top 35 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 41 points 6 months ago (15 children)

just... do a roundabout, man

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago (14 children)

    But roundabout require people to think and interact with the traffic! We want to drive fast, but stupid.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago (13 children)

    i think the average american would die of shock if they came to visit me. just to get through town (as in just passing by) requires navigating on average 9 to 11 roundabouts, and that's on an E-road.

    it's pretty obvious when using google maps for navigation that they don't really "get" roundabouts. it pipes up "take the second exit" in every roundabout where you need to go straight through.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    We've had roundabouts all over the place for 20+ years at this point. I genuinely don't get why people still struggle so much with them.

    But fwiw my town also requires several roundabouts to get through and it’s not very big. And almost every time an intersection needs work, we get a new roundabout.

    However I actually do like the way the directions work in maps where it says “take the x exit” because a ton of roads aren't well marked in roundabouts, and there are some weird but decently common situations where the exit you'd think you need is not the right one. Thats just sort of what happens when you are retrofitting everything, and have space constraints.

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

    but i mean, it doesn't say "continue straight" in every interchange. i don't know how other countries do it but we have being able to navigate by signage as a mandatory part of driving tests and it's always understood that no instructions given means "continue on your current course".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    It depends here, sometimes we genuinely do get a bunch of “continue straight to stay on xyz” for no obvious reason, and on highways with multiple off-ramps that split the existing lanes, it’s very common to get “use the middle lane to continue on xyz” so it’s not really as out of place as you might think. Our roads are just spaghetti garbage. Josh from Let’s Game It Out must have done the road planning.

    And yes, navigating by signs is doable, but we are (were?) talking about navigation apps which provide excruciating detail, so thats a bit of a moot point. But where, specifically, they are marked changes, how well they are marked changes, and on many of them you can’t see signage at night until you are almost past it, and due to mostly being space-constrained retrofits, which exit you want from the roundabout isn't nearly as standardized as it should be, even to continue straight. Sometimes straight is the first exit, sometimes the third. Usually second. It’s not a super great implementation of the system, but the roads themselves aren't a whole lot better. Sometimes it is really really unclear what road you are already on, because only cross-streets are marked (as in you can’t see the signs for your road until you go through an intersection, and it might not be marked in a way you can see for several blocks if the intersections are with small quiet streets).. driving in general sucks, basically, and the maps direction to continue through the second exit is thus either welcome, or at least not a dealbreaker, for drivers here.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago*

    The more progressive and more well-planned small towns and cities around the US have actually been building out roundabouts for the better part of a decade now. When I go visit my parents in suburban Washington I go through 4 or 5 roundabouts between the highway and their house. Turns out you can get the majority of suburban Americans on board with a roundabout if you just point out that it meants they probably won't have to stop and idle anymore. Also, usually cheaper.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Is that monstrosity over 10 lanes wide? I think it's closer to 18 in actual width. That could be as wide as 63 meters (206 ft). Insanity.

    Anything but building some trains and putting buildings closer together.. We'd sacrifice anything and everything on the altar of cars.to appease the rich and the selfish.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    A few things stand out from the demo/concept:

    • Proposes to knock over a lot of buildings to grow the intersection footprint by... I'm guessing 3x.
    • Avoids constructing an overpass while aping features of a diverging diamond and NJ-style jug-handles. I think this is possibly cheaper, but probably not by a lot.
    • Lots of runway for merge zones, far from intersection.
    • The "just one more lane" gang is gonna be disappointed with the inevitable bill to widen this monstrosity in ten years.
    • Makes it impossible to turn into local parking lots which might be inducing demand for the intersection in the first place.

    So, it's not great nor abysmal but man is that a fuckload of extra pavement just to build a pedestrian "dead zone". With respect to the last point, I've seen that kind of thing happen first hand. By the time the project is over, local business astride the new overpass/intersection have already closed their doors since traffic is now optimized to blow past everything at 55MPH.

    IMO, if exercising imminent domain is on the table, may as well beef up and/or add secondary relief roads around this intersection instead. Spread the infrastructure build and cost into multiple smaller projects and leave the existing intersection to through and left-turn traffic only. The result should be calmer and less accident prone. Then, make sure that pedestrians and bikes can get around these multiple smaller roads.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago

    4,000 busses were harmed during the making of this video.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago

    It's the state level version of endless wars to funnel money to donors. The fact that they will never be done is the point.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    That looks like some truly dumbass nonsense

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] [S] 6 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    It honestly is quite amazing from an engineering standpoint but would be pretty immoral to build in real life

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    I disagree, it looks like quite bad engineering to me

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    How so? It's a total traffic killer, in more ways than one :P

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Isn't engineering supposed to involve efficient use of resources? Space, time, cost, maintenance; this looks like an awful design for transporting things.

    This is more like art; wasting resources on something grandiose that makes some sort of 'statement', whilst honouring daft constraints like 'each twat must be at least 4m from every other twat at all times'.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago

    Reducing commute time by two (2) minutes and it will cost 30 billion dollars. Seems like a good value proposition.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago
    [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    Why don’t they just build on top por favor existing road or below 🤪

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    I guarantee you that people will miss the exit ramp and fuck the whole thing up when they try to make a sharp turn in the middle

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    Revolting. All of this just to go eat at Chili's

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    Ok so obviously it's hideous, costly, wasteful etc, but also, sooo many people would pull into wrong way traffic just trying to get through it

  • source