Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
It kinda depends on what you mean by "solved". You could have a bus route stop at every person house. This would be expensive, frequency would be abysmal, and the routes would take forever and no one would use it.
This issue is that public transit thrives in areas with more density. Get rid of the density public transit ceases to exist.
A more realistic solution for most people would be to try and set up a bike network throughout the neighborhood. Biking, especially e-biking, is mode of transit that can be implemented almost anywhere in a city and have some big benefits to the citizens.
I wonder if this might be a situation where autonomous vehicles could really solve a problem. Like if there were like 2 or 3 minivan size vehicles that you could summon to ferry you from your house to the nearest real bus stop. The vehicle would only have to go like 20 miles an hour to make it safe for pedestrians and be compellingly worthwhile to make people take the bus instead of drive
In smaller mexican cities instead of huge busses they have smaller 10 person vehicles that run every 15ish minutes. Terrible for the environment cause it's more cars but better for public transit cause they're consistent and come more often.
Could just have a human driver. I think the impromptu routing would be the thing that works best for suburbs.
You want the shuttle available as completely as the bus.
In a given neighborhood there could be many hours only a few / no people need the shuttle. It would be hard to staff.
Be cooler to make a protected shuttle lane where the shuttle operates under very strict controlled parameters.
3 human drivers 24/7 would be too expensive. And suburb subdivisions are perfect for autonomous systems, it's a very unchanging route with rarely any other people or cars on the road and the speed limit is already capped at a very low number
do that and make trips to or from a train stop half price to encourage using it as a last mile to funnel into a public transit system
who knows if when they will exist. if they exist they will probably work.
They already exist
https://www.theverge.com/2023/12/20/24006712/waymo-driverless-million-mile-safety-compare-human
In a few specific areas. None within 1000 miles of my city., the tech is promissing, but only time will tell how far it gets.
If you live where it exists then you should be asking questions. It seems like a dream answer.
Get rid of cars and their awful infrastructure and density can comfortably go up.