What is your opinion on traffic calming projects? To me, they seem to be a waste of time and money and just make traffic worse. Especially when they narrow the road shoulders and put in random yellow blinking lights.
I can see their uses for neighborhood roads but for main thoroughfares it seems counterproductive. Also seems a lazy way out for local communities to get out of actual road improvements that upset the NIMBYs.
But this is just my opinion. Eager to hear all views on this.
As always, it depends. Sometimes, they're good for the community; others, not so much. Usually dependent on the existing characteristics of the neighborhood.
If your answer is a catch-all "I like all of them," or "I hate all of them," you haven't done the level of analysis required. Every situation is different.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on August 23, 2022, 01:17:20 PM
If your answer is a catch-all "I like all of them," or "I hate all of them," you haven't done the level of analysis required. Every situation is different.
Very much yes.
I've worked on and experienced countless TCM projects and there's been times when they've worked perfectly, there's times when the measures and execution leaves much to be desired. But never encountered a situation where some kind of TCM wasn't worthwhile.
Traffic calming in general is a good idea in built-up areas, if only to prevent serious injury and death for people in vehicles and people walking/rolling/biking on those same streets. The cost to society will always outweigh the cost of some fresh paint, bollards, and better curbs.
Quote from: Bruce on August 23, 2022, 03:25:48 PM
Traffic calming in general is a good idea in built-up areas, if only to prevent serious injury and death for people in vehicles and people walking/rolling/biking on those same streets. The cost to society will always outweigh the cost of some fresh paint, bollards, and better curbs.
No, the cost is more congestion on other roads.
I firmly believe that if Waze could conceivably route you on a particular road to avoid congestion elsewhere, it should not have traffic calming features. Doing so just puts more traffic on the congested road.
Definitely a waste of money if you happen to be Hollister, California. Fortunately you can always blame the contractor and say the calming measures put in aren't what was intended.
Quote from: 1 on August 23, 2022, 03:43:07 PM
Quote from: Bruce on August 23, 2022, 03:25:48 PM
Traffic calming in general is a good idea in built-up areas, if only to prevent serious injury and death for people in vehicles and people walking/rolling/biking on those same streets. The cost to society will always outweigh the cost of some fresh paint, bollards, and better curbs.
No, the cost is more congestion on other roads.
Which might be an acceptable cost to pay.
Quote from: Bruce on August 23, 2022, 03:25:48 PM
Traffic calming in general is a good idea in built-up areas, if only to prevent serious injury and death for people in vehicles and people walking/rolling/biking on those same streets. The cost to society will always outweigh the cost of some fresh paint, bollards, and better curbs.
But also the "cost to society" needs to be accurately measured–traffic calming to "protect" people walking/biking should only be considered when there's evidence of people interested in walking/biking there to protect. Traffic calming in Norman would be silly, for instance, because hardly anyone walks or bikes here (the distances are too great and the weather is too shit).
Traffic calming projects are good if it's major downtowns or tourist areas though.
I would argue that traffic calming is usually put in place to correct for an existing design flaw. The streets getting these measures were usually laid out long ago, before modern sensibilities of urban design took hold. Add in the change in traffic patterns that modern habits such as driving children to school (vs walking), or active route-planning and GPS routing brings, and you have lots of situations where streets that were built 50+ years ago to serve a small volume of neighborhood traffic are suddenly fulfilling a very different function.
The best traffic calming measures are to design and maintain the main thoroughfares in such a way that traffic does not need to divert through neighborhoods. Speed humps, chicanes, and roundabouts are usually just slapping a bandaid on the symptoms vs addressing the root cause.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 23, 2022, 07:41:16 PM
Traffic calming in Norman would be silly, for instance, because hardly anyone walks or bikes here (the distances are too great and the weather is too shit).
In fairness to pioneers, no one walks or bikes
anymore. It was a conscious decision to build Norman (and the rest of the OKC metro) out the way they did because the car made it easier to build that way. And yeah, the weather sucks so it was nice to not get soaked on the way home.
They could easily start building tons of density in the middle of Norman. The downtown is there, just not much in the way of apartment towers. Build that, you might get the demand for walking, cycling, and --yes -- traffic calming. But as it exists now, definitely no demand.
