AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"  (Read 1460 times)

adventurernumber1

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1609
  • David Carson

  • Age: 19
  • Location: Dalton, Georgia, USA
  • Last Login: October 15, 2019, 08:56:35 PM
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #25 on: March 01, 2019, 05:03:13 AM »

I am personally fascinated with urban planning and design, and my interest and knowledge regarding it is always growing - as a matter of fact, if I recall correctly, I think that my Senior Paper (12th Grade, 2017) was even on the subject of urban planning. I would be in support of a board on this forum related to those topics, if it is at all possible and feasible, and that there would not be too many negative effects as a result of it. I agree that we must try to maintain the centrality of roads to the discussion on this forum, but as noted upthread, the addition of this sub-forum would probably not have a significant negative effect on that. I would be really excited to see this, and I feel that it could transform my insight on urban design even more. As mentioned, urban planning is often interconnected with roads and transportation, so it isn't really a topic that is too wildly unrelated. I could agree that it may be best for this board to be hidden from guests, if implemented. I feel like this could be a great addition, and I am excited to see where it goes.


We hide Fictional Highways, yet somehow wound up with some people who seem to do nothing here but post in Fictional. Same could happen with a new urban design board.

While this has happened in some cases (most notably with FritzOwl), I don't think it is quite the same thing - that being because Fictional Highways is still a topic directly related to roads, and that it definitely would have been an interest in some aspect of roads (in this case, fictional roads) that probably brought them to the forum in the first place. I definitely think it would be a good idea to hide this theoretical Urban Planning/Design board, but I don't feel that we would see a very similar phenomenon as that within the Fictional Highways sub-forum.


« Last Edit: March 01, 2019, 05:05:39 AM by adventurernumber1 »
Logged
Alternating between different highway shields for my avatar - my previous highway shield avatar for the last few years was US 76.

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/127322363@N08/

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-vJ3qa8R-cc44Cv6ohio1g

Rothman

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5036
  • Last Login: October 15, 2019, 10:11:08 PM
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #26 on: March 01, 2019, 07:59:22 AM »

I like this idea, as long as it doesn't end up attracting a bunch of people who hate cars.
And therein lies the rub.  That is a parallel concern to what Oscar and I have mentioned.

I see a decent amount of potential that the new board just becomes an anti-road / pro-road shouting match.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10801
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: October 15, 2019, 09:14:27 AM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #27 on: March 01, 2019, 08:18:38 AM »

^ As if we don't already have some of that as it is.  We've seen it with some of the more...bullish...freeway proponents on this forum, including a few existing users who can't understand that there are options besides freeways in urban areas.  That said, I'd prefer to avoid mud-slinging shouting matches around here (especially given the Beltway-sprjus4 fireworks of late).

Regarding the mention of a "lack of urbanist discussion boards", I'm a bit surprised that was mentioned.  Not only is there Planitizen, but SkyscraperPage and SkyscraperCity could also arguably be considered such, and those two are forum-based much like AARoads here is.
Logged

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13540
  • It is well, it is well, with my soul.

  • Age: 57
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: October 15, 2019, 02:21:57 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #28 on: March 01, 2019, 12:30:19 PM »

I agree with Oscar's sentiments.  Unless there are strict parameters, I see a high risk of the new board turning into a disaster that keeps the moderators even busier.

Or they could, you know, let people discuss things as they want and let the chips fall where they may.

I have no opinion on the proposal, as I have no desire to live in an urban area or somewhere that discourages the use of personal automobile travel to get to Point B from Point A, and wouldn't be reading or participating. Don't think I've ever taken a peek at the transit board here, as I'm not a transit user -- and again, don't want to live somewhere that you can't or don't use a car to get around.
Logged

Rothman

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5036
  • Last Login: October 15, 2019, 10:11:08 PM
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #29 on: March 01, 2019, 12:34:32 PM »

That's certainly an interesting opinion from someone that doesn't have one. :D
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10688
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: October 15, 2019, 05:08:37 PM
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #30 on: March 01, 2019, 01:41:01 PM »

Part of my goal in urban planning is to figure out how to manage auto traffic while also making cities more pedestrian, bike, and transit-friendly. Hopefully auto traffic won't interfere with any of those things.

Now, there's a noble goal!
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

oscar

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6779
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:00:49 AM
    • my Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #31 on: March 01, 2019, 02:56:59 PM »

That's certainly an interesting opinion from someone that doesn't have one. :D

I think he was expressing an opinion about moderation, rather than the proposed board.
Logged
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10288
  • U/Wash - Urban Design

  • Age: 23
  • Location: Seattle and Tacoma, WA Vancouver, BC | Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:56:02 AM
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #32 on: March 01, 2019, 03:00:10 PM »

Indeed! Roads are a huge part of the urban design process. I am constantly designing roads in my proposals. As part of my current project, I have had to redesign a major intersection. Though I have not yet drawn any of the traffic lights or signs, I am proposing a half signal: traffic on the road with the raised crossing would have a stop sign, but the main road has a signal. This is because of a trolley that I have not yet modelled.

With a thread or board devoted to this topic, I could post about this intersection to get some feedback from other users. Only thing stopping me thus far has been the overall feeling that most users here don't care about this stuff, but I might be wrong, judging by the existence of this thread.

I'm really curious to see how this design works with the trolley and the stop sign/traffic signal configuration you describe.  I look forward to seeing more!

"Half signals" seem to work well in Seattle, odd as it may look to drivers (who think people are running a red light). But it's a hell of a lot cheaper than a full signal!

I should have the whole model done with a couple days, and I'll report back. Maybe in that new "Urban planning" thread started by Roadgeekteen.

Part of my goal in urban planning is to figure out how to manage auto traffic while also making cities more pedestrian, bike, and transit-friendly. Hopefully auto traffic won't interfere with any of those things.

Now, there's a noble goal!

Yeah, no kidding! It's been the goal of planners for decades now to find some way to fuse everything. I'm not going to say its impossible, nor whether there's places that have "figured it out", but it's a...yeah, "noble goal" sums it up.
Logged

stridentweasel

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 503
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Kansas
  • Last Login: October 13, 2019, 06:01:44 PM
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #33 on: March 01, 2019, 04:19:34 PM »

Regarding the mention of a "lack of urbanist discussion boards", I'm a bit surprised that was mentioned.  Not only is there Planitizen, but SkyscraperPage and SkyscraperCity could also arguably be considered such, and those two are forum-based much like AARoads here is.

In all honesty, I must say, thank you for introducing me to SkyscraperCity!  AARoads Forum appears to have a worthy competitor.  :D
Logged
I am the traffic, and so are you.

Disclaimer:  All views I express here are my own and do not reflect those of any employer or any organization or entity with whom I have or have had any professional relationship.

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10688
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: October 15, 2019, 05:08:37 PM
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #34 on: March 01, 2019, 04:37:12 PM »


Regarding the mention of a "lack of urbanist discussion boards", I'm a bit surprised that was mentioned.  Not only is there Planitizen, but SkyscraperPage and SkyscraperCity could also arguably be considered such, and those two are forum-based much like AARoads here is.

In all honesty, I must say, thank you for introducing me to SkyscraperCity!  AARoads Forum appears to have a worthy competitor.  :D

#1 rule for roadgeeks visiting skyscrapercity:  Be careful what you call a highway.

You have been warned.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

MNHighwayMan

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4053
  • Blue and gold forever!

  • Age: 27
  • Location: Des Moines
  • Last Login: Today at 07:50:56 AM
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #35 on: March 01, 2019, 05:20:57 PM »

I'm intrigued. What definition do they go by that would find ours offensive?
Logged

1

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 7270
  • UMass Lowell student

  • Age: 20
  • Location: MA/NH border
  • Last Login: Today at 07:57:21 AM
    • Flickr account
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #36 on: March 01, 2019, 05:30:31 PM »

I'm intrigued. What definition do they go by that would find ours offensive?

I'm assuming he's referring to highway = freeway.

