramway/bus immediately - as well as buying groceries. | |
− | + | All roads should have a sidewalk, which, of course, costs area, but make the pedestrians' lives much easier. But then, not only roads impact walkability. In the United States, many places open to the public are, by municipal ordinances, forced to provide enough parking space for [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUNXFHpUhu8 all customers at any given time], which leads to serious knock-on effects: Pedestrians must often cross a large and weather-exposed parking lot in order to shop. A building can often be only re-purposed if a neighboring building is bulldozed to create the necessary parking area. And tenants who live in an apartment, but do not own a car, are forced to pay for the parking space they do not need. | |
− | Another topic is subsidizing public traffic. Municipalities in Switzerland, for example, order bus connections | + | Another topic is subsidizing public traffic. Municipalities in Switzerland, for example, order bus connections - e.g. a hourly bus from 6 AM until 10 PM, and in exchange, they cover the deficit of any such connection. That way, families, who usually are better taxpayers, move to villages, and beginning with grade 5, 6 or 7, pupils can still easily commute to a district school. |
==Transcript== | ==Transcript== | ||
Line 99: | Line 70: | ||
:Megan: It's a vicious cycle. | :Megan: It's a vicious cycle. | ||
− | :[Knit Cap is walking around with two Dutch flags raised in | + | :[Knit Cap is walking around with two Dutch flags raised in his hands.] |
:Knit Cap: '''''Netherlands! Netherlands! Netherlands! Netherlands!''''' | :Knit Cap: '''''Netherlands! Netherlands! Netherlands! Netherlands!''''' | ||