Quote from: jakeroot on August 24, 2022, 02:42:07 PM
They could easily start building tons of density in the middle of Norman. The downtown is there, just not much in the way of apartment towers. Build that, you might get the demand for walking, cycling, and --yes -- traffic calming. But as it exists now, definitely no demand.
The major barrier to building density in Norman, or indeed the Oklahoma City metro as a whole, is–get ready for this one–the banks. Any time someone wants to build a multi-use facility of the kind you see in a city like Seattle, banks deny the loan because "that type of development has never been tried in Oklahoma".
So essentially, the only way Oklahoma will ever get dense development is if some wealthy person pays cash to build so much dense development that the banks have no justification for denying loans on that basis. And if you have the cash to do that, there are investment opportunities for you with a far better return on investment that come with the benefit of not having to do anything with Oklahoma.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 24, 2022, 04:20:44 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 24, 2022, 02:42:07 PM
They could easily start building tons of density in the middle of Norman. The downtown is there, just not much in the way of apartment towers. Build that, you might get the demand for walking, cycling, and --yes -- traffic calming. But as it exists now, definitely no demand.
The major barrier to building density in Norman, or indeed the Oklahoma City metro as a whole, is–get ready for this one–the banks. Any time someone wants to build a multi-use facility of the kind you see in a city like Seattle, banks deny the loan because "that type of development has never been tried in Oklahoma".
So essentially, the only way Oklahoma will ever get dense development is if some wealthy person pays cash to build so much dense development that the banks have no justification for denying loans on that basis. And if you have the cash to do that, there are investment opportunities for you with a far better return on investment that come with the benefit of not having to do anything with Oklahoma.
It doesn't even need to be a multi-use facility (like a five over one with ground-level retail). It could even be just a four to six level apartment building. Certainly those exist in parts of Oklahoma? Something that encourages people to live closer together and walk and bike a bit more than they would if they lived way out in the middle of the burbs.
I don't necessarily object to traffic calming projects per se if they're implemented in a way that allows you to drive through an area at the speed limit. What I resent is when they overdo it and install very sharp speed bumps (rather than speed humps) and other things that serve as obstacles to driving. Those are often pitched as "traffic calming," but what they really are is a "stay off our street" message. They do things like forcing you to slow to 10 or 15 mph in order to make the driving experience so unpleasant that you'll find another route. If the street is privately-owned and maintained (around here, that usually means HOA streets), then I have less of a problem with them making the street unwelcoming as a cut-through route, but if the street is public, then as much as I understand why residents may dislike thru traffic, I feel people have the right to use the street.
But I do think there's something legitimate to taking measures to try to force people to stick to the speed limit in heavily residential areas. There was a woman up the end of our street (I think she's moved away now) who used to come flying around the corner and didn't care that some of the neighborhood kids were often playing in or near the street, people would be walking dogs, etc. She's the type of person that causes speed humps or the like to be needed in some places.
Quote from: jakeroot on August 24, 2022, 04:30:19 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 24, 2022, 04:20:44 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on August 24, 2022, 02:42:07 PM
They could easily start building tons of density in the middle of Norman. The downtown is there, just not much in the way of apartment towers. Build that, you might get the demand for walking, cycling, and --yes -- traffic calming. But as it exists now, definitely no demand.
The major barrier to building density in Norman, or indeed the Oklahoma City metro as a whole, is–get ready for this one–the banks. Any time someone wants to build a multi-use facility of the kind you see in a city like Seattle, banks deny the loan because "that type of development has never been tried in Oklahoma".
So essentially, the only way Oklahoma will ever get dense development is if some wealthy person pays cash to build so much dense development that the banks have no justification for denying loans on that basis. And if you have the cash to do that, there are investment opportunities for you with a far better return on investment that come with the benefit of not having to do anything with Oklahoma.
It doesn't even need to be a multi-use facility (like a five over one with ground-level retail). It could even be just a four to six level apartment building. Certainly those exist in parts of Oklahoma? Something that encourages people to live closer together and walk and bike a bit more than they would if they lived way out in the middle of the burbs.
I think there's, like...one or two in downtown OKC?
The most common mode of apartment complex in Oklahoma are one- or two-story (sometimes three) wooden structures. Anything bigger than that and you start running into needing structural steel. Wood is cheaper. So that's what they build.
