this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2024
115 points (97.5% liked)

Portland

968 readers
1 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The gist is that Portland drivers couldn't stop hitting crucial safety infrastructure (proving its necessity) so PBOT gave up on it.

As one of the commenters pointed out: Since a pedestrian/bike fatality costs PBOT nothing and replacing a concrete planter a car has demolished costs them more than nothing, to balance the budget they're going to go with more pedestrian deaths.

top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 55 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Frequent collisions show there needs to be more, not less.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It also shows that the layout of these calming devices was poorly designed. There are lots of ways to calm traffic without causing continual accidents

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

are they really accidents if they are predictable

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Yes, otherwise they'd call them intentions lol

No one's like "I'm going to ram into this giant concrete barrier now," they do it accidentally

Edit: I don't understand why this is so unpopular

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago

No, they’re just like “let me check this text while I make this turn”

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

if u make shitty street designs, give driving licenses to people who shouldnt even operate a tricycle let alone a 2+ ton metal vehicle, let such people drive at reckless speed, sdont enforce traffic laws, and then put a concrete planter in the middle of the street that isnt an accident.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Imagine being so bad at driving that you can't avoid hitting a bright yellow concrete cylinder sitting in the middle of the road when you're doing 25kph.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They should just replace it with steel planter so they have to replace it less often

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

Just fit them with IEDs and gradually eliminate the problem drivers

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 month ago

Learn how to drive. Jfc.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

TLDR; They didn't actually expect them to work. Every time they get hit, they move and they require a crane or forklift to put back into position.

Perhaps they should double the weight of them so they're less likely to move when struck.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 month ago (1 children)

In the UK if you crash and cause damage to the road infrastructure then you need to pay to fix it. They should bring in that law in US…

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

But that would impede their freedom to destroy stuff because of their terrible driving

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago

If drivers couldn't stop hitting the planters, then the planters aren't the problem. But hey, at least Portland is accomodating to maniac drivers.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

Alternative: recycle old, large pipeline and pour concrete between two different diameters of it. Should hold up better to being struck by idiots in vehicles

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You need a real roundabout, not this half assed giant plat pot.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Not every intersection should or needs to be replaced by a roundabout, especially on local lane intersections where speeds are already supposed to be low. They take up more space, are more expensive to maintain (than a stop sign-controlled or uncontrolled intersection), and are also less convenient for bikers as well as cars.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Stopping with 30 kph puts a pressure of over a metric ton via the seat belt on your body for a short time.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

We really need a higher standard for possessing a drivers licenses if people can't be trusted not to hit large, stationary objects on the regular... All of the forced incentive to drive in this country has made it into something people take for granted. It's easy to forget you're operating heavy machinery capable of high speeds.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I'm not sure why the people who put these in didn't expect there to be lots of collisions. There's a reason why obstacles are generally not placed in the middle of the road...

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They're usually placed in such a way to prevent people turning far too sharply risking hitting someone in the oncoming lane, usually near the crosswalk. If people are having trouble with this they're having trouble with pedestrians too

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I think I understand what you're getting at but your terminology is backwards - what you're describing is a wide turn. The obstacle is actually making people turn very sharply. Maybe my sense of scale is off, but the intersection in the picture looks it might even force some larger vehicles to make a three-point-turn.

[–] Cethin 6 points 1 month ago

From the look of these roads, there shouldn't be any vehicles so large they have to make a three-point-turn. If there are, then that's yet another indication these were needed.