They think protecting drivers cars from scratches is more important than protecting pedestrians from getting hit, so they make the sidewalk part of the “clear zone”
Physical design is not neutral.
Physical design is an expression of our values.
They think protecting drivers cars from scratches is more important than protecting pedestrians from getting hit, so they make the sidewalk part of the “clear zone”
Physical design is not neutral.
Physical design is an expression of our values.
I mean, you’re not wrong, except it’s not to keep the cars from getting scratched. It’s there to keep the car from going off into the ditch. It also prevents pedestrians from walking off the edge. If there was no slope there, then there would be no guardrail at all. We don’t typically put rails between roads and pedestrian walkways because it would prevent pedestrians from crossing the street. If the rail were closer to the road, the foliage would probably overtake the walkway.
I agree that we should make our communities more walkable, and I agree that safety measures should prioritize the safety of people over inconvenience or the damage of property. But we should understand and accurately describe the reason for the current system, lest we be dismissed entirely.
The problem is once you put people on this path of playing the victim, they see everything through the lens of being personally wronged. They incorrectly attribute all attributes of everything, eventually, to someone attempting to harm them in some way. Thankfully this community still has their wits about them, but I see this happen everywhere on the internet.
The internet also just has a general problem of burying nuance in preference to big simple opinions.
If also has a habit of treating anyone who cares about nuance as being a pedant and derailing because of it.
Usually the accusation “you know that’s not what they meant!” Anytime is pointed out that the words people use in an argument don’t actually define the opinion or argument they are missing
Valid.
The foliage thing is nonsense. The guardrail does nothing to stop plants from growing. And the guardrail ends at the crossing area anyway. So I think OP has a point here.
Right, but a mower isn’t going to go on the other side of a guardrail to clear it, and people aren’t going to walk there if it’s all overgrown.
I don’t see any reason it couldn’t? Sidewalks require maintenance. If we choose not to maintain them then they won’t be usable. The guardrail is barely relevant to that.
Have you seen how a roadside mower works? Because a guardrail between the walkway and the road would definitely impede that. And then for ada compliance, you’d need to make sure the rails are finished on both sides, and there are sufficient gaps at the crosswalks and curb cuts. And, you’d still need some sort of protection on the ledge side to prevent people from falling down into the bushes.
I mean, yeah, unlimited budget and effort, you could make that walkway much better. You could pave the whole thing and level the ground so there is no ditch and no trees. Plant some gardens for pollinators, and put in a water feature to keep things cool. Build a playground and one of those moving walkway conveyors they have at airports. Ice cream and blowjobs for everyone, while we’re at it.
The way it is now protects cars and people from the ditch, and is easy and cheap to maintain. Hardly any sidewalks anywhere have guardrails along the curb to protect pedestrians, because most pedestrians are hit where they cross the street. Even if a car jumped the curb and hit the rail, it’s unlikely people would be standing in that exact spot, and how often does that happen anyway?
If you want to improve the walkability shown in the picture, you’d do better putting in more crosswalks, signals, signs, and stops to permit pedestrians to cross the street more safely.
They could definitely design a mower that is able to reach over the guard rail. We could also just send a different mower to do the gaurd rail sections.
When your response is “we could design a different mower” I think you’ve answered why it’s on the side it’s on. Yes, I agree, in a perfect world we could. But the people deciding what side the guard rails go on are not the people deciding what mowers look like, nor do they have the sort of power to do that.
They could just send a crew out with a regular mower. Im also nearly certain ive seen a mower on a tractor reaching over guardrails on a highway before.
That guard rail is there because the book told the designers to put it there and thinkkng outside the book hasn’t been allowed for decades in road planning, its all cut and paste.
Of course they have those. They could have a guy go out with scissors, or replace all the grass with marshmallows and replace them daily when the animals eat them. Good for jobs, good for the animals, and good for me, the municipal marshmallow supplier!
Mowing is like one small part of it, and this configuration allows it to be done with any equipment.
Has anyone been struck by a car here? Have any car accidents happened here at all? What’s the speed limit on the road? Is it near a school or a park or a playground for blind children? Putting a safety rail between the sidewalk and the road is inconvenient for many reasons. Of course it can be done, and safety is always going to be inconvenient.
It was inconvenient to put a rail on the far side of the sidewalk. They did it because the need for safety outweighed the inconvenience of it. Cars and pedestrians could fall down the hill, and it would make accidents worse.
I mean, what are we even talking about? Having a second guardrail would make the sidewalk harder to navigate, and would obstruct the view of drivers turning the corner looking for people crossing the street. The most obvious need is for a crosswalk and additional signage.
Maybe pedestrians shouldn’t be crossing busy roads unless at designated crossings. Additionally, if they are going to jaywalk, having the barrier would at least ensure they have some kinda bare minimum physicality in order to hop over the barrier.
And seriously, how often has a vehicle guard rail been the deciding factor in a pedestrian falling down the ditch?
Zoom in.
What are you trying to show me?
This is a designated crossing. It’s just really poorly marked, which is far more dangerous than the lack of a physical barrier between the sidewalk and the road. Crossing the road here would not be jaywalking.
Oh yes, I was speaking about the idea of guard rails and sidewalks in general, not this specific intersection. This particular intersection looks stupid for several reasons, including that sidewalk that cuts across without any markers to show a crossing. In fact I’d go as far as saying this isn’t even a crosswalk, it’s a sidewalk with an expectation of teleportation since there’s nothing painted on the road.