Can anyone explain why this is wrong, or why it isn't done more often?>doesn't actually remove parking lane>any place with sufficient off-street parking keeps the parking lane mostly clear anyway>prevents bike lanes from effectively being in the gutterThe only thing I can think of is the possibility of getting doored.
>>2024358What is "this"? Kid warning signs? Ranch style homes? Grass dividers? Black pickup with religious stickers as the default vehicle?
>>2024358Physically, such an arrangement takes up the same kind of space as a four lane road with shoulders, and that's a lot of pavement to put down and maintain for two lanes worth of traffic.
>>2024371Using a full lane for a bike lane and a narrow parking lane.>>2024374>Physically, such an arrangement takes up the same kind of space as a four lane road with shoulders, and that's a lot of pavement to put down and maintain for two lanes worth of traffic.Not counting the median, it was a wide street with a median and two traffic lanes (though was unstriped).
>>2024376Ultimately it's still quite a bit of space, and that kind of spacing is expensive. Urban planners are many things, but skilled bargainers with savvy budgeting practices is rarely one of them.
>>2024377I meant the concept, not that specific example. It sounds like a good compromise:>there's still a parking lane, it's not being arbitrarily closed for a bike lane>bike lanes aren't in the gutter, making it usable when the road is wet
>>2024358>any place with sufficient off-street parking keeps the parking lane mostly clear anywayAnd there-in lies the reason this is retarded. The only reason one of those driveways is going to be permanently full is someone running a rooming house on your street. Why does this street need any on-street parking at all?>...but ChristmasThey can fucking walk from parking elsewhere. Talk to your neighbors, someone is going to be on vacation and not using their driveway for a few weeks. Park on the lawn as last resort.>...but bylawsMake the arbitrary rules support reality, rather than make the arbitrary rules oppose reality. Allow parking on the lawn provided there are no permanent markings/modifications. Give delivery people or contractors the absolute right to use the recipient of the service's driveway, or for momentary uses even a neighbor's if it's not explicitly signed.See >>2024377. Government shouldn't assume a 4-lane road in a subdivision until that road has 4 lanes of traffic. If the HOA wants to fundraise and pay for it, then they can do that locally.
why should the government be paving a road twice as wide to provide parking ?so homeowners can have lawns?
>>2024389>They can fucking walk from parking elsewhere.You're sure to win over hearts and minds with that attitude. YIMBYs are their own worst enemy once again>Make the arbitrary rules support reality, rather than make the arbitrary rules oppose reality.What if the people who live there like the arbitrary rules and in fact asked for them?>Give delivery people or contractors the absolute right to use the recipient of the service's driveway, They already do>or for momentary uses even a neighbor's if it's not explicitly signed.No
>>2024389>The only reason one of those driveways is going to be permanently full is someone running a rooming house on your street. Why does this street need any on-street parking at all?becuase there is a housing crisis pretty much everywhere cept in mcmansion neighborhoods and many residencies are turning back to multigenerational households and "rooming houses"
>>2024358>the possibility of getting doored.Ultimately this is the problem because when a cyclist gets doored in this road configuration, they're sent directly into the car lane, it's why the law has mandated that this is an at fault incident to the driver. It's completely preventable but the nature of humans is carelessness and so, this configuration needs to change. Unfortunately, alternative configurations come with flaws. For example, moving the bike lane to the sidewalk side would increase dooring (because passenger side occupants are far less likely to check for incoming cyclist before opening their door} and pedestrian strike likelihood. The only real full proof nature is to allow to lane mixed use road usage and reducing the speed limit to match traffic
>>2024768Since the bike lane is on the inside of the parking lane, it's on the drivers' side, which in traditional parallel parking setups is right into the main traffic lane, which instills a perception to look out anyway.>>2024420Since it wasn't striped at all until around 2010 (the configuration for a few years was a combination parking/bike lane) I assume the original idea was that it would be unstriped until it was actually needed as a four-lane throughfare, which it ultimately wasn't because another road (six lanes) about 1.4 miles to the west has been able to handle the suburb's traffic even decades later.
