4 ms·

Given how pedestrian unfriendly the Strip is, it surprises me that you even managed this at all. On the other hand, I was also surprised how much better public

Given how pedestrian unfriendly the Strip is, it surprises me that you even managed this at all. On the other hand, I was also surprised how much better public transit seemed in vegas than in most us cities.

aflag 4y ago
That makes sense. Lots of tourists there who travelled by plane and may not know how to drive or be unwilling to rent a car. The casinos would still like these people to drop by though
- nasmorn 4y ago
  Also people get drunk a lot in Vegas and casinos encourage it.
LorenPechtel 4y ago
Are you calling it unfriendly because it's set up to make jaywalking hard? We got tired of drunk tourists getting creamed because they wandered into traffic. And the crowds are heavy enough that turning across a pedestrian flow is problematic in peak hours. Thus it has been engineered to as much as possible separate pedestrians from cars.
- lucideer 4y ago
  I'm calling it unfriendly because it's a highway cutting through an area fully suited to being entirely pedestrianised. You can't even drive to the front of casinos (they have car park entrances at the back), yet the vast majority of real estate outside them is given up to traffic lanes, with precious little left to the people wandering around them spending. There isn't even that much traffic on the strip, the road-to-footpath ratio of land allpocation is absurd. It's unfriendly because you have to walk so damn far to get around lanes that have little business existing in the first place.
  - LorenPechtel 4y ago
    I have walked between various casinos at times--and never have I felt I was being made to walk unduly out of my way to do so. The games they play with scale make you think things are closer than they are. And, yes, parking is generally in back--that's actually being pedestrian friendly! If parking was in front a pedestrian would have to cross a lot more parking lot to reach the casino. And if you think there isn't much traffic on the strip you've just been there at the wrong time.
- saagarjha 4y ago
  Maybe it should be set up for pedestrians first and cars second…
  - weberer 4y ago
    There are whole networks of pedestrian paths connecting buildings. You can walk from A to B just fine without having to step outside and leave the air conditioned zone. The outside temperature in Las Vegas in the summer isn't very suitable for pedestrian use. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Las_Vegas#Climate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Las_Vegas#Climate
    - refurb 4y ago
      Yeah, I'm kinda surprised at the comments. The Strip is way more pedestrian friendly than most cities it's size.
      - lucideer 4y ago
        I'm European so I must admit my experience of US cities is relatively limited. I know in general US cities have a terrible reputation for pedestrian-centric planning but even by US standards I found the Strip bad. The Strip is even bad by Vegas standards: not only is Fremont entirely pedestrianised, Downtown in general is very walkable: pavement width matches foot traffic, amenities are close together, & traffic moves much more slowly than on the Strip / crossing-timing is relatively frequent. For comparison, I've only really visited SoCal extensively (SD is super walkable, SF is as long as you're fit/not disabled, LA is worst than downtown LV but still nowhere near as bad as the Strip imo). East US I've seen Philly & Chicago which were both even better than CA.
        LorenPechtel 4y ago
        Fremont is 4 blocks, the Strip is the better part of 4 miles. Fremont has no meaningful cross traffic beyond those going there, the Strip is crossed by 3 major streets that most certainly carry cross traffic. (There's also one more that is bridged/tunneled so you do not interact with the Strip--that one would be unaffected.) And if you take out the Strip the properties on the west side are going to scream because it's now hard for customers to reach them.
- watwut 4y ago
  You can separate cars away without making short distances into massive hikes for pedestrians. > Are you calling it unfriendly because it's set up to make jaywalking hard? You can give priority to pedestrians, slow down the cars and put in obstacles for cars. You can build large roads to go around and up in places where pedestrians are likely to want to go.
  - LorenPechtel 4y ago
    In other words, kill the casinos on the west side. They would not survive the loss of customers this would cause. Priority to pedestrians = gridlock. I've sat through multiple light cycles as it is because of pedestrians.
GuB-42 4y ago
For the US, I find it quite pedestrian friendly. I walked from Luxor to Fremont (essentially spanning everywhere you'll go as a tourist) with no issue. It took a while, but it was a nice and safe walk, with protected sidewalks, overpasses and galeries.
- saagarjha 4y ago
  It’s hot. Have you visited in the summer?
  - GuB-42 4y ago
    Mid June, not exactly summer but still hot. But that's not something you can really do much about, same thing for cities build on hills, or where it rains/snows a lot. For example, cities in Portugal are both hot and hilly, and like many European cities, are nice to walk in. Yet, in the case of Vegas, you can walk indoors in nice air-conditioned galleries and casinos for good sections of the strip. There are bodies of water and some vegetation, more than there should be considering the climate. Maybe could be better in terms of shade but not terrible either. It is also easy to find refreshment and drinks. Of course the intention of all that is for you to spend and gamble as much as possible, but if that's a problem for you, why are you visiting Vegas in the first place? That's what defines Vegas.

aflag 4y ago

That makes sense. Lots of tourists there who travelled by plane and may not know how to drive or be unwilling to rent a car. The casinos would still like these people to drop by though

nasmorn 4y ago
Also people get drunk a lot in Vegas and casinos encourage it.

