Definitely has his grip on reality, this one
You must log in or register to comment.
oh no the unbeatable twitter “trust me bro” move. why has no one ever thought about his input??2?
See, the problem is that you only have two lanes in the city /s
one_more_lane.copypasta
Just one more lane bro. I promise bro just one more lane and it’ll fix everything bro. Bro, just one more lane. Please just one more, one more lane and we can fix this whole problem bro, bro c’mon just give me one more lane i promise bro, bro bro please! Just need one more lane
In the end the city will have to bulldoze the houses and offices that make up to the city to make room for more roads and cars, increasing costs and destroying their own tax revenue in the process, or realize less cars are the answer.
In addition to all the parking lots that the increased car traffic would require
Long story: short the city will eventually have to decide whether to put one last parking space or one last lane.
Man, I’m flashing back to my visit to Detroit and the massive ‘boulevard’ that cuts the city in two. The car I was riding in had to get on to what was basically a highway, change lanes a half dozen times, and exit via ramp in order to get from one neighborhood to another. (In the span of a quarter mile).
It was eerie, but doable, because there weren’t many other cars on the road. I can only imagine how difficult it would have been when there was actually traffic.
Roads can be walls as well as nooses.
When you have enough tarmac, you don’t even need lanes or lights, there’ll be space for everyone.
Lanes are a commie plot to steal freedom anyway.
It’s obvious from the picture that it is the buildings in the city that cause the congestion. get rid of em.
I once got stuck behind someones house once, I politely honked three times and flashed my headlights , but it wouldn’t budge, so in the end i had no choice but to ram right through it. Fucking cities stealing all our open roads.
Do you have the key for the car colour coding? Is it occupancy?
It probably just attempts to indicate it’s the same 3 cars again, likely pointing out the fact that there are legitimate reasons to drive, those people are just fucked by everyone else and brain-dead traffic planning.
It looks like the green cars have passengers, while the red cars have single occupants.Nevermind, some of the red cars have passengers, too. I guess the green cars survive to the final graphic… why that’s relevant, I don’t really understand.
That’s what tripped me up too, haha
Might just be that those three cars have legitimate reasons to be driving. Like, it could be a carpenter’s or electrician’s van on the way to a job site in the city.
I think it’s more for design language, you’re subconsciously drawn to the green vehicles because they’re different, and subconsciously when you’re looking at the traffic, you’re reminded what it’s like being in the traffic yourself.
So you imagine yourself as the green car.
1st scenario: traffic is really bad. 2nd scenario: they’ve added more lanes, but you, the green car, are still stuck. 3rd scenario: public transportation has alleviated the traffic and it’s better for all.
Notice in the 3rd scenario, all the transportation is green. I think it’s to make you think, “I can ride my bike to work” or “I can take the bus” or “I can still drive my car if where I live requires me to” depending on your own situation. It’s to show all options can be viable, if you support public transportation.
That’s how I see it at least.
Full marks for interesting nuance, for what it’s worth. I would love to think every designer thought this hard about their own work.
I was thinking it’s electric?
I assumed that Green = Moving. The pedestrians in the city are green, as are the busses and bikes in the bottom diagram. The greens in the top two are there to show just how few vehicles can actually move at any given time.
I think red is just to show the effective capacity advantage of the bus lane once it appears in the final diagram.
A bike lane on a highway seems like a terrible idea.
Denmark checking in. A lot of our highways have separate parallel bicycle highways. It’s really great! They have exits in the same spots as cars do and have big sound barriers.x
Separate makes sense
anywhere that you might say “we shouldn’t have a bike lane here, it’s too dangerous for cyclists” is a place where there should be a bike lane.
And this is why the Marianas Trench needs a bike lane.
Inside rail racks? That is such a dumb decision making process.
Spending billions of dollars connecting two cities and not spending a couple percent more for parallel active transportation infrastructure also seems like a terrible idea.
On and near are not the same thing.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Get blocked, you-know-what. You are noise.
As if you don’t block people who are rude and bad faith with you.
Nobody cares if you block them. We object to the things you say. You don’t just block people and get on with your life, you attempt to weaponize blocking people. For your own petty needs.
