4 ms·

What an incredibly "out of the box" idea we have here. Sorry, I don't want to sound mean, but its a sad state of affairs when 10 year olds grow up fully accusto

What an incredibly "out of the box" idea we have here. Sorry, I don't want to sound mean, but its a sad state of affairs when 10 year olds grow up fully accustomed to a world where most public space is taken up by two ton combustion engines. It cuts out all the vital critical thinking. The question shouldn't be "how can we make crosswalks safer for pedestrians" but "why are there cars and roads where pedestrians walk". Otherwise we end up with things like the "bicycle lane".

rwmj 14y ago
Because people want to make journeys faster and further than they could walk or cycle?
mattdeboard 14y ago
"In the case where a thing exists, let's make that thing better." Sounds legit. In contrast, I have no idea what your complaint is even about.
avree 14y ago
Maybe the ten-year old wanted to propose an idea to solve an immediate problem she saw rather than trying to come up with a holistic strategy to re-do transportation and city planning. I think this is a great. She came up with her own question and then an answer to it.
ohwp 14y ago
The other question that remained unanswered is "Why don't cars stop when someone is waiting for a crosswalk?". Because in the example it's already completely clear that there is a crosswalk.
- jasonlotito 14y ago
  "Why don't cars stop when someone is waiting for a crosswalk?" Because, that's pointless. You should only stop when someone is waiting to cross at a crosswalk. This is a distinction people forget. Standing at a crosswalk does not mean you want to cross. Furthermore, wanting to cross at a cross walk does not mean you have the right of way to do so. Regardless of where you live and the laws, these are problems.
mvleming 14y ago
I've thought a lot about how we can seperate bicyclists and pedestrians from vehicles on the road. I think it would be amazing to have all roads completely underground and replace the roads outside with parks, for example. I can just see kids running up and down the grass 'streets' playing soccer with skyscrapers all around. With underground streets you could even collect the pollution the vehicles emit and store it instead of releasing it into the atomsphere. But the huge downside which I have no idea how I could make this practical with is the construction costs. Maybe the first city to do this could get an increase in tourism thus offsetting the costs?
- fudged71 14y ago
  Moving things underground tends to be prohibitively expensive. When self-driving cars are common, there won't be a need for street-side parking, which will give more walking area in urban centers. And the lidar navigational system will be far safer for pedestrians, so it won't be a safety issue to mingle cars with people.
- vacri 14y ago
  Vehicle tunnels need to be huge and require enormous amounts of power for lighting and ventilation. It'd be more viable to put the pedestrians and cyclists underground...
  - Dylan16807 14y ago
    Surely lighting is not that big of a problem; they're already lighting the roads all night long. You could even install skylights.
- kh_hk 14y ago
  What about: 1. a circular rotating peripheral parking in which you can get a car (or your car) in around 5 to 30 minutes. 2. incredible discounts using public transport. 3. huge taxes to ride the city by car, except for service transports (taxis, ambulances, distribution, ...).
justincormack 14y ago
There is a fascinating book, among other things about the history of the first footbridge over a road in the UK http://www.amazon.co.uk/Leadville-Biography-A40-Edward-Platt/dp/0330392638 http://www.amazon.co.uk/Leadville-Biography-A40-Edward-Platt... There is a picture of it here, with a summary from the book below: https://secure.flickr.com/photos/justincormack/256217251/ https://secure.flickr.com/photos/justincormack/256217251/ In 1938 the inhabitants started to protest about the rising death toll on Western Avenue, the "Avenue of Speed and Death". They petitioned the Ministry of Transport to impose a speed limit of twenty-five or thirty miles an hour. The ministry said that would be an "ingenious provision" to save lives, but it would be against "the whole object of constructing a road free from congested traffic". On 21 July 1938 the protestors filed across Western Avenue from the Approach, and then back, causing a huge tailback. The next day the Ministry arranged to build two bridges, one here and one by Gipsy Corner, much to the disgust of the protestors, who thought it would encourage cars to drive faster and to force pedestrians off more roads onto bridges and subways. A week later a thousand people demonstrated again for "their right to cross on the level". In September the hastily erected bridge was complete, and five hundred people demonstrated against it again. The bridge became a tourist attraction and it was "quite usual to see people from other districts coming to look at it". In October torchlight processions were held on the road every evening for a week, with a dog with a red light attached to it and four bearers carrying a coffin, and placards saying "We want crossings not coffins".
gruseom 14y ago
What an incredibly "out of the box" idea we have here. You're applying sarcasm to the idea of a ten year old? Sorry, I don't want to sound mean, but But you do sound mean. Since you don't want to, why don't you edit the meanness out of your comment? It would be easy. Though you might want to do it twice to be sure. As a bonus, your point would then come across better.
- Dylan16807 14y ago
  You're applying sarcasm to the idea of a ten year old? I don't see it as an an insult to the ten year old; it's an insult to all the people pretending it's a unique idea because of that.
  - gruseom 14y ago
    Why be insulting at all?

