https://xkcd.com/2929

Alt text:

While it seemed like a fun prank at the time, I realize my prank fire extinguishers full of leaded gasoline were a mistake.

  • eksb@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Diverging diamonds are great if your only consideration is car throughput.

    If you are considering people walking or riding bicycles, they are shit.

    • Oinks@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      It doesn’t help that US diverging diamonds seem to insist on having pedestrians walk through the median.

      But honestly all interchanges are varying degrees of horrible and if you want your city to be bearable to navigate as a pedestrian/cyclist you just really don’t want to do urban highways, or roads above a certain size in general.

    • Lux@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I hadn’t considered that. I was still pretty car-brained when i watched the cgp grey video on them, but now that you mention it, i definitely agree

      • eksb@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        This is expensive to address because you have to separate cyclists out to the right before the right car lane splits for right turns before the crossover. And then you have to build a bridge or tunnel for cyclists and pedestrians. On each side.

        Really, any road busy enough to justify a diverging diamond probably already needed separated bike lanes. But in America (motto: “If you aren’t in a car, you don’t matter”), there almost certainly was not any cycling infrastructure there before.

        There is one of these near me. Their solution for pedestrians is to make them cross the high speed outer lanes four times (where drivers are encouraged to not slow down). Their solution for cyclists is take the lane and pray or get off and do what the pedestrians have to do.

        Edited for clarity: pedestrians cross four times, not drivers are encouraged to not slow down four times.

          • eksb@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            To be clear, it is four times that pedestrians have to cross, not four times that drivers are encouraged to not slow down. Drivers are not explicitly encouraged to not slow down, but the point of the diverging diamond is to make drivers not have to slow down.