Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 582 posts

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#511

Post by threatofrain »

lliamander wrote: post #376
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…

> Anything else just feels like NIMBY entitlement. I disagree. I also think there is a sense that our urban/suburban planning should serve more that just the interests of motorists, and should support activities other than just driving to/from work. My wife and I used to drive 45 minutes just to park on the outside of a nice residential neighborhood so we could take a walk. Now we can get to family, friends, parks, b…

What that means is the problem is going to be pushed to someplace else, normally to a poorer place. If areas of living aren't shouldering equal burden, then some other neighborhoods are shouldering disproportionate burden.

That's the symptom of NIMBY.

If we aren't talking about (1) a new transportation method without the same issues, (2) a somehow substantial decrease in cars, (3) a decline in US population that outpaces growth, then we're probably talking either about how to shoulder the problem equitably, or how to push the problem to another neighborhood so you don't have to suffer.

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#512

Post by AnthonyMouse »

plttn wrote: post #506
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much anything that requires vehicles to use their brakes funds terrorism because every stop requires subsequent acceleration. Sure, the net effect from adding one stop sign is negligible, but it's tragedy of the commons. If everybody does it then it adds up. And it's not just wasted fuel, it's wear on the vehicles (which harms used car reliability and negatively impacts the poor), stress on the vehicle occupan…

So every single gallon of gasoline used in every country is all provided by conflict petroleum? By the same token, every plastic spork is funding terrorism.

> So every single gallon of gasoline used in every country is all provided by conflict petroleum?

Of course it is. Petroleum is a global commodity. If there is more demand anywhere then the price goes up and all sellers make more money.

> By the same token, every plastic spork is funding terrorism.

Only the ones that aren't recycled. Make sure you recycle your spork.

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#513

Post by hnal943 »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #470
CamperBob2 wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Shrug) When I was a child, I was taught not to play in the street. Meanwhile, access for emergency vehicles can be pretty important for the rest of us.

Are cul-de-sacs not a thing in the states?

They are, but they aren't universal. Most people live on a through street.

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#514

Post by chockablock »

threatofrain wrote: post #511
lliamander wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anything else just feels like NIMBY entitlement. I disagree. I also think there is a sense that our urban/suburban planning should serve more that just the interests of motorists, and should support activities other than just driving to/from work. My wife and I used to drive 45 minutes just to park on the outside of a nice residential neighborhood so we could take a walk. Now we can get to family, friends, parks, b…

What that means is the problem is going to be pushed to someplace else, normally to a poorer place. If areas of living aren't shouldering equal burden, then some other neighborhoods are shouldering disproportionate burden. That's the symptom of NIMBY. If we aren't talking about (1) a new transportation method without the same issues, (2) a somehow substantial decrease in cars, (3) a decline in US population that outp…

don't forget 4) Better urban planning so people don't have to commute in such great numbers / such long distances

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#515

Post by jimktrains2 »

superuser2 wrote: post #482
jimktrains2 wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if it's a road paid for with public money, how can use like this be restricted?

The same way the doors of public schools can be locked at night, and a property tax receipt does not get you a set of master keys. I think this is something a local government should not do, but it's certainly within its authority (assuming it is the sole funding source - federal or state money may - and IMO should - come with overriding strings attached).

I'm talking specifically about a road. There are reasons buildings are locked, &c. Also, no muni pays for roads alone. They all get state and fed dollars.

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#516

Post by Natsu »

chockablock wrote: post #514
threatofrain wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What that means is the problem is going to be pushed to someplace else, normally to a poorer place. If areas of living aren't shouldering equal burden, then some other neighborhoods are shouldering disproportionate burden. That's the symptom of NIMBY. If we aren't talking about (1) a new transportation method without the same issues, (2) a somehow substantial decrease in cars, (3) a decline in US population that outp…

don't forget 4) Better urban planning so people don't have to commute in such great numbers / such long distances

In Phoenix, major streets are on about a 1 mile grid. The major streets (mostly) go through and take you wherever you want, they're very fast and optimized for heavier traffic.

The rest of the streets connect to people's homes, they're full of speed bumps and such and while some do go through, it's a slow and twisty road with no certainty unless you know that street (or peer at the GPS) so you'd never take those roads unless you actually wanted to go into that community.

I find that it strikes a pretty good balance between helping people get where they're going and making sure that people don't have tons of cars zooming right past the front door.

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#517

Post by imgabe »

morninj wrote: post #13
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.

There's no way that the trickle of revenue is greater than the cost of enforcement. Officer salary and benefits, equipment maintenance, and all the costs associated with the court system...

Those costs are going to be paid regardless of whether they write tickets for that or not. If a police officer is sitting around on an otherwise slow day, they might as well go write some tickets.

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#518

Post by hnal943 »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #512
plttn wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So every single gallon of gasoline used in every country is all provided by conflict petroleum? By the same token, every plastic spork is funding terrorism.

> So every single gallon of gasoline used in every country is all provided by conflict petroleum? Of course it is. Petroleum is a global commodity. If there is more demand anywhere then the price goes up and all sellers make more money. > By the same token, every plastic spork is funding terrorism. Only the ones that aren't recycled. Make sure you recycle your spork.

Except there's currently a price war going on because of fracking. There's way more supply than there was a decade ago, most of it domestic.

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#519

Post by jpetso »

cmurf wrote: post #333
Jacqued wrote: post #254

Earlier 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…

Speaking for myself, my logic doesn't consider the neighborhood roads owned by the neighborhood. I consider it public, and as such I don't think cutting through the neighborhood is illegal. I just consider it something almost like pissing in a swimming pool. They aren't asking for this extra traffic and it is after all their neighborhood. I wouldn't like it happening in mine either. What we should have is better infr…

As a cyclist, I avoid these mandatory-turn mazes like the plague. It's just as confusing as it is for cars, unless you put dedicated bike lanes in many of the streets - which of course isn't going to happen because, you know, they're quiet little side streets with few markings and overprotective NIMBYs. Not designed as through streets also for cyclists.

If the intention is to scare vehicles away, it's unlikely that they come out specifically for one type of vehicle.

I'd rather take the straightforward road and share with cars, thank you. (Yes, think Toronto, not Atlanta.)

Re: Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war

#520

Post by AnthonyMouse »

hnal943 wrote: post #518
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So every single gallon of gasoline used in every country is all provided by conflict petroleum? Of course it is. Petroleum is a global commodity. If there is more demand anywhere then the price goes up and all sellers make more money. > By the same token, every plastic spork is funding terrorism. Only the ones that aren't recycled. Make sure you recycle your spork.

Except there's currently a price war going on because of fracking. There's way more supply than there was a decade ago, most of it domestic.

Which has no effect on the principle. Increasing the demand will increase the price regardless of whether the existing price is $2 or $4.
Post reply on HN