rwmj 14y ago

Because people want to make journeys faster and further than they could walk or cycle?

mattdeboard 14y ago

"In the case where a thing exists, let's make that thing better." Sounds legit. In contrast, I have no idea what your complaint is even about.

avree 14y ago

Maybe the ten-year old wanted to propose an idea to solve an immediate problem she saw rather than trying to come up with a holistic strategy to re-do transportation and city planning. I think this is a great. She came up with her own question and then an answer to it.

ohwp 14y ago

The other question that remained unanswered is "Why don't cars stop when someone is waiting for a crosswalk?". Because in the example it's already completely clear that there is a crosswalk.

jasonlotito 14y ago
"Why don't cars stop when someone is waiting for a crosswalk?" Because, that's pointless. You should only stop when someone is waiting to cross at a crosswalk. This is a distinction people forget. Standing at a crosswalk does not mean you want to cross. Furthermore, wanting to cross at a cross walk does not mean you have the right of way to do so. Regardless of where you live and the laws, these are problems.

mvleming 14y ago

I've thought a lot about how we can seperate bicyclists and pedestrians from vehicles on the road. I think it would be amazing to have all roads completely underground and replace the roads outside with parks, for example. I can just see kids running up and down the grass 'streets' playing soccer with skyscrapers all around. With underground streets you could even collect the pollution the vehicles emit and store it instead of releasing it into the atomsphere. But the huge downside which I have no idea how I could make this practical with is the construction costs. Maybe the first city to do this could get an increase in tourism thus offsetting the costs?

fudged71 14y ago
Moving things underground tends to be prohibitively expensive. When self-driving cars are common, there won't be a need for street-side parking, which will give more walking area in urban centers. And the lidar navigational system will be far safer for pedestrians, so it won't be a safety issue to mingle cars with people.
vacri 14y ago
Vehicle tunnels need to be huge and require enormous amounts of power for lighting and ventilation. It'd be more viable to put the pedestrians and cyclists underground...
- Dylan16807 14y ago
  Surely lighting is not that big of a problem; they're already lighting the roads all night long. You could even install skylights.
kh_hk 14y ago
What about: 1. a circular rotating peripheral parking in which you can get a car (or your car) in around 5 to 30 minutes. 2. incredible discounts using public transport. 3. huge taxes to ride the city by car, except for service transports (taxis, ambulances, distribution, ...).

justincormack 14y ago

There is a fascinating book, among other things about the history of the first footbridge over a road in the UK http://www.amazon.co.uk/Leadville-Biography-A40-Edward-Platt/dp/0330392638 http://www.amazon.co.uk/Leadville-Biography-A40-Edward-Platt... There is a picture of it here, with a summary from the book below: https://secure.flickr.com/photos/justincormack/256217251/ https://secure.flickr.com/photos/justincormack/256217251/ In 1938 the inhabitants started to protest about the rising death toll on Western Avenue, the "Avenue of Speed and Death". They petitioned the Ministry of Transport to impose a speed limit of twenty-five or thirty miles an hour. The ministry said that would be an "ingenious provision" to save lives, but it would be against "the whole object of constructing a road free from congested traffic". On 21 July 1938 the protestors filed across Western Avenue from the Approach, and then back, causing a huge tailback. The next day the Ministry arranged to build two bridges, one here and one by Gipsy Corner, much to the disgust of the protestors, who thought it would encourage cars to drive faster and to force pedestrians off more roads onto bridges and subways. A week later a thousand people demonstrated again for "their right to cross on the level". In September the hastily erected bridge was complete, and five hundred people demonstrated against it again. The bridge became a tourist attraction and it was "quite usual to see people from other districts coming to look at it". In October torchlight processions were held on the road every evening for a week, with a dog with a red light attached to it and four bearers carrying a coffin, and placards saying "We want crossings not coffins".

gruseom 14y ago

What an incredibly "out of the box" idea we have here. You're applying sarcasm to the idea of a ten year old? Sorry, I don't want to sound mean, but But you do sound mean. Since you don't want to, why don't you edit the meanness out of your comment? It would be easy. Though you might want to do it twice to be sure. As a bonus, your point would then come across better.

Dylan16807 14y ago
You're applying sarcasm to the idea of a ten year old? I don't see it as an an insult to the ten year old; it's an insult to all the people pretending it's a unique idea because of that.
- gruseom 14y ago
  Why be insulting at all?