Ah so it is considered petty to tell someone why you are blocking. We? You are plural?
If you only have a hammer …
Well it’s a good thing no one is proposing that! Seriously, where do you people come from?
the return of /r/all
Removed by mod
You are the asshole. You need to look at the image again. They are separated.
When cars are going 70+ mph 6 feet of fucking grass is not enough there needs to be a cement barrier.
Definitely put cameras in the bus lane and fine all the cars who are driving in it then.
There are solid black lines in the bottom diagram instead of dashed in the top two, this suggests something more than a lane line, it might be representing a kerb or could easily be a more physical barrier. but as far as a simplified diagram goes that looks pretty clearly separated as can be depicted in plan view.
I assume this is not the detailed plans. If it is those buildings are way too small for all of these people to fit inside.
There’s a bus lane before getting to the cars, and there’s a stoplight and a tighter lane which indicates that that’s no longer a fucking 70+mph zone lol.
Look, it’s ok to not be that smart but being such a massive prick about it is a bad look, broski.
Removed by mod
You’re looking at what is obviously a conceptual diagram and acting as if it’s some kind of literal blueprint. IMO it’s something closer to a Sankey diagram showing the overall flow and moda share of traffic into the city than a plan sketch of an individual road. I don’t think it’s even reasonable to conclude that it’s actually suggesting using the same alignment for cars, bikes, and pedestrians at all, let alone strawmanning it as “a bike lane on a highway.”
Frankly, I’m found it to be a tough call deciding whether you genuinely didn’t understand that or if you were commenting in bad faith (which violates rule 1), and the only thing that made me give you the benefit of the doubt was your later comment talking about the cement barrier (i.e. a somewhat constructive comment about how to make it better) instead of continuing to flatly reject it.
If you had looked at my replies to other people who replied to me, you would see I wasn’t antibike lanes in general. The diagram looks far closer to a city street than a highway.
If you had looked at my replies to other people who replied to me, you would see I wasn’t antibike lanes in general.
I did, hence my reference to “your later comment talking about the cement barrier.”
The diagram looks far closer to a city street than a highway.
The right side of it does, sure, because that’s what it’s depicting the highway transitioning to.
I was referring to other comments. Ones the people I blocked could have checked before attacking me.
Nobody “attacked” you until you attacked them first. That’s why your comments were removed for being uncivil and theirs weren’t.
oh no they called me a communist however shall i cope
When it gets to the stage that you get called a communist, you know you have won the argument.
As if the GOP even hold back anything after the first round
usually when I get called a communist, it’s when I’m explaining that people deserve basic human rights.
When someone calls you a communist you know that you won the argument.
Absolutely something a Sith would say.
If you’re stuck in traffic, you ARE the traffic.
“Hi boss, I’ll be a bit late into work. I am traffic.”
“Hi boss, I’ll be a bit late into work. I’m stuck in me.”
“Goddammit Phalange, I don’t need to know what kinky shit you’re into. Go to the hospital if it’s that bad.”
“Can’t. I’m stuck.”
Call your step-brother?
Yeah! Thanks! That’ll help. 🤣
Sounds more like it’ll make you even more late.
“I’m the main character and everyone else is the NPC traffic!”
It’s crazy how our 18-lane highway, with none of the stuff mentioned, is gridlocked all the time. 🤔
Maybe one more lane, bro!
It’s the stoplight’s fault! Ban stop signs, traffic lights and remove speed limits and we’ll never have gridlock again!!!
I’m unironically all for removing stop signs, traffic lights, and speed limits. If you build streets and roads properly, you don’t need those, frequently ignored, control devices.
It would remove gridlock, but not necessarily congestion.
This person urban designs.
Round about gang for life
As an often pedestrian, i often prefer lights. If it’s a busy dual carriageway roundabout It can often be hard to route pedestrians across. You end up with elaborate and winding pedestrian subways.
Roundabouts are ok on rural junctions, but round here we often have to have traffic lights on roundabouts as you start to get closer in to urban areas - and they do seem to help flow.
