News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Banning cars on SF’s Market Street, once a radical idea, ... by rco8786 on Tuesday October 15, 2019 @10:48PM (#21266588)
You can’t realistically take a whole city and draw a line down the middle and say “no cars can cross this ever”.
Re:Banning cars on SF’s Market Street, once a radical idea, ... by maccam94 on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @05:31AM (#21268559)
Well, there's Golden Gate Park for a good chunk of the way across SF, which has no surface level streets crossing directly through it...
Re:Banning cars on SF’s Market Street, once a radical idea, ... by g_h on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @07:13AM (#21269113)
That’s not true. There are several roads that wind through GGP for driving and parking. Crossover Drive cuts through approximately the middle.
Re:Banning cars on SF’s Market Street, once a radical idea, ... by alwaysdoit on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @12:21AM (#21267012)
Sure you could. We have more than 2 dimensions.
Re:Banning cars on SF’s Market Street, once a radical idea, ... by benmusch on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @12:36AM (#21267076)
I guess, but the amount of space and inefficiency that building a highway that literally runs over 1 block over the middle of a city would seem to be not at all worth it.
Re:Banning cars on SF’s Market Street, once a radical idea, ... by dajohnson89 on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @01:49AM (#21267417)
it wouldn't be a highway, it's called an overpass. and they're quite common.
Re:Banning cars on SF’s Market Street, once a radical idea, ... by Symbiote on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @04:02AM (#21268097)
An overpass tends to make the area underneath it pretty grim: surrounded by concrete with little natural light. I can't think of any examples of a nice shopping street with an overpass above it.

An underpass works well, but is likely to be much more expensive.

Re:Banning cars on SF’s Market Street, once a radical idea, ... by icebraining on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @06:43AM (#21268941)
My city has a two-way overpass over a popular pedestrian street: https://cdn.olhares.pt/client/files/foto/big/980/9808889.jpg

I think it works well as long as the overpass isn't too wide. Also, using colours and stone instead of raw concrete on the outside helps.

Re:Banning cars on SF’s Market Street, once a radical idea, ... by OkGoDoIt on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @04:50AM (#21268345)
Also there’s two levels of subways running beneath market street so an underpass wouldn’t be feasible
Re:Banning cars on SF’s Market Street, once a radical idea, ... by bluGill on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @09:36AM (#21270155)
Most cities have that in some form. A river acts as a you cannot cross, except for a few far apart areas. The bay in SF does the same. Then there are sea side cities which have a large shall not cross line.
Re:Banning cars on SF’s Market Street, once a radical idea, ... by rco8786 on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @01:40PM (#21273070)
Rivers have bridges. Seaside cities do not have an undriveable barrier down the middle of it.
Re:Banning cars on SF’s Market Street, once a radical idea, ... by bluGill on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @01:50PM (#21273199)
Rivers have limited bridges. I live in a city divided by a river (I suspect a large number of those reading this do as well: rivers attract cities for various reasons), most streets just end at the river even though both sides are very developed. If I want to cross the river there is are 5 bridges in the 15 miles of river frontage the city covers (then nothing for many more miles either way). There is great demand to get across the river, we are a tiny city and so the only traffic congestion is getting to the river crossing, but the cost of getting over the river is high enough nobody can justify building another bridge.

I don't know SF, but my guess is that market street will have more crossing than our rivers.