urbanism

Obviously I know why railroads are often built on the banks of rivers - they offer a flat/low grade path that penetrates far inland, often through mountains that would pose great difficulty for railroads. And railroads are not the only transportation often built along rivers, roads are also often built along rivers for similar reasons. Although with roads theoretically there's more freedom to build them elsewhere since the flat/low grade isn't completely necessary, although it does make building them easier. Anyway, the reason I'm thinking about this is because I live on a fairly large river, and it always depresses me a bit that it's difficult to actually reach the water's edge because there's a railroad going along it for nearly the entire length. Only in a couple spots that there happens to be land on the other side of the tracks can I actually reach the water's edge. The other side of the river has a bit more parkland or undeveloped land on the riverbanks, but it's similar over there too - rail takes up a very large portion of the riverbank. I would never swim in the river or anything due to pollution, but the fact remains, it's really hard to enjoy and make use of the defining geographic feature in my area due to development. And not even "bad" development, but railroads! Anyway there's no real point to this post, I was just sitting around thinking about things and figured I'd post my thoughts here in case anyone wants to share their thoughts related to this.

12
1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlLyS8x1gZo

>Earlier this summer I was riding along a new bike lane under construction when I came across this poster: “Help save our neighbourhood. Big new bike path endangers schoolchildren, removes parking, and was imposed without neighbourhood consultation.” It advertised a meeting to take action and organize resistance at a local church, so I went to see what they had to say. Insane Canadian shitlibs argue against bike lanes.

24
7
www.adn.com

the Anchorage subreddit's response to the assembly's proposal to reduce speed limits on streets where it is currently 45 or 50 mph is to blame homeless people for being hit by speeding cars and I can't take it anymore ![agony-consuming](https://www.hexbear.net/pictrs/image/2826dcf5-3046-4e2e-bfb3-33cf46c01824.png "emoji agony-consuming")

31
1

it's even in communism colours there's got to be old propaganda with maos head on a train

22
3
https://archive.is/ikvWx

I'm not sure I agree with the premise that automatic license-plate readers are "AI," but shit is fucked: >Spencer and the other Regal customers found themselves in the middle of a controversial business practice that utilizes A.I. surveillance technology and exploitative tactics in order to target drivers for simply parking at the garage. They aren’t the only ones to have been targeted, either. Around the country and the world, more and more parking companies are quietly installing automated license plate readers—ALPRs—in their lots and using them to track clients, and, in some cases, send out fines the way ABM is doing at the Regal City North parking lot. >While the tech is annoying and even scary when used to send out unexpected parking fines, it’s an indicator of a much larger problem surrounding A.I. and its increasing intrusion into our private lives—one that could even be weaponized against marginalized communities like women, trans people, people of color, and undocumented immigrants. >ABM is now one of at least six parking companies facing a class-action lawsuit for allegedly violating the 1994 Driver’s Privacy Protection Act. The law was passed in response to the murder of actress Rebecca Schaeffer, whose killer hired a private investigator to track her down using her license plate number, and limits who can access vehicle registration information and use it to track people. But it’s full of loopholes, and may not be sufficient to protect customers’ privacy, according to experts. . . . >The fight to prevent private companies from using ALPR data to track vehicles has implications beyond parking fines. Landlords and homeowners associations have also begun using ALPRs to track who is coming and going in their buildings, which could lead to discrimination against tenants based on who they associate with, among other problems. >Also, by selling ALPR location data directly to law enforcement, private companies allow their customers to bypass the need for a search warrant. This could be especially threatening for people traveling through multiple states who face persecution from the law, like people who need abortions, or undocumented immigrants. (The Electronic Frontier Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union have both expressed concern that state law enforcement could go after citizens who seek abortions in other states using similar techniques.)

27
2

I cannot explain otherwise how so many people can nearly hit a vulnerable road user at like 20kph and then be mad when those people are quite irate they nearly just got hospitalized. Like yeah this'd be a nuisance if I was in a car, but I'm not. Anyways give everyone not in a car a gun so they can retaliate. You may not hit the car, you may shoot periliously close, though.

63
25
urbanism
urbanism RNAi Now 97%
Yea
217
35
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbLqn6ErrfA

>When city-dwellers report feeling lonely, it could be an urban design problem. When cities structure themselves to make sharing easier, people thrive in every way—including socially. But what should cities build to foster sharing?