One thing that has started to grate on me about Oklahoma is the pervasive mindset that if something costs more than ten dollars to build it's not worth doing.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on August 23, 2022, 04:44:17 PM
Definitely a waste of money if you happen to be Hollister, California. Fortunately you can always blame the contractor and say the calming measures put in aren't what was intended.
Yes Traffic calming projects are good if it's in San Francisco, Sacramento, Davis and Berkeley. I don't know how that would fit in small towns like Hollister though.
But that will vary where the city council and the county of San Benito wants them to be.
Quote from: bing101 on August 24, 2022, 05:19:04 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on August 23, 2022, 04:44:17 PM
Definitely a waste of money if you happen to be Hollister, California. Fortunately you can always blame the contractor and say the calming measures put in aren't what was intended.
Yes Traffic calming projects are good if it's in San Francisco, Sacramento, Davis and Berkeley. I don't know how that would fit in small towns like Hollister though.
But that will vary where the city council and the county of San Benito wants them to be.
I was just surprised that any community in San Benito County would want traffic calming anything. That certainly doesn't jive with the semi-rural nature crowd Hollister draws. San Juan Bautista did it better arguably with 3rd Street and made it a tourism/commerce street.
It is possible to do traffic calming without impeding traffic flow. Carmel IN has recently upgraded the Rangeline Road corridor by adding roundabouts, raised pedestrian crossings, tree lined medians, and some protected bike lane additions without negatively impacting traffic.
project overview video: http://carmellink.com/video/Range_Line_Flythrough_HBR.mp4
Here is a street view of a completed section: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9699594,-86.1269664,3a,75y,170.77h,91.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRChKlw2f3fGaIJMvU9afkg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
and here is a street view of another section before conversion:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.972955,-86.1269981,3a,75y,12.43h,76.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7fipjYKpEafLsxUzvLEjow!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 24, 2022, 04:36:46 PM
I don't necessarily object to traffic calming projects per se if they're implemented in a way that allows you to drive through an area at the speed limit. What I resent is when they overdo it and install very sharp speed bumps (rather than speed humps) and other things that serve as obstacles to driving. Those are often pitched as "traffic calming," but what they really are is a "stay off our street" message. They do things like forcing you to slow to 10 or 15 mph in order to make the driving experience so unpleasant that you'll find another route. If the street is privately-owned and maintained (around here, that usually means HOA streets), then I have less of a problem with them making the street unwelcoming as a cut-through route, but if the street is public, then as much as I understand why residents may dislike thru traffic, I feel people have the right to use the street.
This has been my concern especially about speed bumps. When you see gouges in the road on the far side of the bump, that is physical damage to people's cars occurring, and not necessarily at high speed to cause it. Ones that also have no gap on the side (for cyclists and rainwater) are even more of a danger.
Whatever can be done to keep cars at a slower, consistent speed, is the best thing. Causing people to drop to a near stop, then accelerate from that for nothing, causes more noise, pollution, and fuel waste.
Speed bumps cause people to drive faster in between the speed bumps. It's a psychological annoyance and people feel compelled to make up for the time they wasted slowing down for the obstacle.
My neighborhood is lousy with speed bump/humps and I see it all the time; slow to a crawl, then stomp on the gas all pissed off. Shit, I do it myself sometimes.
It's punishing people for driving the posted speed limit, too, because most cars can't safely navigate them without slowing way way down to a crawl.
If I was rich, I'd rent a milling machine and grind some of those fuckers off. Hire a few day laborers to wear orange vests while I do it; probably no one will question it until it's already done because we "look official". It would be hilarious.
Not to mention the speed bump is an obstacle to snow plows and emergency vehicles.
If you want traffic to slow down, make the road narrower. Giant shoulders are what compel people to speed through neighborhoods because it "feels" like you can go faster. Far more effective and less intrusive that making the road purposefully shitty with uneven pavement.
I've heard of places where angry commuters have gotten "revenge" on residents of streets with speed humps by driving through blowing their horns in the middle of the night. Not sure what that really accomplishes.
Depends on what the project is and where it is located.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on August 25, 2022, 04:28:35 PM
If you want traffic to slow down, make the road narrower. Giant shoulders are what compel people to speed through neighborhoods because it "feels" like you can go faster. Far more effective and less intrusive that making the road purposefully shitty with uneven pavement.