I just don’t believe road design alone can remove the need for coordination as population density gets above a certain level. Fuck in central London you need traffic lights just to coordinate all the buses never mind cars. Of course they need an overhead s-bahn type light rail system there though, but planning rules/landowners won’t allow it. At this point they just need less people - but again the govt/electorate/landowners won’t allow that because they’re all a bunch of tw4ts.
As Jason Slaughter (Not Just Bikes) says—and I agree—any city street with more than one car lane in each direction is an abject failure of urban planning. Multi-lane roundabouts should never exist in places where people are expected to walk.
If enough people are going the same direction at the same time that they need more than one lane for cars, then that’s the perfect route for transit.
Abject failure of urban planning, or democracy?
Oh there are many other intersections
Round abouts, peanuts, uncontrolled, yielded, modal filtered, raised, edged, sunken, and more.
There are a lot of ways to give clear cues to all road users on what to do, and how to do it, without relying on signage. Traffic lights in particular are extremely low throughput; their primary advantage is allowing vehicles to drive really fast between intersections, so they are great for roads/highways but not for streets.
Ok with that, but you also need to remove other cars from the road. Every time I’ve been stuck in traffic, it was because there were so many other cars. This has got out of control! Who are all these people and where are they all going?!?
All these bums without cars trying to cross the road made me late! Do they really need a crossing every five blocks? /S
There was a guy who took his guitar before the Portland City Council and sang a song about induced demand. If you build more lanes, more drivers will come and fill them.
OMG, I love this man! That video is 7 years old… Did they add more lanes? 🫣
The project actually still hasn’t started due to ongoing litigation and budget constraints. It did get redesigned with more bike infrastructure and pedestrian bridges to cross the freeway, but local bike and pro-transit groups still oppose the project.
One of the main arguments is that the state’s proposal is not consistent with the city’s regional plan, which says that the interstate can only be expanded if congestion pricing is also implemented to discourage additional traffic.
At this point, the state is planning to fix up some bridges while the rest of the legal fight plays out. Expansion probably won’t start until 2028 in any case… at which point this song will be an “oldie.”
I’m stuck on this rock with people like that. The worst part is they speak with such confidence and authority that their opinions will carry more weight than mine in the real world.
I despair.
yes but i will upvote you :3
Their entitlement truly knows no bounds.
Oh how naive I was when I used to think that spread of the internet would mean spread of intelligence. Who knew that the dumb-and-the-loud would have an easier time than the smart folks when spreading information.
To fight despair, organize. Find and join your local advocacy groups for transit, cycling, etc. Many improvements that happen are the result of fierce advocacy behind the scenes.
Or at the very least, participate in a critical mass in your city from time to time.
Congestion is literally made out of cars. Without cars, there would be no congestion.
You know what would REALLY fix congestions?
MORE CARS!!
Just one more lane bro. Just one more.
I swear I can stop anytime I want man!!
What’s the solution after EVERY. SCHOOL. SHOOTING?
Moar guns.
This could not possibly be said any better, I think.
Communism is when bike
tell me more 💕
The people sieze the means of commuting, and install bike lanes and public transport.
It amazes me that this country literally has state borders built around rail systems, a huge dependence on rail for shipping, but decided to just pave over trolley rails, and jack prices of train transit to thousands of dollars for just a few hundred miles. Then the government forces us to pay shittons of money into our vehicles in taxes, insurance, etc without regulating the private companies that we’re forced to pay. Meanwhile other countries have super fast trains to travel, subsidized with tax money, and travel seems to be more efficient.
travel seems to be more efficient.
And they just ignore the negative health outcomes here vs countries where cars are not the norm.
That’s the American system working as designed.
Provide no public benefit for your taxes while forcing the populace to funnel money into predatory private businesses. This ensures the powerful can rob the population with impunity and without pesky competition while making the populace distrustful of public programs that might benefit them and deprive those wealthy, powerful robber-barons of their golden eggs.
My car doesn’t create congestion. It’s everyone else’s that’s the problem.
Like people driving during the pandemic and talking how amazing it felt to drive
Communism is when you don’t like cars. Apparently.
I wish they’d follow that mental thread backward, and question why they have a kneejerk response to call anything that’s about caring for other people communist, and then why they think that’s a bad thing.
