• DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    It can and should be both whenever possible

    Roads or tramlines don’t need greenery. It adds nothing.

    It would be much better if this place was a promenade for people, with some benches, a playground for kids, maybe a place to sit and have lunch, … and the transportation stuffed out of sight underground, aka a subway.

    rail only needs, well, rails

    And overhead lines … which trees often interfere with.

    • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      You can’t have an as extensive of a subway network as you can a tram network. It’s not trivial to just make tunnels everywhere, and can have consequences for the terrain. In addition, putting many stops on the subway removes the speed advantage, and so is always a trade-off. Good public transit has both.

      And green spaces always add something, no matter where they are.

      • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Looking at the way this particular road is constructed, and the age of the trees, I guarantee that this space was a promenade before and the space to build a tramway has been taken from pedestrians (people) not from cars.

        • Allero@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          10 months ago

          My country had green tram lines since Soviet times; trees had more than enough time to grow.

          We need promenades; but there where we lie down transportation (and it’s a necessity, you can’t NOT do this), it better look like this, and not as a giant asphalt road.