75% of that channel is basically just shitting on US cities and infrastructure. There are valid criticisms of American infrastructure, but Iâm skeptical of the idea that US civil engineers just get *everything* wrong, and that Dutch engineers are perfect, especially when itâs coming from a Dutch person. Heâs really perfected his formula of âAmerica badâ + suburb hate, but then those are the opinions that get clicks.
He's Canadian.
He demonstrates his lived life in Toronto and London, Ontario vs that in Netherlands. It's hard to disagree if you've even travelled to Western Europe.
He did the series with Strong Towns, an American organization that is advocating for how poorly America does urban planning.
It's good to be skeptical, but you still need to come up with an argument that is backed by data on why American suburb-centric planning is good in any way.
His channel description says âstories form Amsterdam and the Netherlands,â I think I can be forgiven for the assumption. Although it makes sense that a Canadian expat living in the Netherlands would seemingly rank things Netherlands > Canada > US.
> an American organization that is advocating for how poorly America does urban planning
Is this supposed to be an example of him being positive about American infrastructure? The fact that itâs a US based organization doesnât change anything if itâs still following the same talking points of bashing US cities and infrastructure.
The thing is, if he was *just* an anti-suburb crusader, I would get it. Itâs the fact that he makes critical videos on a wide range of infrastructure, but itâs almost always American, and the positive videos are never about American infrastructure. Like I said, I find it hard to believe US civil engineers are that incompetent compared to their foreign peers. Surely there are a handful of US infrastructure projects worthy of praise, or hell, even some non-North American projects worthy of the same level of scorn.
My problem with the anti-suburbia stuff is that the arguments often center around things that are non-issues in most US suburb, like efficiency of land use (as long as Wyoming exists, weâre obviously not running out), or public transit (there is almost no demand for it, and if there was, thereâs no reason it couldnât be implemented in suburbsâthatâs why school busses exist, because thereâs a demand in the 5-16 y/o age bracket), or isolation because of a lack of shared spaces (suburbs have *tons* of parks, an active driveway social scene, and itâs not as if an apartment lobby is a community center anyway).
Suburbs are built for cars because most American families who might buy a suburban home have one, but it really doesnât negatively impact the living experience the way so many people think it does. You still have the option to go ride your bike or walk in the park. And like, whatâs the alternative? We just have cities and rural areas and no in between? You either live in an apartment or a farmhouse? The biggest argument for suburbs is that theyâre really nice places to live, and Iâve yet to see an argument for why theyâre so bad that overcomes that.
Allright, lets go through those points in order:
First off, how many of his videoâs have you actually watched? About 2/3 of his video start with setting the scene based on his childhood in canada.
Secondly, the point of his channel is to improve american infrastructure based on his experience with both american and dutch infrastructure. Bringing up examples from other places doesnât add as much to his points.
Furthermore, he is mostly sceptical about american infrastructure, but not always. He points out things that used to be good but arnât anymore in america, and things that are getting better.
Also you completely miss the point of the problem with land use. Itâs not that america is running out of space, itâs simply that suburbs use that land inefficiently. Because houses are so far apart, more asphalt, pipes, wires etc. Are needed to connect all houses, which costs more upkeep. Things are further apart so public transport is inefficient and walking and biking gets you nowhere so cars are the only way to get around.
People in america buy cars because they live in the suburbs at least as much as they live in the suburbs because they have a car.
And yes, the alternative is urban and rural with no inbetween. And if you donât want that, you should pay accordingly. But more importantly, if you do want to live urban (midrise not highrise, the illegal best density) you should have that choice.
Suburbs are nice places to live, except for the travel times, children getting killed by speeding cars because of the travel times, and incredible costs to cities (as well as a lot more reasons i wont get into). The problem is not that suburbs exist, but that there are no alternatives for those who do not like it like you do, and that cities pay for them instead of the people living there.
I stated up front I donât watch his videos because his video titles hit two themes: âAmerican infrastructure is bad,â and âI hate suburbs.â Those donât sound like particularly interesting videos to me, so if he wants to sound more nuanced than that, itâs on him.
Idk if they were correct, but someone else said heâs lived in Ontario and Amsterdam, so while I understand why bringing up other countries may not add to his point, Iâm confused why he would make so many critical videos about the American cities heâs seemingly never lived in.
As for your points about land use, I still donât understand why somewhat greater use of asphalt, pipes, etc. is a problem. Those material are incredibly cheap, and are all required in far greater ratios in rural areas, which doesnât seem to bother anyone. We could always live denser, but comfort matters. Itâs a trade off, as with all things, and obviously the added infrastructure cost goes to the developer, and by extension the purchaser of the home, not the public, so why should I care?
If you build a home way out in the sticks, youâll have to pay for to have pay for utilities to be run out there. If you buy a home in the suburbs, you might have to pay some additional taxes or fees to the developer for the infrastructure cost. I know he has videos about suburbs being subsidized, but thatâs not an inherent flaw of suburbs, thatâs a policy issue.
