SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
[...] In mid-January, the borough’s police force will close 60 streets to all drivers aside from residents and people employed in the borough during the morning and afternoon rush periods, effectively taking most of the town out of circulation for the popular traffic apps — and for everyone else, for that matter.
[...] While a number of communities have devised strategies like turn restrictions and speed humps that affect all motorists, Leonia’s move may be the most extreme response.
[...] Borough officials say their measure is legal, although it may yet get tested in court. Some traffic engineers and elected officials elsewhere say the move may set a precedent that could encourage towns to summarily restrict public access to outsiders.
Source: Navigation Apps Are Turning Quiet Neighborhoods Into Traffic Nightmares
Also: New Jersey town will close streets to fight navigation app traffic
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Wednesday December 27 2017, @12:14AM (5 children)
we're happy, and so are the locals because we don't make any noise.
Must be some unique demographic, because most Americans absolutely despise cyclists, believing them to be some kind of insult to their religion, which says that people who God loves the most drive the biggest SUVs they can find.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Kilo110 on Wednesday December 27 2017, @01:52AM (3 children)
If cyclists had their own lane, where they can separately go a third of the speed of normal traffic, and they also followed the same laws then I'd have no issues coexisting with them.
But they seem to want it both ways. They want to be permitted on automotive roads but don't want to follow the same rules or feel they don't apply to them because they're not cars. I've lost count on how many time idiots cycle the wrong way on a road, or run reds, or ignore stop signs and just charge into the middle of the road. Just last week, I even saw a guy bike straight into an intersection on a red light with oncoming traffic. He just expected other drivers to stop for him.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Wednesday December 27 2017, @02:42AM (1 child)
If cyclists had their own lane, where they can separately go a third of the speed of normal traffic, and they also followed the same laws then I'd have no issues coexisting with them.
I'm sure 99.9% of the cyclists would love this too.
But they seem to want it both ways. They want to be permitted on automotive roads but don't want to follow the same rules or feel they don't apply to them because they're not cars.
They ARE permitted on automotive roads: that's the law, like it or not. Yes, there's some who break the rules like running reds, but I see plenty of that with car drivers too, and that's far, far more dangerous (at least to other people in traffic than the one committing the offense). But some of those other things do make some sense, as far as why cyclists think the rules are stupid: it's because those rules are made with cars in mind, and cause huge inconvenience to cyclists.
Stop signs: these things are generally stupid in 100% of all cases, for cars and cyclists. Why should you stop, when simply yielding is sufficient? If you need to stop to yield, that's fine: "yield" means you don't have right-of-way, and need to yield it to whoever else is there, so if you need to come to a stop to ensure you're clear to go, that's your responsibility. Yield signs already cover all this; there's no reason for a stop sign, ever. For a cyclist, coming to a full stop is actually more dangerous, because the transition between having your feet on the pedals and on the ground, and then back on the pedals, is the one point in all your riding where you're most unstable and most likely to fall over, and even worse if you have clip-in pedals. Given the low speeds cyclists travel at, simply slowing to a near-stop and yielding is sufficient. If I'm coming to a 4-way stop and there's clearly no one else there (no obstructions to my view, perhaps late at night so no cars to be seen anywhere), then where is the sense in stopping at all? One-way roads are pretty stupid for cyclists too; we had a one-way road around a drillfield when I was in college, and it was stupid to require cyclists to ride a half-mile around that instead of going a hundred feet to where they needed to turn. Even worse, car traffic was frequently backed up for 10-20 minutes because of all the students crossing the road at various point when classes changed, and the pedestrians never let any drivers go. They really shouldn't have even allowed cars on that road at all, just cyclists (going both ways) and official vehicles. If going only the correct way on one-way roads means adding a half-mile to your trip, you bet your ass cyclists are going to go the wrong way. Plan the fucking roads better, or close them to car traffic.
But yeah, changing out into moving car traffic is pretty stupid, I'll grant you that. But I see reckless driving *all the time* with car drivers too, so don't feed me any BS about it being unique to cyclists. It's not. And when car/SUV drivers do it, they're risking many peoples' lives; when some idiot cyclists does it, he's only risking his own. There's no possible way a 150-lb guy on a 25-lb bike is going to hurt anyone in any kind of car or SUV, unless you've strapped a rocket on his bike or something.
The ultimate answer is exactly what you yourself said in your first line: give cyclists their own lane, or better yet their own road. Some cities have cycling trails in certain places, and it works very well: it gets the cyclists off the car roads a lot, and gives them a place that's totally safe for them to do their commute without worrying about getting hit, at least until they get to parts of their trip where the cycling trails aren't convenient. There should be plenty of cycling lanes so cyclists can just stick to these; if there aren't, that's the fault of local government, and by extension YOU, because you're a voter, and the local government is the responsibility of you and your fellow car drivers.
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Wednesday December 27 2017, @05:03AM
A dedicated lane for slow-moving vehicles works until a cyclist wants to turn left (US, CA) or right (GB, IE, AU, NZ, JP). Then he needs to cross one or two lanes of through motor traffic to get to the turn lane.
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Wednesday December 27 2017, @04:52PM
I see people in cars do that all the time. I also see them make right turns across three lanes of traffic from the 'left turn only' lane. And change lanes and make turns without ever using a turn signal. I've even seen cops (with no lights or siren active) do all of the above too. The problem isn't cyclists, the problem is fucking assholes and idiots who think the rules don't apply to them. And there's *plenty* of drivers in that category too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 27 2017, @03:44AM
I love cyclists. They're worth 75 points! [youtube.com]