That's what it means in my local area among the general public.
Logged
Clinched

Traveled, plus
US ⒔50
MA ⒐2⒉40.9⒐10⒎10⒐1⒒1⒚14⒈159
NH 27, 111A(E); NY 366; GA 42, 140; FL A1A; CT 32; VT 5A; QC 16⒉16⒌263

Flickr

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6377
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: October 15, 2019, 11:43:11 PM
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #37 on: March 01, 2019, 06:51:24 PM »

While there are people there who do share useful information verbally and try to respond constructively to written queries, the Highways & Autobahns board on SkyscraperCity is very photo-focused.  Most of the in-depth discussion occurs on other boards, many of which are country-specific.  The last time I visited it for any significant length of time, it was to use wget to download all the pages for the China thread so I could extract the images for separate viewing in a photo browser.  (I was seeking to orient myself since I was at the time writing downloaders for public resource trading platforms in several Chinese provinces, which I have since used to extract about 2,000 pattern-accurate sign drawings for Chinese expressways and trunk roads.)
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

Roadgeekteen

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4301
  • Interstates everywhere to everything

  • Age: 16
  • Location: boston metro area
  • Last Login: October 15, 2019, 10:54:24 PM
    • New interstate plans
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #38 on: March 01, 2019, 09:46:29 PM »

I'm intrigued. What definition do they go by that would find ours offensive?

I'm assuming he's referring to highway = freeway.

That's what it means in my local area among the general public.
I refuse to use "highway". I use freeway or expressway.
Logged
I'm a young roadgeek who has been interested in roads since I was a little kid.

ipeters61

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 670
  • Age: 25
  • Location: Dover, Delaware
  • Last Login: October 15, 2019, 01:52:22 PM
    • Personal Website
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #39 on: March 03, 2019, 02:01:15 PM »

I agree with Oscar's sentiments.  Unless there are strict parameters, I see a high risk of the new board turning into a disaster that keeps the moderators even busier.

Or they could, you know, let people discuss things as they want and let the chips fall where they may.

I have no opinion on the proposal, as I have no desire to live in an urban area or somewhere that discourages the use of personal automobile travel to get to Point B from Point A, and wouldn't be reading or participating. Don't think I've ever taken a peek at the transit board here, as I'm not a transit user -- and again, don't want to live somewhere that you can't or don't use a car to get around.
I think I'm in my personal sweet spot in terms of this.  In Dover, I can walk to most places I need to go (including work), but have to drive to where I want to go.  However, there are a small number of alternatives, should I need them.

Not go to off topic, but it's things like this that bother me about articles like, "How Uber/Lyft is ruining car ownership."  Are you going to tell some guy in southern Delaware/the middle of West Virginia/some other rural area, where everything is far apart, that instead of getting into their own personal car outside their door that they should instead call Uber/Lyft and wait 30 minutes for the nearest car to show up?  A lot of these articles make the erroneous assumption that nearly everybody lives in a big city and has this seemingly endless infrastructure available to them, and it really bothers me.
Logged
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed on my posts on the AARoads Forum are my own and do not represent official positions of my employer.
Instagram | Clinched Map

MantyMadTown

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 608
  • UW-Madison

  • Age: 21
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: September 04, 2019, 03:07:18 AM
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #40 on: March 03, 2019, 04:00:23 PM »

Not go to off topic, but it's things like this that bother me about articles like, "How Uber/Lyft is ruining car ownership."  Are you going to tell some guy in southern Delaware/the middle of West Virginia/some other rural area, where everything is far apart, that instead of getting into their own personal car outside their door that they should instead call Uber/Lyft and wait 30 minutes for the nearest car to show up?  A lot of these articles make the erroneous assumption that nearly everybody lives in a big city and has this seemingly endless infrastructure available to them, and it really bothers me.

Same. I think the people who write these articles are pretty out of touch with the rest of America. Even though the majority of Americans live in cities of some kind (though that figure also includes suburbs and small towns that are still classified as "cities"), most places outside the center of large cities don't have the proper infrastructure in place to get people to where they're going without a car.
Logged
Forget the I-41 haters

english si

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3535
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Buckinghamshire, England
  • Last Login: October 15, 2019, 01:00:58 PM
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #41 on: March 03, 2019, 04:01:27 PM »

Those anti-car people should just eff off from this forum, because roads are what this forum is all about.
Was with you until here. Roads != cars.

Roads are there for more than just cars - pedestrians, cyclists, buses, trucks, etc. And there's more to roads than the vehicles that use them - history, numbering, signage, engineering, etc.