This has certainly proven true in my neighborhood. The streets were all laid out in the 1940's, and are exactly 25 feet from curb-to-curb. I rarely see anybody go much faster than 25 MPH, it just feels unsafe passing between parked cars or trying approaching oncoming traffic any faster.
Quote from: cjw2001 on August 24, 2022, 07:05:29 PM
Here is a street view of a completed section: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9699594,-86.1269664,3a,75y,170.77h,91.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRChKlw2f3fGaIJMvU9afkg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
and here is a street view of another section before conversion:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.972955,-86.1269981,3a,75y,12.43h,76.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7fipjYKpEafLsxUzvLEjow!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Sure looks like they reduced the vehicle capacity of that road. I doubt it was so deserted that that didn't matter.
Traffic calming = driver enraging.
Quote from: pderocco on August 26, 2022, 09:49:59 PM
Traffic calming = driver enraging.
Good news is that they can do less bodily harm if the engineering makes it more difficult to go at a higher speed without stopping them. I shouldn't have to walk around with body armor on the off chance a psycho tries to run me over.
Quote from: Bruce on August 27, 2022, 02:58:22 AM
Quote from: pderocco on August 26, 2022, 09:49:59 PM
Traffic calming = driver enraging.
Good news is that they can do less bodily harm if the engineering makes it more difficult to go at a higher speed without stopping them. I shouldn't have to walk around with body armor on the off chance a psycho tries to run me over.
Wut.
Quote from: pderocco on August 26, 2022, 09:49:25 PM
Quote from: cjw2001 on August 24, 2022, 07:05:29 PM
Here is a street view of a completed section: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9699594,-86.1269664,3a,75y,170.77h,91.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRChKlw2f3fGaIJMvU9afkg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
and here is a street view of another section before conversion:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.972955,-86.1269981,3a,75y,12.43h,76.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7fipjYKpEafLsxUzvLEjow!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Sure looks like they reduced the vehicle capacity of that road. I doubt it was so deserted that that didn't matter.
Capacity likely hasn't changed. With the roundabouts, traffic can keep moving (more or less) at each intersection and there won't be as much backup along the arterials.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on August 23, 2022, 01:17:20 PM
If your answer is a catch-all "I like all of them," or "I hate all of them," you haven't done the level of analysis required. Every situation is different.
When two or three more-or-less parallel and more-or-less equal speed alternatives exist, putting calming on some of them results in increased traffic going faster on the road that isn't calmed. This could be a good thing, if the people who live on the uncalmed street accept it, but, often they don't.
On the other hand, when you have a pretty nearly perfect 25x25 grid of streets that are only interrupted by an occasional park, the only thing that calming does is cause people to drive over the obstructions or onto people's lawns or front porches.
I live in a city with a slightly different problem: Extremely wide bike lanes which are protected by pylons that virtually no bikes ever use (at least any time that I have been on them). I don't mind protecting
people with every bit as much right to the roadway as I have, but
ghosts don't need their own lane. If they exists, they are meant to be able to travel through solid matter.
Quote from: michravera on August 27, 2022, 08:42:27 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on August 23, 2022, 01:17:20 PM
If your answer is a catch-all "I like all of them," or "I hate all of them," you haven't done the level of analysis required. Every situation is different.
I live in a city with a slightly different problem: Extremely wide bike lanes which are protected by pylons that virtually no bikes ever use (at least any time that I have been on them). I don't mind protecting people with every bit as much right to the roadway as I have, but ghosts don't need their own lane. If they exists, they are meant to be able to travel through solid matter.
Are the bike lanes painted green on the pavement? I been to areas there the bike lanes have pylons but are painted green apparently so both bikes and drivers can see them.
Bikers really don't like painted lanes. Can get too slippery when it rains.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 10:33:40 AM
Bikers really don't like painted lanes. Can get too slippery when it rains.
This is after bikers want painted lanes so they stand out more. The bike community has a hard time deciding what they want
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 11:08:33 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 10:33:40 AM
Bikers really don't like painted lanes. Can get too slippery when it rains.
This is after bikers want painted lanes so they stand out more. The bike community has a hard time deciding what they want
🙄🙄🙄
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 11:44:57 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 11:08:33 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 10:33:40 AM
Bikers really don't like painted lanes. Can get too slippery when it rains.