>>2024358Why the fuck would you need a parking lane there? Every house here has a driveway and a garage.Get rid of em, and get rid of the grass in the middle. Instead have a green strip on either side, with trees and place sidewalks and bikelanes there, seperated by an additional curb for pedestrian safety.
>>2024358In a location like this the the arrangement is largely wasted. You still have a wide road with an unprotected bike lane which produces a poor speed differential between two moving lanes. You also have a large amount of space devoted to parking, which is highly unlikely to be used if ever so that space is effectively wasted. The median is nice as a crossing feature, but it too is serving very little purpose for it's square footage. I think a far better design would be:Standard two lane road. No dedicated parking lane, two 14ft lanes provide plenty of width for ad hoc street parking on one side while still leaving plenty of space to get by in a car. Then at minimum a curb or ideally grade separated bike lane, then a devote the space that the median had to that bike lane and wider sidewalk space, further distancing bikes and people from moving vehicles.If you have to keep the street and pavement as is, then I here I personally would put the bike lane next to the median with curb barriers. That leaves the parking lane if you really need it and separates from cyclists from both moving traffic and doors. The median also makes left turns a little safer as long as you bump out the protection at the intersections and force cars to slow down fully as they turn. This also gives the bike lane better lighting from the street lamps. Plus the lane swap is a very cheap project, you are just repainting some lines and adding concrete as opposed to changing the permeable land or rebuilding the entire road0. Local EMS and fire can also be talked into something like that since a lot of emergency vehicles will have the ground clearance to hop over a short barrier, and that turns your bike lane into a passing lane for emergency crews. While they're at it they can throw some simple speed bumps down to keep people from speeding down this which I'm sure they do.
>>2024901>Why the fuck would you need a parking lane there? Every house here has a driveway and a garage.Holidays and multiple unrelated people living in the same place.>>2024919>between two moving lanes One of them is a parking lane.>which is highly unlikely to be used if ever so that space is effectively wastedIf it were an issue of wasted space, then bike lanes should be MORE scrutinized if they replace a well-used parking lane or traffic lane.Get rid of em, and get rid of the grass in the middle. Instead have a green strip on either side, with trees and place sidewalks and bikelanes there, seperated by an additional curb for pedestrian safety.>If you have to keep the street and pavement as is, then I here I personally would put the bike lane next to the median with curb barriers While it would eliminate the issue of dooring (which if the number of cars parked on the street is low then the chances of getting doored is also low) that seems really impractical from turning left and right. A dotted-line "shared lane" for turns I've never seen on left-turn lanes before, and that might actually be better since people tend to look to their left when doing merges anyway.>simple speed bumps It's 30 mph, which is a neighborhood speed, but speed humps aren't rated for 30 mph. Speed tables maybe, but advocating for speed humps is counter-intuitive since the biggest "enemy" of the roads, big pickup trucks, are the ones LEAST affected by speed humps.
Oh geez, I forgot about the median too.The issue with the median here is that it actually encourages cars to drive faster.Fear of a head-on collision is one of the things that restrain driver's "enthusiasm", so putting a barrier between the two removes a deterrent against speeding.It's built like a fucking 70 km/h rural highway, except with some gentle curves and curb cuts.
>>2024981>>2024998Why not do something like this? The sidewalk is the least used part of the apparatus, and if you need parking, having divert lanes onto the sidewalk for cycling shouldn't hurt anyone, as long as the curbs and markings are done well.
>>2024998You don't live in the US, you don't need to worry about us
>>2025044He doesn't, but the median is a bad idea, if for no other reason than it looks like shit because nobody's gonna pay the money needed to make it look nice.
>>2025045It looks fine how it is. Yes it could be prettier, but it's not ugly either, and depending on the location it may be easy or impossible for beautification to happen.
