Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war • Hacker News Board

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#131

Post by HillaryBriss » Mon, Jun 06, 2016, 4:54 PM UTC

vidoc wrote: post #60

jdblair wrote: post #17

The City of Berkeley, CA, fixed this problem a long time ago, before Waze or even widespread GPS. Every few blocks they block side streets to all vehicles except bicycles. The effect is to be forced to take right or left turns that guide you back to the main through street. Streets parallel to the through streets that are now impassible to cars are marked as "bicycle boulevards" and provide safer routes for cyclists.…

They totally did! I don't count the times I forgot about this while I was stuck on the eastbound traffic on university ave, attempting to outsmart the traffic by cutting through the blocks on the south side. Most of those blocks are barricaded nimby style, and you end up having to drive several extra miles, worsening your carbon footprint!

Carbon footprint. Interesting. The Bay Area has worsened one of its externalities.

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#132

Post by incongruity » Mon, Jun 06, 2016, 4:55 PM UTC

throw7 wrote: post #103

breischl wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But locals also know the area better, pretty much by definition. That usually makes them safer drivers. I know that the streets near my house are filled with kids because of the three schools nearby that use the park as a playground, that almost (not quite) every other intersection is a two-way stop instead of a four-way, and that even though the streets are wide the speed limit is 25. A flash mob of commuters is not…

It's the opposite... knowing an area well usually makes dangerous drivers. Most accidents happen within some miles from home, mainly because one "knows" the area so well one lets their guard down.

Source? It seems much more likely that most accidents happen within some smallish radius from home because one is much much more likely to be driving there as home is the presumably, on aggregate, most frequent starting or ending point for a person (besides, possibly work or a transit hub, etc.) – the other end points are much more dispersed, but home definitely biases the distribution of driving location and therefore one would expect to see more accidents near home even if the moment by moment probability of getting into an accident was uniform.

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#133

Post by tbyehl » Mon, Jun 06, 2016, 4:55 PM UTC

danra wrote: post #73

I simply hate it when Waze navigates me through a dozen small streets I'm not familiar with, just to save one minute vs. taking a main road. The multiple suggested routes often don't mitigate this enough. Wish for a feature to turn a preference for main roads in general.

IME, Waze's journeys down non-primary roads probably aren't making my driving experience less frustrating and probably don't save any time. Invariably it sends me down a series of side streets with stops signs and dumps me back at a busy primary road where I have to make a left across traffic without the aid of a signal. If I was "up" any time by then I'll probably give it all back and then some waiting to make that final turn of Wave's goofy detour.

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#134

Post by ucaetano » Mon, Jun 06, 2016, 4:59 PM UTC

The american dream is everyone having their own cul de sac :)

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#135

Post by underwater » Mon, Jun 06, 2016, 5:00 PM UTC

rhinoceraptor wrote: post #6

FroshKiller wrote: post #2

I'm a homeowner and an active Waze user. The street I live on is not "my" street. It's a public street that any licensed driver may use. I did have an issue with drivers coming around a blind curve too quickly to be safe, though, so I did what these homeowners ought to be doing and contacted my local government about getting my street assessed for a traffic calming project. The city created a three-way stop before th…

I got a ticket for one of these types of things, some local ordinance prohibiting through traffic during rush hour. It's a great revenue generator for the local PDs. Lots of one-off traffic laws that people passing through won't (and really, can't) know about.

"No Thru Traffic" signs are enforceable!? What law does that fall under?

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#136

Post by jws » Mon, Jun 06, 2016, 5:00 PM UTC

zyxley wrote: post #92

mikeash wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't things like that usually have signs?

I'm sure they do, somewhere that nobody actually driving on one of the streets in question will ever see it. > "But the plans were on display..." > "On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them." > "That's the display department." > "With a flashlight." > "Ah, well the lights had probably gone." > "So had the stairs." > "But look, you found the notice didn't you?" > "Yes," said Arthur, "yes I di…

Once Waze integrates that law into their dataset the problem is solved. No sign required.

I suppose they can't crowdsource that information or people would lie.

There must be a system for getting traffic information from municipalities to the road databases. Apple Maps told me there was no way to drive home a couple days ago, on examination the street in front of my house was marked as closed for the day, they were paving. That is essentially a zero traffic street in a grid area but bisected by rail road tracks without a crossing, so no one uses it except the people who live on it.

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#137

Post by xenadu02 » Mon, Jun 06, 2016, 5:02 PM UTC

superuser2 wrote: post #33

paulddraper wrote: post #4

If it's faster to take a neighborhood street than the interstate , there's a problem. It's not normal. It sounds like residents are at war with transportation infrastructure instead.

10mph is blazingly, exceptionally fast for an interstate in a major city during commute hours. Building bigger highways sparks further-flung suburbs and the new traffic brings everyone else's commute times back to equilibrium.

Indeed, you can see this in the Dallas area. The major roads have run out of room to expand and according to the old timers traffic is no better than it was in 1990. All the road expansion did was let people move to ever more distant suburbs.

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#138

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Jun 06, 2016, 5:03 PM UTC

underwater wrote: post #135

rhinoceraptor wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got a ticket for one of these types of things, some local ordinance prohibiting through traffic during rush hour. It's a great revenue generator for the local PDs. Lots of one-off traffic laws that people passing through won't (and really, can't) know about.

"No Thru Traffic" signs are enforceable!? What law does that fall under?

[deleted]

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#139

Post by yardie » Mon, Jun 06, 2016, 5:04 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #77

DanBC wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Local people may know that children live and play there, and drive more cautiously. (I didn't downvote you.)

You shouldn't need tribal knowledge like that to drive safely and to keep others safe; the roads should be marked well for everyone, and all drivers should be cautious in all neighborhood settings.

You would think that but have you been driving lately? 20% are just assholes all the time. Not to far from me some guy ripped through a school zone at 60mph. This resulted in a fatality. Of course the family was on the news saying how a nice guy he was but what nice guy drives 60mph through a residential street.

The driver died. He hit a schoolbus. Luckily, none of the kids were seated near the point of impact and none were critically injured.

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#140

Post by breischl » Mon, Jun 06, 2016, 5:05 PM UTC

Piskvorrr wrote: post #117

breischl wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spoken like someone who has never witnessed the process of changing streetscapes. There's a project on another street near me to do some traffic calming along a ~10 block stretch. It's actually a relatively small project - they're going to move the existing street parking out next to traffic, move the existing bike lane next to the curb, and make a few minor pedestrian & signage improvements. That effort has been goi…

Got a crystal ball, eh? Don't worry, I'm acutely aware what a PITA any sort of street change is - just changing the designation of a 1-block residential street to a living street is Impossible (TM), and physically, that's just signage. I'm not saying that street planning is easy, not at all. In my opinion, you seem to be saying "I understand street development, but I don't do software; therefore if the former is hard…

Actually I'm a software developer by day. Polish up that crystal ball.

I'm suggesting fixing the problem in the software because that's where the problem was created and where it stands a chance of being fixed. Street infrastructure cannot be changed fast enough to deal with temporary traffic problems. Attempting to do so would be ineffective.