I turn off the navigation. I know how to get to work and home. What I want to know is where the accidents are, something in the road, car stopped on the side of the road. things like that. I make navigation choices once presented with these options.
Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war
381–390 of 582 posts
Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war
#382Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand. Your expectation is that if you buy a home, you should be able to prohibit people from using the public street in front of it?
I think many people expect, when they buy a home on a quiet street, that the street will remain quiet indefinitely. Obviously that's not an entirely rational expectation, but it's very understandable. I grew up in an entirely enclosed (not gated, just not connected) neighborhood, where riding my bike as a young child was very safe. After I moved out, it was connected to new neighborhoods, so there is now non-local tr…
Yes. When was growing up from a relatively young age I could be gone half the day on my bike, traveling to friends' houses or nearby parks. I'm not sure I will let my children do that today because of the traffic through our current neighborhood.
Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war
#383Earlier quoted context omitted.
> neighborhoods who didn't voluntarily agree to increased traffic just to make my commute shorter, this is free loading and their roads are for them to get to and from their home It's nothing against you but is this a common opinion in the US? People in neighborhoods "own" the streets? As a Frenchman saying this is astonishing as I would naturally consider that I do own the street just as much as they do and it's my…
> It's nothing against you but is this a common opinion in the US? People in neighborhoods "own" the streets? Yes. In many suburban neighborhoods (especially predominantly white ones) people will give you dirty looks if you are a stranger walking around. If you are black many white people will call the police.
Wow.. what? Do you have any data to back that up? I don't, but from personal experience I have never seen police stopping black people in my neighborhood who are walking around.
Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war
#384Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the California Bay Area, this is not true. There is a non-trivial number of people who are willing to commute 2+ hours each way in order to live in bigger, cheaper houses in "safer" neighborhoods.
The same is true of the Washington DC metro area... However, in both cases, I would bet that the distance involved is about 50-60 miles. If that traffic were moving at speed, it would be an hour commute - and I would submit very few people would put more than that amount of mileage on their car everyday (>30,000 miles/year).
Studies have shown that for every mile of road built, is an additional mile driven, in average, by its populace.
Traffic will expand to meet its resources.
Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war
#385As a Waze user, this has actually been a source of increasing frustration for me. I do not want to save 1-3 minutes on a commute by cutting through unfamiliar residential areas where deaf kids play and homeowners give me dirty looks as I go over their oversized speed bumps. I use Waze not so much as a super-optimal routing tool, but as an aggravation-avoidance tool. Traffic and speed-traps aggravate me, sure... but n…
Agreed. I often ignore it -- Waze really over-optimizes; you end up going left-right-left-right down narrow streets just to save a minute. Mostly, I'd rather sit in the traffic on the main thoroughfare and just chill out listening to music or the radio. Not to mention, the increased mileage, wear and tear and fuel consumption from the back roads and constant turns (and disrupting otherwise quiet neighborhoods). Waze…
This is why UPS drivers don't turn left http://priceonomics.com/why-ups-trucks-dont-turn-left/
Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war
#386Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is actually such a thing as city planning and many streets could, in fact, not be operated by the government for broad public benefit but for the benefit of the people living nearby. E.g. in a residential zone in a suburb the streets may actually be intended to connect the homes not for through traffic.
Streets are kind of built for an expected load too right? I live on a dead end and have to assume my street would wear out faster than the neighborhood thoroughfare if it had an equal level of traffic.
Exactly
Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war
#387Earlier quoted context omitted.
Portraying this as a sense of "owning" the street is unneccessarily perjorative, IMHO. I don't think that many people would argue with the idea that, all else being equal, having less traffic on the street in front of your house is a good thing. Less noise, less polution, less risk of pets and children getting hit by cars. So it shouldn't be surprising that people dislike it when traffic in front of their houses incr…
I was told in Sweden all yards are publically usable and if someone wants to use "yours" you have to let them. I only bring that up to point out a cultural difference that other cultures might see this differently https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101116164518A...
Not quite.
There is a traditional free right to roam, but it does not extend to gardens and areas next to houses. Outside of that, it is rather permissive.
Back on topic but still in Sweden: more or less all shortcuts in residential areas are closed, either by physical barriers, or more commonly by official signs forbidding pass-through traffic, and they are typically respected.
Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war
#388Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have the congestion charge in London. Initially the traffic did drop, but now the traffic is just as busy, and the gridlock lasts all day. Cities like London, NYC and SF are expanding very quickly in terms of population size and density, so in transport terms, the solution will have to be something like automated self driving cars integrated into a conveyor belt like system, which incentivise ride-sharing.
> We have the congestion charge in London. Initially the traffic did drop, but now the traffic is just as busy, and the gridlock lasts all day. My guess is that this is for the same reason as the fact that housing prices have gotten crazy high in London over the last decade: demand has continued to outpace supply (and in this case, the congestion charge). I mean, you can always suppress traffic if you're willing to r…
Minority Report style fancy transportation is totally unnecessary. All we need is an automatic congestion charge similar to Uber's surge pricing. Heck, such a system would work great for keeping traffic out of residential areas too.
Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war
#389Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why doesn't society tell people "keep to the right lane" or "signal your turns"? It's funny, because I live in California, and I find myself wanting to yell these things a people all the time .
"Keep Right Except to Pass" is a pretty common sign. And in at least some states you can be ticketed for improper lane use and failure to signal.
Indeed. I hail from Oregon, where it is the law. Freeway driving, even when busy, is much more pleasant there.
Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war
#390This is a delicate and complicated issue, to be sure. It's got a bit of a NIMBY flavor to it - at least, personally. Like many other Waze users below, I benefit greatly from the alternatives the app presents - and have been expert at quickly switching to the 'routes' view to see JUST how much time that detour is going to save me. With the heavily congested Bay Area freeways, our 35 minute drive can easily take well over an hour (the 'regular' way) and Waze consistently trims it down to under 50 minutes, door-to-door.
All of that said - if there was a sudden influx of 'through' traffic on my quiet, residential street, where my child plays - I'm pretty sure I wouldn't like it. Of course, no matter WHAT route we're taking, every driver is expected to travel within the legal speed limit and remain fully aware of surroundings... right?? I know, I know.
There's no doubt that this is a technology that's here to stay - and I applaud enhancements like highlighting schools, hospitals or other "slow zones" (they could even become optional 'areas to avoid'). With more and more autonomy and connectivity being built into vehicles (which disturbs me due to security implications), I imagine it won't be long until this functionality gets (at least optionally) embedded in the vehicle.
Perhaps a self-drive car, aware of its surroundings, wouldn't hit the plastic "Slow - Children at Play" sign. :)