LorenPechtel 4y ago

Are you calling it unfriendly because it's set up to make jaywalking hard? We got tired of drunk tourists getting creamed because they wandered into traffic. And the crowds are heavy enough that turning across a pedestrian flow is problematic in peak hours. Thus it has been engineered to as much as possible separate pedestrians from cars.

lucideer 4y ago
I'm calling it unfriendly because it's a highway cutting through an area fully suited to being entirely pedestrianised. You can't even drive to the front of casinos (they have car park entrances at the back), yet the vast majority of real estate outside them is given up to traffic lanes, with precious little left to the people wandering around them spending. There isn't even that much traffic on the strip, the road-to-footpath ratio of land allpocation is absurd. It's unfriendly because you have to walk so damn far to get around lanes that have little business existing in the first place.
- LorenPechtel 4y ago
  I have walked between various casinos at times--and never have I felt I was being made to walk unduly out of my way to do so. The games they play with scale make you think things are closer than they are. And, yes, parking is generally in back--that's actually being pedestrian friendly! If parking was in front a pedestrian would have to cross a lot more parking lot to reach the casino. And if you think there isn't much traffic on the strip you've just been there at the wrong time.
saagarjha 4y ago
Maybe it should be set up for pedestrians first and cars second…
- weberer 4y ago
  There are whole networks of pedestrian paths connecting buildings. You can walk from A to B just fine without having to step outside and leave the air conditioned zone. The outside temperature in Las Vegas in the summer isn't very suitable for pedestrian use. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Las_Vegas#Climate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Las_Vegas#Climate
  - refurb 4y ago
    Yeah, I'm kinda surprised at the comments. The Strip is way more pedestrian friendly than most cities it's size.
    - lucideer 4y ago
      I'm European so I must admit my experience of US cities is relatively limited. I know in general US cities have a terrible reputation for pedestrian-centric planning but even by US standards I found the Strip bad. The Strip is even bad by Vegas standards: not only is Fremont entirely pedestrianised, Downtown in general is very walkable: pavement width matches foot traffic, amenities are close together, & traffic moves much more slowly than on the Strip / crossing-timing is relatively frequent. For comparison, I've only really visited SoCal extensively (SD is super walkable, SF is as long as you're fit/not disabled, LA is worst than downtown LV but still nowhere near as bad as the Strip imo). East US I've seen Philly & Chicago which were both even better than CA.
      - LorenPechtel 4y ago
        Fremont is 4 blocks, the Strip is the better part of 4 miles. Fremont has no meaningful cross traffic beyond those going there, the Strip is crossed by 3 major streets that most certainly carry cross traffic. (There's also one more that is bridged/tunneled so you do not interact with the Strip--that one would be unaffected.) And if you take out the Strip the properties on the west side are going to scream because it's now hard for customers to reach them.
watwut 4y ago
You can separate cars away without making short distances into massive hikes for pedestrians. > Are you calling it unfriendly because it's set up to make jaywalking hard? You can give priority to pedestrians, slow down the cars and put in obstacles for cars. You can build large roads to go around and up in places where pedestrians are likely to want to go.
- LorenPechtel 4y ago
  In other words, kill the casinos on the west side. They would not survive the loss of customers this would cause. Priority to pedestrians = gridlock. I've sat through multiple light cycles as it is because of pedestrians.

GuB-42 4y ago

For the US, I find it quite pedestrian friendly. I walked from Luxor to Fremont (essentially spanning everywhere you'll go as a tourist) with no issue. It took a while, but it was a nice and safe walk, with protected sidewalks, overpasses and galeries.

saagarjha 4y ago
It’s hot. Have you visited in the summer?
- GuB-42 4y ago
  Mid June, not exactly summer but still hot. But that's not something you can really do much about, same thing for cities build on hills, or where it rains/snows a lot. For example, cities in Portugal are both hot and hilly, and like many European cities, are nice to walk in. Yet, in the case of Vegas, you can walk indoors in nice air-conditioned galleries and casinos for good sections of the strip. There are bodies of water and some vegetation, more than there should be considering the climate. Maybe could be better in terms of shade but not terrible either. It is also easy to find refreshment and drinks. Of course the intention of all that is for you to spend and gamble as much as possible, but if that's a problem for you, why are you visiting Vegas in the first place? That's what defines Vegas.