this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2025
1143 points (97.5% liked)

Fuck Cars

10377 readers
1809 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] karpintero 167 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Let's also get rid of golf courses in arid deserts in the midst of droughts

[–] PugJesus 144 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You had me at "Let’s get rid of golf courses"

[–] [email protected] 50 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

This is a municipal course as well, so Seattle could literally do this. The city government doesn't want to.

This heavily neglected sidewalk, next to the fenced off golf course, alongside a high speed and very busy highway onramp just 2 blocks from a light rail stop, tells you just how much the city cares about the area.

There is no excuse not to cleanup and widen this sidewalk except apathy and malaise from the city.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 21 hours ago

@mosiacmango @PugJesus
My wire cutters, pipe cutters and bolt cutters are cheaper than your fence.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That lady is Seattle personified.

[–] Soup 11 points 23 hours ago (5 children)

A fairly generic lady and that’s what you took from that guy’s comment?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 93 points 1 day ago (3 children)

You're probably not going to save 95% of the trees given the major earthworks likely needed for managing sewage, stormwater, and other utilities. You'll probably save most of them, though.

40k looks pretty optimistic for the size and number of buildings, too.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

probably not going to save 95% of the trees

I was wondering that too... maybe they meant: plant new trees, and the total number of new trees would be 95% of the number of old trees?

[–] [email protected] 33 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I’m guessing they’re just not aware of construction impacts on trees. It’s not something most people think about.

[–] PugJesus 25 points 21 hours ago

I supposed they meant "And this amount of space is still available for greenery" rather than "These, specific, trees will be preserved"

[–] [email protected] 4 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

Depends how many floors they have but yeah, that would be quite high density at 60k/km²

[–] [email protected] 0 points 14 hours ago

I don't know if it's the same in USA but with all these new regulations building houses these days is an environmental disaster

[–] urata 37 points 22 hours ago

I work at a golf course and I'd rather be doing something meaningful like building homes so this post speaks to me directly.

Unfortunately the big thing lately is we've been dropping a bunch of trees.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 18 hours ago

Now add in mixed use zoning, and affordable housing units and this could be a winner

[–] pHr34kY 1 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

That area should hold about 400 people, not 40,000. The trees won't survive unless they can see the sky.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If you just repurpose for housing you just wind up with 40,000 people needing transit and overloading the system you're trying to promote.

We need to think beyond housing and towards having communities that largely provide the needs of the people living with them. Shops, offices, other non-office/shop jobs, and recreational activities need to be considered as well.

[–] MisterFrog 2 points 12 hours ago

The neat part is that businesses can be in the bottom couple of floors. Though often this doesn't seem to be done unless it's the CBD...

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 day ago (2 children)

BuT wHeRe WouLd i PaRk mY cAr?!?!!?

[–] rolling_resistance 47 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That's the neat part, you don't.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

car
car go
car go bye
cargo bike

[–] [email protected] 11 points 22 hours ago

if I saw this on a billboard/poster I'd have a new bike

[–] Lemminary 8 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Truly the poet of our generation 🥲

[–] fnrir 5 points 17 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 21 hours ago

In the water hazard on the 14th hole.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 22 hours ago

Plus you can live in a pentagon! Just not the Pentagon.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 day ago

When there's no more golf you'll know the rich fucks are gone.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

Most suburban streets are 50 feet wide, many suburban front yards are 50 feet deep. That's a wasted space 150 feet wide and however long the street is long. Think of how much housing could be built in that space if you tore up that road, and in its place put a pair of alleyways housing in the middle

[–] ChokingHazard 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I would argue closer to 30, unless you’re including all the easement and sidewalks?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I did some measuring on Google Earth and the distance from sidewalk (or on roads without a sidewalk from the road) to the front of houses in a major city nearish to me and found a few neighborhoods 50 feet to the house was about the standard. They also had 50 foot deep backyards!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Good luck with the NIMBYs. Or NIMFYs now I guess?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] themeatbridge 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not for nothing, but this wouldn't fly in the USA. You'd need to replace most of those trees with roads.

Or better yet, reduce the number of housing units and keep the trees.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

This is Seattle btw, but I think the meme is that it won't fly.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Keeping all of the trees while also building a 40,000 unit apartment building on the same lot is gonna be a bit of a trick. Unless the building is 30 stories high. That might be normal in New York, but that’s not something you’re gonna see very much outside of the city.

I’m all for vertical city building, but keep in mind what is likely to happen in your local community.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure you've misunderstood the idea here in a couple of ways

[–] [email protected] 2 points 23 hours ago

No, I get it. I was just trying to make a joke.

Apparently, it wasn’t very funny.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[–] Remember_the_tooth 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What if we just altered zoning laws so they don't restrict high-density residential buildings?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

Oh, they didn't change that, people living there need to get real good at dodging golf balls.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

But where would we play golf?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 23 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

Yeah but then rich fucks wouldn’t have a place all to themselves to be rich fucks, so that’s a fuck you, poors, just be rich like us, thanks.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I guess that technically counts as a public sex forest then

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mkhopper 3 points 1 day ago
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›