This is after bikers want painted lanes so they stand out more. The bike community has a hard time deciding what they want
🙄🙄🙄
I don't mind, if they are painted. I don't mind, if they are pyloned. -- If they are USED. I don't even mind giving 10% of the roadway to 5% of the users -- But not 0.02%! This is Fremont -- Not Amsterdam -- or even Davis!
If there are enough cyclists, giving them a lane (or even their own roadway as has been done in Sacramento, for instance) helps everyone. If there are not enough, it is elitist virtue signaling. When I lived in Sacramento, I used my bike for recreation and for transportation when I couldn't use my car. Back in the 1980s the bike lanes there and the rather extensive bike trail along the river worked wonderfully. Perhaps they should be tried elsewhere, but how about a separate roadway that takes me to the bay or along a river or a gully -- Not to the mall!
Oh FFS stop being so dramatic. "Virtue signaling?" They're just bike lanes.
If we're gonna start using hackneyed political phrases to talk about innocuous traffic design choices, I'll start referring to the elimination of bike lanes as "cancel culture" now.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 01:09:23 PM
Oh FFS stop being so dramatic. "Virtue signaling?" They're just bike lanes.
If we're gonna start using hackneyed political phrases to talk about innocuous traffic design choices, I'll start referring to the elimination of bike lanes as "cancel culture" now.
Again, bicyclists need to determine what bicyclists want. Some bicyclists want the entire lane and don't want their own lane.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 03:00:25 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 01:09:23 PM
Oh FFS stop being so dramatic. "Virtue signaling?" They're just bike lanes.
If we're gonna start using hackneyed political phrases to talk about innocuous traffic design choices, I'll start referring to the elimination of bike lanes as "cancel culture" now.
Again, bicyclists need to determine what bicyclists want. Some bicyclists want the entire lane and don't want their own lane.
Bicyclists aren't a collective. Regardless, state and local DOTs determine the properties of bike lanes.
^ This. It's also important to remember that cyclists have varying ability and comfort levels. That bit about "there aren't enough cyclists to justify infrastructure for them" is a chicken or the egg problem - since more casual riders aren't comfortable riding in the lane with traffic, you're not going to see them until you've already invested in a good bike network, and few places have the money or political will to build that all at once, so bike lanes and whatnot get done as they can.
I still maintain that 5 to 6-foot shoulders are decent for regions between urban centers on roads with a single lane in each direction, like this (https://goo.gl/maps/BCHXfQGSzTxnxREt9), speed limit 35 (40 and 45 farther down the road) with businesses. They allow bicycles their own lane, which I occasionally see but not that often, but they also allow cars to pass other cars that are stopped waiting to turn left, and as a pedestrian, I can step into the shoulder and typically one of the first three cars will stop for me and let me cross.
I'm not sure how much this shoulder is encouraging biking, though; Lawrence gets more bikes on the roads than Methuen simply because it's a more urban area despite worse biking infrastructure. (The GSV above is in Methuen.)
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 03:11:39 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 03:00:25 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 01:09:23 PM
Oh FFS stop being so dramatic. "Virtue signaling?" They're just bike lanes.
If we're gonna start using hackneyed political phrases to talk about innocuous traffic design choices, I'll start referring to the elimination of bike lanes as "cancel culture" now.
Again, bicyclists need to determine what bicyclists want. Some bicyclists want the entire lane and don't want their own lane.
Bicyclists aren't a collective.
And that's the issue. Motorists are, and have specific laws. Bicyclists have enough varying laws that they can pretty much get away with everything. There's even groups of that they need to follow all traffic laws, and some that say it's dangerous to remain stopped at red lights.
Quote from: vdeane on August 28, 2022, 03:33:30 PM
^ This. It's also important to remember that cyclists have varying ability and comfort levels. That bit about "there aren't enough cyclists to justify infrastructure for them" is a chicken or the egg problem - since more casual riders aren't comfortable riding in the lane with traffic, you're not going to see them until you've already invested in a good bike network, and few places have the money or political will to build that all at once, so bike lanes and whatnot get done as they can.
If you build them, they will come...
I don't know. In Syracuse, there is a big biking "lobby" through SOCPA and SMTC. Just sat through a meeting on how to stimulate economic development with the Empire State Trail (*facepalm*).
