6 ms·

Where I live, many people park at intersections right up to the curb making it almost impossible to see oncoming traffic from the right or left. Really scary wh

by RyanOD 1y ago

Where I live, many people park at intersections right up to the curb making it almost impossible to see oncoming traffic from the right or left. Really scary when you have a 16-year old driver you're trying to keep safe. There is a very real reason why most intersections require drivers to park 20-30 feet away. Please think of the safety of others and adhere to this rule.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
vhcr 1y ago
This is solved with better infrastructure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curb_extension https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curb_extension
- RyanOD 1y ago
  Yes, I've seen some of this. While it certainly helps, it seems like a waste of limited resources. Why can't some people just follow such a simple rule?
  - Dylan16807 1y ago
    Waste of what resources? If anything I'd expect the sidewalk to be cheaper.
    - godelski 1y ago
      There's a difference between starting from scratch and modifying existing infrastructure
      - Dylan16807 1y ago
        There is. But the post saying it's a better method isn't suggesting extra labor to do modifications. That's useful just as pure knowledge, and also it can be applied into future designs or when parts of the road wear out.
    - RyanOD 1y ago
      In Seattle, I've mostly seen approaches such as this as a modification. Though I see your point in a new construction situation.
- goopypoop 1y ago
  the picture on that article looks like a nice stripy parking space
  - Dylan16807 1y ago
    A car could push into the first third of it, but visibility would be fine in that case. Trying to use the whole thing in a car would mean you're jutting into the traffic lane, and anyone willing to do that is causing bigger problems. And if a bike parks in the stripes that's fine for visibility too.
- godelski 1y ago
  Great solution but until then I think the gp's point still stands. We as humans need to ensure our actions are done with care are forethought. You can't control others but you can control yourself and influence others (like this comment attempts to do) Plus, it's a lot cheaper for all of us if we don't need to constantly redesign once someone figures out how to "beat the game" (see Goodhart's Law). We're social creatures and the Tragedy of the Commons is a much more common occurrence than people think, especially in large cities. Our actions affect others.
knowitnone3 1y ago
This is now illegal in some states
- rahimnathwani 1y ago
  It's illegal in California but in San Francisco official policy is to not enforce this law. If there's no red paint on the curb, they won't ticket you. This is official policy: https://www.sfmta.com/blog/making-enforcement-fair-our-new-plan-state-daylighting-law https://www.sfmta.com/blog/making-enforcement-fair-our-new-p...
  - gboss 1y ago
    It makes sense. It was ridiculous that they were originally proposing ticketing people without there being signage that it was illegal to park there. They need to just paint the curbs.
    - scottbez1 1y ago
      Is it ridiculous to ticket someone who parks in the middle of Market St if there's no sign that it's illegal? No. Driving a car is a privilege, and a dangerous one at that, which requires a competency test. It is not unreasonable to expect licensed drivers to know the statewide laws that govern that privilege without reminder signs.
      - tossandthrow 1y ago
        While I agree on this, the US is a bit special as having a car is considered mandatory. IMHO, that culture needs to be changed: better public transport and walkable cities. When that is established, then it is also easier to revoke the drivers privilege.
        renewiltord 1y ago
        Having a car in SF is not mandatory. It's quite useful but you can live well without.
buckle8017 1y ago
This rule removed something like 10% of all parking spaces in SF.
hk__2 1y ago
In Paris, France, they are replacing all the car parking spaces near intersections with bike ones, which is a lot better for visibility. But that’s a small-ish city where 65%+ of the population don’t even own a car.

by RyanOD 1y ago

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

vhcr 1y ago

This is solved with better infrastructure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curb_extension https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curb_extension

RyanOD 1y ago
Yes, I've seen some of this. While it certainly helps, it seems like a waste of limited resources. Why can't some people just follow such a simple rule?
- Dylan16807 1y ago
  Waste of what resources? If anything I'd expect the sidewalk to be cheaper.
  - godelski 1y ago
    There's a difference between starting from scratch and modifying existing infrastructure
    - Dylan16807 1y ago
      There is. But the post saying it's a better method isn't suggesting extra labor to do modifications. That's useful just as pure knowledge, and also it can be applied into future designs or when parts of the road wear out.
  - RyanOD 1y ago
    In Seattle, I've mostly seen approaches such as this as a modification. Though I see your point in a new construction situation.
goopypoop 1y ago
the picture on that article looks like a nice stripy parking space
- Dylan16807 1y ago
  A car could push into the first third of it, but visibility would be fine in that case. Trying to use the whole thing in a car would mean you're jutting into the traffic lane, and anyone willing to do that is causing bigger problems. And if a bike parks in the stripes that's fine for visibility too.
godelski 1y ago
Great solution but until then I think the gp's point still stands. We as humans need to ensure our actions are done with care are forethought. You can't control others but you can control yourself and influence others (like this comment attempts to do) Plus, it's a lot cheaper for all of us if we don't need to constantly redesign once someone figures out how to "beat the game" (see Goodhart's Law). We're social creatures and the Tragedy of the Commons is a much more common occurrence than people think, especially in large cities. Our actions affect others.

knowitnone3 1y ago

This is now illegal in some states

rahimnathwani 1y ago
It's illegal in California but in San Francisco official policy is to not enforce this law. If there's no red paint on the curb, they won't ticket you. This is official policy: https://www.sfmta.com/blog/making-enforcement-fair-our-new-plan-state-daylighting-law https://www.sfmta.com/blog/making-enforcement-fair-our-new-p...
- gboss 1y ago
  It makes sense. It was ridiculous that they were originally proposing ticketing people without there being signage that it was illegal to park there. They need to just paint the curbs.
  - scottbez1 1y ago
    Is it ridiculous to ticket someone who parks in the middle of Market St if there's no sign that it's illegal? No. Driving a car is a privilege, and a dangerous one at that, which requires a competency test. It is not unreasonable to expect licensed drivers to know the statewide laws that govern that privilege without reminder signs.
    - tossandthrow 1y ago
      While I agree on this, the US is a bit special as having a car is considered mandatory. IMHO, that culture needs to be changed: better public transport and walkable cities. When that is established, then it is also easier to revoke the drivers privilege.
      - renewiltord 1y ago
        Having a car in SF is not mandatory. It's quite useful but you can live well without.

buckle8017 1y ago

This rule removed something like 10% of all parking spaces in SF.

hk__2 1y ago

In Paris, France, they are replacing all the car parking spaces near intersections with bike ones, which is a lot better for visibility. But that’s a small-ish city where 65%+ of the population don’t even own a car.