>>2025046IMO, it's a waste of space. It doesn't look good, and it doesn't do anything to make people drive better.
>>2025047I don't think Texas is too concerned with space and it doesn't make people drive worse either
>>2025051Ultimately, nothing is free.
>>2025018That's the same as the street in OP's pic just narrower.This right here is the solution, it even has street parking by sacrificing the greenery in a few places.
>>2025085It is somewhat inspired by the Dutch intersection solution. Being narrower was one of the goals, to make more room for better things on the side like accessible plantings, utility boxes, and whatever other infrastructure might be needed.
>>2025086Having a physical barrier between car and bikelanes makes all the difference. OP's street is wide enough for a dutch redesign if you give it a two car lanes btw.Now the lanes might now be wide enough for two full sized trucks to pass each other at speed as well as they shouldn't.
>>2025088>Having a physical barrier between car and bikelanes makes all the difference.I don't get that, that seems like an illusion of safety. Collision points aren't parallel to traffic lanes, they're at points where there's driveways and other streets. Hell, in >>2025085 there's an accident about to happen.
>>2025089>I don't get that, that seems like an illusion of safety.Try driving into a tree and see how much of an illusion it is.>Collision points aren't parallel to traffic lanes, they're at points where there's driveways and other streets. It's where there's speed differential, when it comes to cycling there's one each time a car overtakes a bike and there's one in each dooring scenario.>Hell, in >>2025085 (You) (You) there's an accident about to happen.To the contrary, the car is waiting. And the extended curb forces drivers to take a sharp right turn which limits speed.
love the clowns who are like>hurr just add gardensas if they are free and don't actually cost more than fucking paving
>>2025118>GardensLiterally nobody suggested gardens.
>>2025018>The sidewalk is the least used part of the apparatus>and if you need parkingSummarizing your diagram:>the sidewalk isn't used very often but it needs to be there>the bike lane isn't used very often but it needs to be there>the parking lane isn't used very often, so screw thatThis is the root cause of why cycling/"complete street" advocates run into issues when it comes to town hall debates especially when it comes to balancing traffic and/or parking lanes and bike lanes. Neither "fuck you, that's why" or "now if you just watch this 20 minute video by Strong Towns/NJB/literally who" work in real life, so you just end up with seething about "carbrains" and "boomers".
>>2025144It's literally not needed, but for some reason people tend not to put their cars inside a garage, and leave it parked on the driveway. The driveways themselves will usually hold two to four vehicles without issue. If space is at a premium, and ignoring bike lanes and sidewalks entirely, what's the best way to make that work? The roads should still be wide enough for two full sized vehicles to drive by each other or else you create snarls in traffic and awkward situations that nobody likes. Sidewalks are still needed because of the very same drivers parking on the side of the roads and then walking to whatever their destinations are. If you've got kids, why not encourage their independence and let them walk in the neighborhood a bit, since the safety of suburbia is supposed to be one of its selling points?
>>2025147>The roads should still be wide enough for two full sized vehicles to drive by each other or else you create snarls in traffic and awkward situations that nobody likes.So where do you draw the line? Is that full sized or oversized?
>>2025159I mean lanes should be 9 to 12 feet wide.
>>2025161Ok let's use 9 feet everywhere then. What's left is a perfectly adequate bike lane.
>>2025163Precisely, and the bike lane can be nudged off to the sidewalk when you need to add streetside parking.
>>2025164You're still missing the point, OP's street has 2x12ft car lanes, 2x5ft bike lanes, 1x8ft parking lane, 1x12ft green strip in the middle and 2x 6ft sidewalk with green strip.The street could look exactly like this.
>>2025165>It doesn't look the way I want it to lookWhy should we care
>>2025165Why should they want it to look like that? Rural settings can't afford the tram systems that make Amsterdam work, and even >>2025018would be a significant step up over what's going on in the rest of The Netherlands outside the major cities.