Just seems to me there needs to be more data collected on this supposed demand for bicycle related facilities, rather than just dreams and speculation. There are a variety of methods (surveys, focus groups, town hall meetings...) and even funding available to do so (e.g.,, a whole lot of SPR funding).
Quote from: vdeane on August 28, 2022, 03:33:30 PM
^ This. It's also important to remember that cyclists have varying ability and comfort levels. That bit about "there aren't enough cyclists to justify infrastructure for them" is a chicken or the egg problem - since more casual riders aren't comfortable riding in the lane with traffic, you're not going to see them until you've already invested in a good bike network, and few places have the money or political will to build that all at once, so bike lanes and whatnot get done as they can.
The problem with this approach is then you get a mishmash of bike lanes that don't actually go anywhere, and so you never see anyone use them, which increases political opposition to expanding the system.
Norman is a good example of this. My street has a bike lane. It leads to another street with a bike lane. So far so good. That street–leads to a four-lane arterial with no bike lane. There's a bike lane on that same arterial on the other side of the OU campus, but there's no way to get between the two without riding in the street or on the sidewalk.
I created a new thread (in Fictional) on my proposal for a connected set of bike lanes between certain cities. I figured ideas for specific roads was worth a thread split. (The thread is for anyone's proposals, not just mine.)
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=32087
Quote from: michravera on August 28, 2022, 12:44:45 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 11:44:57 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 11:08:33 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 10:33:40 AM
Bikers really don't like painted lanes. Can get too slippery when it rains.
This is after bikers want painted lanes so they stand out more. The bike community has a hard time deciding what they want
🙄🙄🙄
I don't mind, if they are painted. I don't mind, if they are pyloned. -- If they are USED. I don't even mind giving 10% of the roadway to 5% of the users -- But not 0.02%! This is Fremont -- Not Amsterdam -- or even Davis!
If there are enough cyclists, giving them a lane (or even their own roadway as has been done in Sacramento, for instance) helps everyone. If there are not enough, it is elitist virtue signaling. When I lived in Sacramento, I used my bike for recreation and for transportation when I couldn't use my car. Back in the 1980s the bike lanes there and the rather extensive bike trail along the river worked wonderfully. Perhaps they should be tried elsewhere, but how about a separate roadway that takes me to the bay or along a river or a gully -- Not to the mall!
Speaking of Fremont, they put bike lanes in some pretty dumb places, such as on the main road when there's a parallel residential frontage road, or on one lane roads that's already narrow enough. On the latter, it's not even comfortable to go the posted speed limit because the lane is too narrow
Quote from: pderocco on August 26, 2022, 09:49:25 PM
Quote from: cjw2001 on August 24, 2022, 07:05:29 PM
Here is a street view of a completed section: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9699594,-86.1269664,3a,75y,170.77h,91.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRChKlw2f3fGaIJMvU9afkg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
and here is a street view of another section before conversion:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.972955,-86.1269981,3a,75y,12.43h,76.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7fipjYKpEafLsxUzvLEjow!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Sure looks like they reduced the vehicle capacity of that road. I doubt it was so deserted that that didn't matter.
Traffic flows better now with the roundabouts than it ever did with traffic signals.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 04:19:01 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 03:11:39 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 03:00:25 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 01:09:23 PM
Oh FFS stop being so dramatic. "Virtue signaling?" They're just bike lanes.
If we're gonna start using hackneyed political phrases to talk about innocuous traffic design choices, I'll start referring to the elimination of bike lanes as "cancel culture" now.
Again, bicyclists need to determine what bicyclists want. Some bicyclists want the entire lane and don't want their own lane.
Bicyclists aren't a collective.
And that's the issue. Motorists are, and have specific laws. Bicyclists have enough varying laws that they can pretty much get away with everything. There's even groups of that they need to follow all traffic laws, and some that say it's dangerous to remain stopped at red lights.
:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 04:19:01 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 03:11:39 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 03:00:25 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 01:09:23 PM
Oh FFS stop being so dramatic. "Virtue signaling?" They're just bike lanes.
If we're gonna start using hackneyed political phrases to talk about innocuous traffic design choices, I'll start referring to the elimination of bike lanes as "cancel culture" now.
Again, bicyclists need to determine what bicyclists want. Some bicyclists want the entire lane and don't want their own lane.
Bicyclists aren't a collective.
