Desire path for straight sidewalk

all 37 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 60 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Those sidewalks always amaze me at how claustrophobic they feel. You dedicate like 20 m of space to cars and can only spare like 1 m to actual human beings living there?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Yeah what's with the hatched lines artificially widening the road? Couldn't that be more pavement? It's not like it's even being used for cars.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Large roads ussually have a shoulder for when vehicles break down and can be removed safely off the roadway. It would also allow additional cars when the turn lane backs up from rush hour/event congestion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    This is the us right? Many nations would struggle to fail at sidewalks this hard. Those are poured slabs, they could have connected them to the curb for less work and more space, enough to fit the sidewalk in the right place.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I live in Canada, the sidewalk abutting the street is not an issue, and the only time I hear such antisidewalk nonsense is from americans (in MPH of course). That 30 cm of grass is not a meaningful barrier of any kind and the pole is not built to be a car barrier.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    You are saying that you should not have a sidewalk directly next to a street, due to the speed of the street. A uniquely anti sidewalk us-centric view, not saying you are against sidewalks but that you have bought the bad civil engineering at work there. I have not demonstrated to you anything about my knowledge of civil engineering, just that I disagree with yours.

    This same argument has been tried here to not put in a sidewalk. Its weak and silly. Sure having a barrier is better but a having a sidewalk is leagues better then not having one or having the one pictured above.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago

    the OP picture is not bad civil engineering, it’s great civil engineering doing exactly its job in a bad society.

    It is bad civil engineering as in it costs more, does less and looks silly. I am stating that we have the same issues here, and the sidewalks are not at all standardized. The solution is not some massive societal upheaval and rebuilding of all infrastructure, but to just don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. The engineers in this case used more material, more complex forms, more design work to do a worse job. There is no more risk to the public unless you have some info I don't. Hell whats the risk of having sidewalks vs not having them (as most american places I have seen just don't have them at all)? What is so different in the us then Canada that a small strip of grass after the curb makes such a difference? This seems like more of that terrible american exceptionalism that bleeds over here.

    Put the sidewalks in, don't overthink it unless you have the budget. That is all I am saying.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    Passing Lane

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago*

    Idk why they make the sidewalk all zig-zaggy in some places (not like the image here which just seems like poor planning). It doesn't even look cool.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago* (11 children)

    I'll never understand why city planners do that. Like, it's clear you could have definitely had a little bit narrower sidewalk going straight through, but instead they just went around it.

    If it's worried about spacing, they could just make it on both sides like a smaller path to the left of the pole and then the normal path curving around for like wheelchair access.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 1 year ago

    The width is for safe travel by people in wheelchairs. I've been in situations where a mere inch too narrow meant we had to go back to wherever we could cross, or drive/walk in the road, or even give up on that street entirely. Could you possibly fit the pavers if you took it all the way to the edge? Would it be safe for that stretch of roadway? The people who laid the sidewalk presumably measured and decided not. Now, could they have paved the straight AND the curve? Probably yes, but at greater expense. And we'd miss out on this nice desire path.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    What I don't get is why the pole had to go right there. Why not put the sidewalk where you want it and then put the pole to the side? The fire hydrant seems to be doing just fine where it is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    bet you $10 the pole was there first. The cost of working with the cable company and paying their approved expensive team to remove it and moving it vs just taking your existing city contracted cement team and doing a little squiggly

    money is always the motive

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    I'll throw in another $10 that the sidewalk was somewhere else initially.

    I'm betting the road was narrower, and the sidewalk further to the left (in the photo). The pole was to the right of the sidewalk. These were all planned/built around the same time.

    Then the road was widened. The sidewalk had to be pushed (moved/rebuilt) further to the right. They could've put it far enough over to be completely on the other side of the pole, but that would have other implications - including running into the fire hydrant in the background.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    In some places it'll be the phone company and the power company and the cable TV/internet companies as well. You'd have to coordinate with all 3. And there may be regulations about how close it has to be to the street to enable repairs -- regulations put there for the safety of the workers, as well as to keep the lines away from tree branches that might take them down during a storm.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    man I'm so glad we don't have to deal with that here. All poles are owned by the town here, if they wanna move a pole they give notice to the utility companies "hey this is being moved on X date, if you wanna keep services on it we recommend you be there" (coordination wise, we still have many regulations to follow)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (9 children)

    Made by anti-LGBTQ+ sidewalk jerks.

    /jk (for those that need it)

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (6 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    But shouldn't it be straight then if it was made by anti-LGBTQ+ sidewalk jerks?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments