Re:Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war
by iamdave on Monday June 06, 2016 @12:06PM
(#11847771)
I may own property on your street but that doesn't mean I can build a garbage incinerator on it.
Maybe not, but I think the conceit here isn't about what you do on your property vs. utilization of public roads by...well...members of the public.
I think the counter is that the rights of various parties here are not black and white. Restrictions are put in place (in the incinerator case, on a private landowner; in the traffic case, on the public at large) in the common interests of local community members. You _do_ have a say in what happens on your street, even though you don't own it.
Re:Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war
by varjag on Monday June 06, 2016 @04:27PM
(#11850034)
Here (Norway) municipality driveways within residential suburbs are designed based on amount of households and parking spots permitted in the area. Using them for huge amounts of through traffic would violate zoning rules and is plain unsafe.
Re:Traffic-weary homeowners and Waze are at war
by kpil on Monday June 06, 2016 @05:21PM
(#11850500)
I think the best way is to design the residential roads so that you have to drive really slow on them.
I think the best idea is to do build the roads so that there is a single middle lane, surrounded by nice cobblestone refuges that is possible to drive on slowly. Also add some space for bicycles and pavements for pedestrians.
Pouring more concrete is not the solution, it's a policy problem, particularly when rat runs are used to circumvent congestion charges.
(That's not to say we shouldn't build more traffic calming for residential streets; we should do that merely because many traffic planners are stuck in a 1950s mentality and design residential streets that feel like a highway, hostile to anyone not speeding through them at excessive speeds.)