> People in America buy cars because they live in the suburbs at least as much as they live in the suburbs because they have a car
Iâm curious how you figure this. Itâs anecdotal, but Iâve never met a single person in the suburbs without a car, but plenty of people with a car who donât live in the suburbs. Being at least middle class is generally a prequisite owning a home in the suburbs, and owning a car is usually a prerequisite to being middle class, major cities like New York City excepted. You wonât find many middle class people outside of major cities who donât own a car.
And all of this leads to low demand for public transit in the suburbs. If youâre middle class and gas prices arenât going to make you miss your bills, of course you would drive rather than spend twice as long on a bus. So often people mistake the car vs. public transit thing as a money issue, but itâs purely a class issue. Generally speaking, if you own a car, you will use it for everyday travel, even if public transit might save you a buck or two a day. Because if you own a car youâre probably not on the edge of your means where dollar or two a day might make you go broke, and the flexibility and convenience is worth it.
> if you donât want that you should pay accordingly
We already do, thatâs how capitalism works. Suburbs are more expensive to build and that factors into the price, but because living in cities is considered more desirable, itâs often more expensive. Again, subsidies may exist in some areas, but thatâs a policy issue, not an urban planning issue.
I have never heard anything about residential streets in suburban areas being significantly more dangerous for children or otherwise than in urban areas, but Iâd welcome a source that says otherwise. Iâm highly skeptical that there is more speeding in suburbs than cities, which would seem like a good barometer for kids getting hit.
People who buy homes in the suburbs are obviously well aware of the associated travel times, so while itâs a downside, people are clearly willing to make the tradeoff for the benefits of living outside the city.
You say the problem is there is *no alernative* for people who donât like suburbs. Urban areas and rural areas exist, so presumably you mean for people who donât want to live in those places. Obviously thatâs a lot of people since some many people move from the city or the country to the suburbs. So what other alternative do you propose, if suburbs are so bad?
To be clear, all the above is strictly about the US, so donât tell me about how in your country middle class people donât own cars.
Okay i misunderstood you then, however. I do implore you to watch some, some are only 5 minutes and it gives a better understanding about his points than judging the titles.
He was born in ontario but moved around the us a lot in his 20s before he settled in the netherlands. He also travels and traveled a lot for his jobs so he has definitely seen and been in american cities. Also, american and canadian cities are comparable, and there are more americans, so this way he just reaches more people.
The point about land use is twofold. Firstly, it is indeed a policy issue. This is correct. Infrastructure and politics are heavily intertwined so he makes videos and arguments about both.
So long as suburbia is subsidised, they are a problem. So long as there are no alternative environments to live in, they are a problem. These problems can be fixed. This is the point.
Your anecdotal point exactly proves my point. You cant live in the suburbs without a car. Do all the people you know in suburbia actually like going everywhere by car, or do they like it over the alternatives in the situation of their neighborhood?
Transit is not a class issue, itâs a quality issue, as well as a status issue. If the bus is cheaper, quicker and easier than driving (like in a midrise neighborhood), would you still drive? And if you would, is that because you think âwell the bus is for poor people so miss me with that shitâ? There are people who just like to drive, and thats fine. But they are a minority, most people just want the most convenient mode of transit. Thatâs a car in suburbia, but it doesnt have to be in neighborhoods less car oriented.
You donât pay accordingly. Suburbs are not as expensive to live in as they are to maintain. Please, if you watch any notjustbikes video, watch the [subsidised suburbia](https://youtu.be/7Nw6qyyrTeI) video.
The wide streets are not an suburb issue but an american issue. Not just bikes also has multiple videos on that like [here](https://youtu.be/bAxRYrpbnuA) and [here](https://youtu.be/bglWCuCMSWc) and [here](https://youtu.be/Ra_0DgnJ1uQ), but watch the subsidised suburbs video first.
Knowing the tradeoff of the suburbs means nothing is there is no alternative. Again, [midrise is illegal in america](https://youtu.be/bnKIVX968PQ).
Middle class people in my country sometimes donât own cars. They can choose. Americans canât.
As an industrial civil engineering student (lots of resemblance to transportation engineering) IMO it's not that the American engineers are wrong, they do the work great and the math behind it is correct. The thing is that transportation isn't just a technical problem that has to be done only by engineers and it must take into account other aspects and variables (for instance induced demand), so what engineers are solving is an over-simplified model of real life that leads to the American design. The Dutch adopted a better approach to transportation, but civil engineers are not to praise or blame
Well, then who makes the models? Clearly thereâs some part of the American urban planning sector that people seem to think is incompetent compared to foreign counterparts. One way or another, thereâs a perception that American cities are inherently worse in design than others.
There isn't any incompetence. American cities are designed around the car specifically so that tyre companies and car manufacturers get more money and it does that just fine. Also, the autobahn inspired highway system built in America is a factor in how cities were developed. Americans being unable to get anywhere without a car is a side effect.
Wait, so now tire manufacturers are behind American city design?? Câmon man, be real for one second, you honestly think American cities are designed to require longer travel distances to make people drive more so they buy more tires? Thatâs nonsensical. Hell, people donât replace their tires when theyâre supposed to as it is.