That’s the thing. They don’t really do the whole “thinking” thing. Their argument is based entirely around emotion, parroting words they’ve heard before which correspond with the emotion they are feeling rather than actual meaning. If you tried to engage this person in a meaningful dialogue, they would likely dodge your questions, or start engaging in ad homenim attacks, or start talking in circles.
Ah yes. Words as magic spells to be rearranged into weapons until you’ve won the argument or else exhausted your “opponent,” rather than trying to communicate thought. And only ever used offensively, to manipulate. If you actually think about what the enemy is trying to communicate rather than just skimming for keywords, then you risk having them infect your mind and changing you.
At least that’s how I imagine they would put it.
deleted by creator
This must be a bot.
You’re right. They don’t create congestion.
They ARE congestion.
This, exactly.
You’re not sitting in traffic … You are traffic .
The guy in the OP also gives off small dick energy. Just saying.
Is water wet?
“Cars don’t create congestion; People in cars create congestion!”
Can’t wait for self-driving cars so the capitalists can flood the road with passengerless self-driving taxis
I thought single occupancy cars were the worst for congestion. Now imagine being stuck behind 5+ empty driverless cars in a traffic jam.
I think I’ll keep asking for some adequate public transport.
Particularly single occupants
I think the comment was meant to resemble the popular “guns don’t cause death, murderers cause death” comment
Oh, I got it
Solution: Self-driving cars with no one inside.
As a cyclist I’ve noticed a, harshness, recently. In Ontario our premier did a distraction campaign where he villanised bike lanes. Turns out he was talking about a couple of specific ones but all of the sudden, after biking in town for years. People nearly hit me. There is no Lee way any more. I’ve been swiped by mirrors and pickup trucks try to roll coal on me (pretty sure you little dicks need a diesel and your just fucking up your engines for nothing) because I like a bike ride on a sunny day. Or want to stay in shape. Or need to get to work. It really does feel like “get a haircut and drive an f150!!!” around here and that wasn’t always the case.
Not Just Bikes made a video on that. https://youtu.be/KgFCQ7jEZxI
Strap a visible gun on yourself or a bag. That’ll get you some extra space. Saw an article or post about someone who did that and it’s like magic.
Why is the American reaction to every single issue “just get a gun”???
As infants, we’re given “bottles” in the .22lr range. By 4th grade, were sucking 9mm straight from the tap. It’s onto .45acp by highschool…
I’m a 2A friendly American and even I say that’s absolutely not a good idea for this scenario. The person you’re replying to is either trolling or needs serious help.
Specifically in this instance, the type of people who roll coal on bikers are also people who automatically respect people with guns.
Canada does not allow open carry, and handguns have heavy restrictions on use and transportation
May I humbly propose an alternative…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQpaEN_TN_U
In another video, one was demonstrating how easier it was to cross streets with the same accessory.
I’m Ontario that isn’t legal.
Without a gun, a brick would be a fine stand in
Fun fact: The faster a car travels, the bigger the spacing between the cars gets. That’s necessary to leave enough distance for emergency stops.
While the speed increases linearly, the spacing increases with the square, meaning at double the speed, the spacing quadruples, which in turn means that throughput (number of cars per hour) halves.
This is the reason why many regions use electronic speed signs to drop the speedlimit lower when there’s congestion. Because it increases throughput and thus reduces travel times.
The optimum speed for high throughput is 30km/h.
Counterintuitive as it might be, drivers should be all for 30km/h speed limit in cities, because it would make them get to work faster.
That’s also the fastest speed before sharply increasing the likelihood of fatality in pedestrian collisions
You can cite an infinite amount of proven facts and studies, car brains will never accept your „communist propaganda“. This whole discussion is too emotionally loaded to be based on facts.
Another related fun fact: Larger vehicles are harder to see around, so people have to leave even more distance which reduces throughput.
The problem is that often streets are not congested, and then 50km/h is much more time efficient.
Yep, and at that speed, 50km/h on an “empty” street INSIDE a city, that’s also the most “efficient” speed to avoid those pesky children bits getting stuck on your windchill were you to tackle one while checking your phone.