And that's the issue. Motorists are, and have specific laws. Bicyclists have enough varying laws that they can pretty much get away with everything. There's even groups of that they need to follow all traffic laws, and some that say it's dangerous to remain stopped at red lights.
Given the number of people who bomb through red lights now, it is dangerous. If I can move to the side or get across safely on my bike, I'm going for it.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 08:19:11 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 04:19:01 PM
And that's the issue. Motorists are, and have specific laws. Bicyclists have enough varying laws that they can pretty much get away with everything. There's even groups of that they need to follow all traffic laws, and some that say it's dangerous to remain stopped at red lights.
:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-life/should-it-be-legal-for-cyclists-to-roll-through-stop-signs/
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/9/10/its-legal-to-run-lights-and-other-things-you-might-not-have-known-about-cycling
https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2021/01/27/dot-contemplating-revolutionary-pro-cycling-rule-changes/
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 09:33:34 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 08:19:11 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 04:19:01 PM
And that's the issue. Motorists are, and have specific laws. Bicyclists have enough varying laws that they can pretty much get away with everything. There's even groups of that they need to follow all traffic laws, and some that say it's dangerous to remain stopped at red lights.
:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-life/should-it-be-legal-for-cyclists-to-roll-through-stop-signs/
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/9/10/its-legal-to-run-lights-and-other-things-you-might-not-have-known-about-cycling
https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2021/01/27/dot-contemplating-revolutionary-pro-cycling-rule-changes/
None of this says "they can get away with anything."
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 09:33:34 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 08:19:11 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 04:19:01 PM
And that's the issue. Motorists are, and have specific laws. Bicyclists have enough varying laws that they can pretty much get away with everything. There's even groups of that they need to follow all traffic laws, and some that say it's dangerous to remain stopped at red lights.
:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-life/should-it-be-legal-for-cyclists-to-roll-through-stop-signs/
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/9/10/its-legal-to-run-lights-and-other-things-you-might-not-have-known-about-cycling
https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2021/01/27/dot-contemplating-revolutionary-pro-cycling-rule-changes/
We get it, you think cyclists suck and are inferior to you and somehow get away with everything.
I don't see how they can get away with everything. I mean, in some cases they get hit by a vehicle and are either injured or die.
Quote from: Rothman on August 29, 2022, 10:18:47 AM
I don't see how they can get away with everything. I mean, in some cases they get hit by a vehicle and are either injured or die.
I know if I rode as recklessly as the average idiot claims I must, I'd be killed several times over by now.
Quote from: SeriesE on August 28, 2022, 07:15:45 PM
they put bike lanes in some pretty dumb places
This.
It irks me to see bike lanes added to residential streets that were already wide enough and little-trafficked enough for safe and easy cycling–while shoulder-less, sidewalk-less, 40mph-posted arterials go ignored.
Also, if I were a cynical person, I might suggest that bike lanes tend to get added to neighborhoods where anti-car culture is already trendy, rather than neighborhoods where cyclists actually need them. Fortunately, I'm not so cynical.
Yeah, I don't think it's quite that cynical. I wouldn't say my neighborhood is particularly anti-car (if anything, the number of people who illegally park in the bike lanes would suggest otherwise). I think it was just a matter of "hey this road is wide enough that we could add a bike lane for the cost of some road paint". Beyond that, it's just "we are upgrading this road already, and it adds 5% to the cost of the project to add the three feet or whatever of extra space for the bike lane so let's do it".
Unfortunately, both of those create a hodgepodge of disparate cycle lanes that don't add up to a coherent network. For that you would have to have a program of "we are going to expand these streets that don't otherwise need it, to add a bike lane". And in Norman, there just isn't the political willpower for something like that.
Quote from: SectorZ on August 29, 2022, 09:18:03 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 09:33:34 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 08:19:11 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 04:19:01 PM
And that's the issue. Motorists are, and have specific laws. Bicyclists have enough varying laws that they can pretty much get away with everything. There's even groups of that they need to follow all traffic laws, and some that say it's dangerous to remain stopped at red lights.
:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-life/should-it-be-legal-for-cyclists-to-roll-through-stop-signs/
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/9/10/its-legal-to-run-lights-and-other-things-you-might-not-have-known-about-cycling
https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2021/01/27/dot-contemplating-revolutionary-pro-cycling-rule-changes/
We get it, you think cyclists suck and are inferior to you and somehow get away with everything.
