Generally, restrictions on cars make public transport better automatically, as they make buses work better.

It certainly helps the buses move more efficiently, but it can't do much about things like bus stop placement, or just generally sense of place as you start or end your trip.

▲

alamortsubite 2 days ago | parent [-]

> it can't do much about things like bus stop placement

Why not? Fewer cars means more room for bus stops.

▲

zahlman 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Because there has to be a place where the bus stop could sensibly be. A history of car-centric design often eliminates those opportunities.

▲

alamortsubite 2 days ago | parent [-]

I see. I think you're talking about stop placement on a higher level? Removing street parking can free up room for lots of extra stops, which can help with bus bunching: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_bunching

	▲	zahlman a day ago \| parent [-]
		I'm talking about what you physically see, or even step over, at the actual physical location where you're contemplating putting the bus stop; which is there because people were only thinking about cars when doing the zoning and construction.

▲

bluGill a day ago | parent | prev [-]

car centric areas put their front door far from anyplace a but can easilly get. Either the but slows everyone else down because it is going in and out of all these parking lots and cul-de-sacs, or the walk from the but stop to where you are going is already your entire travel budget.

▲

alamortsubite a day ago | parent [-]

I think it gets confusing because we start out talking about cities but we'd also like to include other areas that are overrun with cars in the conversation. Buses in Ghent and Paris aren't going to be navigating parking lots and cul-de-sacs, no matter how much car infrastructure is removed. We can free up a lot of room for bus stops, though, which helps keep buses moving smoothly.

	▲	bluGill 20 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Suburbs are either cities in their own right, or part of the whole city. It deoesn't make sense in this discussion to think of them as not part af the city: they cover too much of the population.

▲

mantas a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Not really. Unless the restriction is to take a generic lane and dedicate it to buses. But if restriction is to take a generic lane and give it to bicycles, then both cars and buses sit in the same traffic jam.

▲

rsynnott a day ago | parent [-]

So, first, it would be rare to bring in restrictions of this sort without doing something to buses. But even if you _don’t_, reduction in traffic helps buses (assuming you already have bus lanes, which any city doing this stuff generally would, the main problem for buses is intersections, which this helps with)

	▲	mantas 17 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It`s totally possible. My city excels at this. We are at level where bus system is not enough at all. But the municipality is trying to avoid it since it’s seen as politically tricky. Nobody wants to start it, take the beating and then let opponents cut the tape a decade later. The bus system is struggling too. Old buses, incomplete bus lanes and so on. When one jackass got an idea to reduce car traffic and started with adding obstacles to cars without improving public transit… Traffic did not better. And buses get stuck with the rest. Thankfully remote/hybrid work is all the rage. In recent decade quite a few offices and other workplaces moved away from urban core. That helps the situation a bit.