30
3
https://hexbear.net/pictrs/image/4c72d919-a9e8-4f2f-9bfe-38297e0834c4.jpeg

https://web.archive.org/web/20240915173553/https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/15/world/europe/tramdriver-competition-frankfurt-tram.html/ I would 1000% go to this

46
2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWEiiRIiCoo

>America is Becoming One Big Consumerist Theme Park >Theme parks are fun family-friendly destinations, but underneath the fantasy lurks a more sinister reality. In this video, we’ll explore the dystopia lurking beneath theme park utopias and ask: Are our cities becoming theme parks too? :baudrillard-agony:

16
1

They're like brutalism haters in that while I personally enjoy it, they're not wrong. There's very bad examples of it. But also anyone who gets into hating it a lot seems entirely incapable of producing any evidence for it being so. They're like truffle pigs for getting it wrong. What the Habitat 67 is to architectural aesthetics is "guy getting run over by a car cutting the corner standing still at a red light" is to active transport

21
3
www.theguardian.com

smth smth trying everything before doing the right thing >The new technology will make Zemu the first hydrogen-powered, zero-emissions passenger train in North America to meet Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) requirements when it goes into service early next year. >Developing a lightweight frame that passed FRA standards is a promising accomplishment because it provides a zero-emission alternative to the expensive overhead electrification that’s common in Europe, **but is prohibited by the FRA on freight lines in the US.** “Once you take that vehicle and you add hydrogen to it, you make it possible to have zero emission technology on the same corridors where Union Pacific and NSF run,” Killpack said. “That’s what’s really crazy and cool about this”. Incredible, freight trains are prohibited from running on electricity in the empire? >In order for these small but promising steps to be economically sustainable in the long run, though, huge investment will need to be made to expand the infrastructure. “You’ve got to be selling at least hundreds [of trains] to start to get some scale economies and bring those costs down,” said Lewis Fulton, the Energy Futures Program director at UC Davis’s Institute for Transportation Studies. (fucking bullshit)

31
12
https://archive.ph/corCn

basically by tying it to federal funding to force states to allow more housing to be built, which is how the federal government got the states to all raise their minimum drinking age to 21 in the 1980s.

33
10

semi serious question. I stumbled onto my local metro area's reddit while trying to look up some historical photos and stared into the abyss for a few mins. I resisted the urge to leave libreddit and make an account just to reply but, I ran into this post that is basically complaining about having a car in one of the most central neighborhoods in the city, and asking for advice on getting off street parking (in reality, anything that isn't an overpriced surface lot that offers no protection is going to be quite a hike away from their apartment, there's no way this will work out). They claim they work in X first ring suburb where "there are no buses" and that's why they have to have this car, which is hilarious because they could one seat ride to half of that suburb in under half an hour from a bus that leaves from their front door. the other half it'd be a 2 seat ride but still under 45 mins, and obviously way cheaper than a car. There are also plenty of neighborhoods they could move to that would have less breakins and cheap off street parking, but they seem convinced that's not the case. But I digress. The fellow ![reddit-logo](https://www.hexbear.net/pictrs/image/4aac8007-876f-4c7f-936d-b7eabf506ef4.png "emoji reddit-logo")ers in there commiserating about how horribly expensive off street parking is (in a neighborhood that is basically *in* downtown) got me thinking... If we can't get city governments to do shit about on street parking and massively unsafe roads, is allowing the street to be so unappealing to park on that people have to actually pay for their giant waste of precious urban land, a viable option to improve things? this expectation that you should be able to just leave your 2 ton death box lying around in public anywhere for any length of time and nobody will so much as touch it doesn't apply to any other kind of property (just look at bike theft), and it really fucks with people when you violate that. I feel like that's a usable weapon, in a way, against gentrification and car dependency and traffic violence. Were kia boys doing praxis?

20
16

*Pictured: unit 4 at lizard head pass, Colorado, 1950. Photo by the Ridgeway railroad museum* The *Galloping Goose* was a series of railcars built in the 1930s by and for the Rio Grande Southern Railroad (RGS) (Not to be mistaken with the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad) as an attempt to maintain revenue during the great depression when passenger and freight traffic severely dropped. During this time, RGS was strapped for cash and sought mail contracts. They developed a lightweight and cheap solution for their narrow gauge infrastructure which was fragile and battered by both deferred maintenance and the harsh elements of the rocky mountains. Such solution was a series of gas and diesel automobiles fitted with bogies and cargo space- with the first unit constructed utilizing the front end of a Buick Master Six. Several additional units would be constructed using Pierce Arrows and GMC bodies with a variety of configurations to carry small freight, US mail and the occasional passenger. During WW2, the RGS continued to run irregular heavy freight service to haul livestock in addition to their goose lineups. By 1950, the RGS lost their mail contract as the postal service found trucks more favorable. Few cars would remain and RGS would run occasional scenic tours throughout Telluride. In 1952, after losing the mail contract and being unable to maintain finances, the RGS would fold, with the final run of the cars assigned to carry track being torn up. The name behind the “galloping goose” is unclear- but it is asserted that the name originated from the jittery nature of the railcars rolling through the battered trackage along with the installed horn resembling the sound of a duck. A few units have been preserved and are mostly relegated to museum displays. However, two units run on excursions at the Knotts’ Berry Farms Ghost Town & Calico Railroad.

25
1