“Dystopian” is a great word for this.
I used to be north of Chicago for work once or twice a year. The hotel was right next to the office, so I could walk there. But that was the only place I could walk. I wanted to walk to the mall, as it was only 2km or so. But it was impossible. There was only a four lane road, no sidewalks. I also had to go to Princeton and it was better there, as the hotel was right next to a residential area and there were sidewalks there. But man, the US are incredibly car-centric.
Usually the hotels have shuttles to the entertainment district. But it gets tricky over there with the airport being a “peninsula” of city territory. I’m not old enough to remember the origin, but I remember many neighborhoods being leveled to expand the airport (we would party in the vacant houses with electricity til the cops noticed). My guess is that was not the original setup and with the neighborhoods going away, the need for pedestrian bridges went away with them.
But I also must add, that entertainment district is also relatively new. It was just the convention center in my youth.
Nope, can’t imagine living next to a motorway. Or choosing to go to a restaurant tbh.
Why can’t he just walk across the street? There isn’t so much traffic that he’d be playing frogger so i don’t see the issue.
An able bodied man, sure. What about an old lady? Or a ten year old? Five lanes of 50mph traffic. That won’t work.
This.
Also, even as an able-bodied man, I’m happy to jaywalk across residential streets and small roads. But a busy road or motorway? I’m not risking my life for that. Let alone multiple lanes! I always walk the 100m or so to the nearest pedestrian crossing… which is exactly what this guy should be able to do.
It’s just bad design, and I strongly disagree with the idea of “it doesn’t look that bad, just cross”. You shouldn’t even have to assess risk like that.
I’m not exactly enamoured with the UK, but its walkability (at least in suburbs and cities) is something I am so thankful for.
I checked with Google Maps. To get to the exact opposite side of where the video is shot using the nearest crosswalk would be 725 meters.
Or just over a kilometer if you didn’t judge it correctly and went the other way.
79 feet (25 meters) if you’re willing to take your chances crossing the road. Most people are going to jaywalk, which just needlessly puts lives at risk.
Why is it uncrossable? Traffic doesn’t drive too fast. Maybe its a bit busy and a bit wide for comfort, but crossable nontheless. Regardless, it’s stupid they don’t at least put a zebra crossing in.
What do you think this is, Frogger?
I bet he’s too young to know what Frogger is.
Good point. I’ve added a link for intergenerational context ;-)
Having to add the link certainly made me feel old. 👴
It’s five lanes and the speed limit is 50mph. I’m not crossing that.
That’s insane. 50mph road with not even a middle island?
Yeah I mean I COULD cross it, but it’s not something I’d want to do. I’d definitely never ever want my kids doing it.
Putting zebra crossing on 4 or 5 lanes is sending people to certain deaths
This isn’t Vietnam. Drivers in America aim for bikers and pedestrians.
Isn’t that what “open carry” is for? (American problems require American solutions) 😅
Even when ignoring the risk of crossing such a wide road, wouldn’t it be jaywalking and thus illegal anyways in the US?
Jaywalking isn’t illegal in most places and in the places where it is illegal unless you’re causing a disturbance you’re usually just going to get a cop telling you to find a crosswalk, not arresting or fining you.
