3 ms·

and makes it more difficult to cross the road as a pedestrian A five-lane road is already hard to cross, regardless of the traffic speed. I understand that thi

by tremon 3y ago

and makes it more difficult to cross the road as a pedestrian A five-lane road is already hard to cross, regardless of the traffic speed. I understand that this design is common in the US, but it boggles my mind that people would even consider crossing a road of that size as a pedestrian unless the traffic speed was 15 mph or less. Something like that would be solved by a bridge or tunnel in developed countries.

verve_rat 3y ago
Not in a town of 200 people it wouldn't.
- Symbiote 3y ago
  If there's money to build a 5-lane road, there would have been money to build the footbridge or tunnel. But more realistically, in other countries the 4-lane road would go around the village, and a 2-lane road with a low speed limit through it.
  - starkparker 3y ago
    As someone who took 165 through Fenton[1] from I-10 to I-49 weekly for 5 years, there's money to build a five-lane federal highway to serve logging, agriculture, and military use, or more cynically for a legislator to say "I brought $XX million in federal funds home this term". (165 is also a hurricane evacuation route, and Fenton is only 12 miles up the road from I-10, this is the typical evacuation demarcation for a major storm. That's why swaths of it are more than two lanes. Further north and between towns, it narrows to two lanes.) In either case the liability of towns or the well-being of the people who live there do not factor into design decisions of villages whatsoever. A footbridge doesn't serve anyone in power, and nobody locally would use it. A tunnel in south Louisiana, even that far inland, is logistically stupid even with good intentions. 1: I was born and raised in the Louisiana terminus of 165, which is only a little larger than Fenton, and Fenton is only one of about a dozen such small towns on that route.

3 ms·

and makes it more difficult to cross the road as a pedestrian A five-lane road is already hard to cross, regardless of the traffic speed. I understand that thi

by tremon 3y ago

verve_rat 3y ago
Not in a town of 200 people it wouldn't.
- Symbiote 3y ago
  If there's money to build a 5-lane road, there would have been money to build the footbridge or tunnel. But more realistically, in other countries the 4-lane road would go around the village, and a 2-lane road with a low speed limit through it.
  - starkparker 3y ago
    As someone who took 165 through Fenton[1] from I-10 to I-49 weekly for 5 years, there's money to build a five-lane federal highway to serve logging, agriculture, and military use, or more cynically for a legislator to say "I brought $XX million in federal funds home this term". (165 is also a hurricane evacuation route, and Fenton is only 12 miles up the road from I-10, this is the typical evacuation demarcation for a major storm. That's why swaths of it are more than two lanes. Further north and between towns, it narrows to two lanes.) In either case the liability of towns or the well-being of the people who live there do not factor into design decisions of villages whatsoever. A footbridge doesn't serve anyone in power, and nobody locally would use it. A tunnel in south Louisiana, even that far inland, is logistically stupid even with good intentions. 1: I was born and raised in the Louisiana terminus of 165, which is only a little larger than Fenton, and Fenton is only one of about a dozen such small towns on that route.