Anti-road people (normally based in a dislike of cars), however...
Not go to off topic, but it's things like this that bother me about articles like, "How Uber/Lyft is ruining car ownership."  Are you going to tell some guy in southern Delaware/the middle of West Virginia/some other rural area, where everything is far apart, that instead of getting into their own personal car outside their door that they should instead call Uber/Lyft and wait 30 minutes for the nearest car to show up?  A lot of these articles make the erroneous assumption that nearly everybody lives in a big city and has this seemingly endless infrastructure available to them, and it really bothers me.
Agreed - arguably rural/semi-rural/suburban planning is more interesting than urban planning, because the challenges are more complex and difficult.

Plus few seem to talk about it, so it's more fresh and interesting, rather than stuff you might have heard before.
Logged

MantyMadTown

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 608
  • UW-Madison

  • Age: 21
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: September 04, 2019, 03:07:18 AM
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #42 on: March 03, 2019, 04:10:54 PM »

Those anti-car people should just eff off from this forum, because roads are what this forum is all about.
Was with you until here. Roads != cars.

Roads are there for more than just cars - pedestrians, cyclists, buses, trucks, etc. And there's more to roads than the vehicles that use them - history, numbering, signage, engineering, etc.

Anti-road people (normally based in a dislike of cars), however...

I agree with you. There's so much more to roads than just cars. And there's a lot that I appreciate about them besides just their use by cars. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say that they should only be used for auto traffic, so I'm sorry for coming off that way.
Logged
Forget the I-41 haters

english si

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3535
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Buckinghamshire, England
  • Last Login: October 15, 2019, 01:00:58 PM
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #43 on: March 03, 2019, 04:18:14 PM »

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say that they should only be used for auto traffic, so I'm sorry for coming off that way.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say you said that or hold that view. What I disagree with is that anti-car people should eff-off because this is a roads forum.

Anti-car people should be welcome, as long as they like roads.
Logged

Roadgeekteen

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4301
  • Interstates everywhere to everything

  • Age: 16
  • Location: boston metro area
  • Last Login: October 15, 2019, 10:54:24 PM
    • New interstate plans
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #44 on: March 03, 2019, 09:35:59 PM »

Looks like our request got granted!  :biggrin:
Logged
I'm a young roadgeek who has been interested in roads since I was a little kid.

stridentweasel

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 503
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Kansas
  • Last Login: October 13, 2019, 06:01:44 PM
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #45 on: March 04, 2019, 12:28:10 AM »

Looks like our request got granted!  :biggrin:

Obviously, I'm happy to see this!
Logged
I am the traffic, and so are you.

Disclaimer:  All views I express here are my own and do not reflect those of any employer or any organization or entity with whom I have or have had any professional relationship.

adventurernumber1

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1609
  • David Carson

  • Age: 19
  • Location: Dalton, Georgia, USA
  • Last Login: October 15, 2019, 08:56:35 PM
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #46 on: March 04, 2019, 01:12:24 AM »

Looks like our request got granted!  :biggrin:

Obviously, I'm happy to see this!

I am as well. Great thanks to the moderators and administrators who have put this together and made it happen. This is a great addition to the forum, and I am very excited!  :nod:
Logged
Alternating between different highway shields for my avatar - my previous highway shield avatar for the last few years was US 76.

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/127322363@N08/

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-vJ3qa8R-cc44Cv6ohio1g

Hot Rod Hootenanny

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1848
  • Diplomat of Solid Sound

  • Age: 44
  • Location: Middle of Nowhere, Ohio
  • Last Login: October 14, 2019, 08:40:17 PM
    • 20th Century roadfan material
Re: Urban Planning/Design under "Non-Road Boards"
« Reply #47 on: March 04, 2019, 09:06:22 PM »

^ As if we don't already have some of that as it is.  We've seen it with some of the more...bullish...freeway proponents on this forum, including a few existing users who can't understand that there are options besides freeways in urban areas.  That said, I'd prefer to avoid mud-slinging shouting matches around here (especially given the Beltway-sprjus4 fireworks of late).

Regarding the mention of a "lack of urbanist discussion boards", I'm a bit surprised that was mentioned.  Not only is there Planitizen, but SkyscraperPage and SkyscraperCity could also arguably be considered such, and those two are forum-based much like AARoads here is.

And on a smaller geographic scale, urbanohio.com.
Logged
SAVE AAROADS!! ONLY TALK ABOUT ROADS!

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.