Certainly not. I'm presenting the very claims bicyclists use, in response to someone's "I'll just use emojis instead of having a discussion".
The biggest problem is this is quite often the case. Many bicyclists have a hard time discussing the issues lobbed at them regarding their tendencies to ignore laws, and often resort to complaining about car drivers or ignoring the issue that tthere are some really bad bicyclists out there..
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 29, 2022, 08:45:31 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on August 29, 2022, 09:18:03 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 09:33:34 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 08:19:11 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 04:19:01 PM
And that's the issue. Motorists are, and have specific laws. Bicyclists have enough varying laws that they can pretty much get away with everything. There's even groups of that they need to follow all traffic laws, and some that say it's dangerous to remain stopped at red lights.
:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-life/should-it-be-legal-for-cyclists-to-roll-through-stop-signs/
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/9/10/its-legal-to-run-lights-and-other-things-you-might-not-have-known-about-cycling
https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2021/01/27/dot-contemplating-revolutionary-pro-cycling-rule-changes/
We get it, you think cyclists suck and are inferior to you and somehow get away with everything.
Certainly not. I'm presenting the very claims bicyclists use, in response to someone's "I'll just use emojis instead of having a discussion".
The biggest problem is this is quite often the case. Many bicyclists have a hard time discussing the issues lobbed at them regarding their tendencies to ignore laws, and often resort to complaining about car drivers or ignoring the issue that tthere are some really bad bicyclists out there..
There are less than coherent car drivers, truck drivers, bikers, pedestrians, and even pets and wildlife.
However, if I had to rate these groups, I would say that commercial drivers are the most disciplined, followed by car drivers and leashed pets. It is sheer number of cars, which may outnumber the rest of traffic by a factor of many, that makes cars to have more problems than any other type of traffic.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 29, 2022, 08:45:31 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on August 29, 2022, 09:18:03 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 09:33:34 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 08:19:11 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 04:19:01 PM
And that's the issue. Motorists are, and have specific laws. Bicyclists have enough varying laws that they can pretty much get away with everything. There's even groups of that they need to follow all traffic laws, and some that say it's dangerous to remain stopped at red lights.
:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-life/should-it-be-legal-for-cyclists-to-roll-through-stop-signs/
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/9/10/its-legal-to-run-lights-and-other-things-you-might-not-have-known-about-cycling
https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2021/01/27/dot-contemplating-revolutionary-pro-cycling-rule-changes/
We get it, you think cyclists suck and are inferior to you and somehow get away with everything.
Certainly not. I'm presenting the very claims bicyclists use, in response to someone's "I'll just use emojis instead of having a discussion".
The biggest problem is this is quite often the case. Many bicyclists have a hard time discussing the issues lobbed at them regarding their tendencies to ignore laws, and often resort to complaining about car drivers or ignoring the issue that tthere are some really bad bicyclists out there..
You're not interested in discussion. You're interested in pontificating. I'm giving you the response you deserve.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 30, 2022, 05:43:51 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 29, 2022, 08:45:31 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on August 29, 2022, 09:18:03 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 09:33:34 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 28, 2022, 08:19:11 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2022, 04:19:01 PM
And that's the issue. Motorists are, and have specific laws. Bicyclists have enough varying laws that they can pretty much get away with everything. There's even groups of that they need to follow all traffic laws, and some that say it's dangerous to remain stopped at red lights.
:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-life/should-it-be-legal-for-cyclists-to-roll-through-stop-signs/
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/9/10/its-legal-to-run-lights-and-other-things-you-might-not-have-known-about-cycling
https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2021/01/27/dot-contemplating-revolutionary-pro-cycling-rule-changes/
We get it, you think cyclists suck and are inferior to you and somehow get away with everything.
Certainly not. I'm presenting the very claims bicyclists use, in response to someone's "I'll just use emojis instead of having a discussion".
The biggest problem is this is quite often the case. Many bicyclists have a hard time discussing the issues lobbed at them regarding their tendencies to ignore laws, and often resort to complaining about car drivers or ignoring the issue that tthere are some really bad bicyclists out there..
You're not interested in discussion. You're interested in pontificating. I'm giving you the response you deserve.
:-D :-D :-D