Apologies for the sarcasm but most drivers I encounter on a daily basis absolutely do not have the sustained concentration behind wheels to safely drive a 50km/h within actual cities.
I have seen old people driving around with oxygen tubes in their noses more times than I feel is safe.
If children are a factor (residential street, school zone, playground, etc) there’s all the reason to limit to 30, or even 20 (like the street I live where kids are playing around). Optionally time restricted.
Main avenues with clear sidewalks separated by a green strip can have 50 or even 60 km/h limits.
As an adult, relatively big (1m85) who doesn’t randomly run across a street but rather use solely clearly marked zebras I sadly have to report that I had numerous encounter with cars at a very uncomfortable distance to my body, some even touching me (not an accident proper though). I did have of course the occasional wave saying “Oops, sorry I didn’t see you or care for slowing down, moving on!”. When I say occasional it’s probably once a month or more.
To clarify this happened next to a park with very VERY good visibility, a straight line without trees, where it’s slightly higher speed than around. Namely small streets around the park are 20km/h, that avenue is 50km/h. It is actually such a problem a red light has been installed 200m further. I assume that enough cars refused to yield so that this change was made.
This makes me believe that unfortunately, even though MOST drivers are indeed able to safely drive in “Main avenues with clear sidewalks” there is still a non negligible amount from my experience as a pedestrian who absolutely can not and are a danger for everyone, kids and adults alike.
That being said, you have the right to believe that few accidents are acceptable if it allows most people to keep such a certain speed.
To clarify this happened next to a park with very VERY good visibility, a straight line without trees, where it’s slightly higher speed than around.
That’s not surprising to me (as an engineer); the dangerous encounters probably happened because the street was straight and had a generous clear zone.
Strong Towns “30 days of confessions” series has a couple of good (short! – under 2 minutes each) videos explaining it:
Fascinating, thanks for sharing!
Of course it makes sense. In fact I believe I have a similar problem while cycling on a one way street for cars while cycling on the (non protected) bike lane of the opposite direction. I hate that street because very often cars do not move away… because they don’t look up. They are busy doing I don’t know what in their cars… probably because, if I understood the idea properly, they think it’s all fine, nobody “should” come from anywhere but behind them, so the “can” be “distracted”.
Also makes me think of Jevons’s paradox (or the rebound effect) but for attention or even more broadly cognition.
deleted by creator
I’m an adult just slightly bigger and have never had an encounter like you describe, and I lived in a big city decades, using public transport and walking exclusively. If drivers in your environment are that bad, stricter limits are reasonable.
Yet I also see them and a lot more frequently since pandemic. I still claim everyone forgot how to drive safely.
For me the big problem is that it’s legal to “turn right on red”. However people for get that you’re supposed to come to a full stop and to yield to any road user. So many times I’m in the crosswalk with the walk signal lighted yet someone zooms through to take a right on red barely slowing and without concern for pedestrians
We also seem to have gotten a lot worse with “stretching a yellow”. Why is it that I can wait for a light to turn red, then wait a couple more seconds for the walk signal to come on, yet still be endangered by someone blasting through the intersection claiming “my light was yellow, bro”.
Or maybe it’s just the self-centeredness. People have so much trouble being aware that someone is travelling differently than they are. Pedestrians are invisible because “everyone drives”, cars zoom right up to and through crosswalks at a red light because “no one will be in the crosswalk”.
It’s become a running joke with my kids that you always have to look the wrong way before crossing the street. We regularly cross a one way street where we have twice had close calls with someone going the wrong way. Knowing the layout, I’m pretty sure it’s intentional. It would be difficult to do on accident and I can see the “short cut” being much more convenient
My guess North American (because of the turn right on red) and European car cultures are different. European cities are much more walkable and drivers are used to pedestrians. I rarely have a car not stop if I come up to a cross walk, and basically 100% if I’m with my kids.
And there’s where we invent roundabouts. Even when the streets are not congested the time to cross any urban area is dominated by the stops. It much more beneficial to eliminate stop signs and red lights, to keep you moving consistently than to let you speed a little more to your next stopping point
Yeah, big thumbs up for roundabouts.
deleted by creator
Why’s it a problem? I crossed them every day, cars usually drive quite slowly around them.