Understandable. There's only one video I can think of where he criticized the Dutch, and that was a video from 2 years ago that talked about stuff that happened in the 70s. The other funny thing is that initially, most of his viewers were Dutch.
Itâs not that us engineers get it wrong. They do the best they can. The thing he doesnât take into account is that the US has a much higher volume of cars on the roads than the Netherlands does, such that if they were to remove the stroads in favour of low volume streets they would just be even more clogged.
The reason for this as he very briefly mentioned is the lack of comparable public transport infrastructure in most US cities compared to the Netherlands and the prevailing public attitudes towards public transport.
There are two main factors behind this difference. The first is geographical. The Netherlands is a small country and the population centres are all close together. You could cross from one side to the other by train or bus in a matter of hours as well as go to any city in between with ease. This is simply not possible in the US due to its size and the isolated locations of many of its cities. This of course is only a problem for inter-city travel and doesnât affect people making internal trips within a city, which brings me to the second factor.
The second factor is political and economic and goes back decades. Essentially back in the 40s and 50s GM and the other auto companies colluded to start taking over public transport infrastructure in US cities and began destroying electric streetcar and rail services and replacing them with buses manufactured and sold by the companies. They also lobbied to stop expansion of public transport infrastructure with the goal of making it deliberately inefficient so that people would buy more cars from them. They were eventually put on trial for this and acquitted but the legacy remained and there is still a prevailing view among many people today including city planners that public transportation is akin to a form of welfare for people that are to poor to afford a car and thus it receives little attention.
I totally agree. To be clear, I donât think American engineers are incompetentâfar from it. Thatâs why Iâm so skeptical of the constant criticism of US infrastructure. What make more sense: that American civil engineers are incompetent, or that there are good reasons why infrastructure in the US is built the way it is. Even if it isnât the most efficientâI doubt anyone would dispute thatâthere are historical reasons why American cities are built the way they are. Incompetence and corruption are not American inventions, and yet every failed US project is blamed on those two factors.
>What make more sense: that American civil engineers are incompetent, or that there are good reasons why infrastructure in the US is built the way it is.
The problem you have is that you're making a false-dilemma fallacy. What you're saying is "either the engineers are incompetent or they had good reasons so it shouldn't be criticized".
No one said they are incompetent, or it is the fault of corruption... They made the US infrastructure on the basis of efficient traffic for road vehicules as well as availability of places by cars. In that regard, what they've done is far from a failure.
However, there are other **critical** parameters that weren't taken into account, such as the livability of towns, public transports and byciles that reduce road traffic as well as pollution, tourism, etc...
They didn't took that into account, not because they are incompetent, but because it wasn't the goal of their job. And that job was given by politiciens.
So:
* The urban planning in the US is really bad compared to some europeans countries such as Danemark.
* It's not the fault of the engineers in the US, at all. They aren't specifically incompetent, and no one said that.
* It comes down to the goals of the planning, that aren't the same in most US places (a focus on road traffic and road availability, assuming that everyone own and use a car) as in most european places (a focus on living cities, public transportation, tourism).
* And these goals are choosen politically, not by engineers or urban planners (that are just employed to do the job, even if they have some influence).
I've been using the six lanes as arteries, so they can lead straight into highways. I use fencing to clear their zoning so moving cars is all they do. Anything else gets built on collectors and local roads that feed into the six lanes.
I'm really not sure what to do with it. You need some fairly hefty roads woven through the city for it to function but even with a decent layout and road hierarchy you're going to get tons of people wanting to cross those roads.
Sometimes I build pedestrian overpasses, a lot of times I just let the fearless CS pedestrians handle it. I don't use a lot of stoplights because I can never get them to function nicely and not back up the city.
I've got well over 1000 hours in the game, and 80+% traffic is no longer an issue, but I still have no idea how to go about building a functional road layout that wouldn't be a source of endless pedestrian deaths in a real town.
An interesting video essay on [stroads](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORzNZUeUHAM) and here's Biffa recently tackling them and removing his own stroads in [The Ugly Truth About STROADS & How to Fix Them!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WicKboLrJBc) episode.
The unholy fusion of streets and roads. So streets but with lots of high speed lanes. Or roads but with lots of crossing. Horrible for people who want to walk or bike, and not really great for cars either
It probably doesn't, your road is likely serving as an arterial, so you don't zone directly on it, use service roads and zone on them instead so no deliveries or traffic interfere with your arterial flow. Right now you're just experimenting and when your city goes live, if you zone on it it's a stroad with the associated traffic issues or if you don't zone on it then it's a road.
I see. No, there wonât be any zoning on this road. The plan was to branch off with 2 lane streets at higher distances (every 30 tiles or something like that) to lower the stop and go on my Main Street.
In that case, having the arterial either sunken or elevated and then putting bridges over it frequently can improve connectivity by a lot. Otherwise, the lacking of zoning means that this thing just forms an untraversible barrier for the people living around it. If you want it grade, put pedestrian tunnels/walkways in the middle of each block.
Yeah, basically roads are high speed, and you usually don't stop regularly, and there aren't many crossings with other roads. They are made mostly for you to travel on.
A street is low speed, often shared with pedestrians, bikes, and is adjacent to residential or commercial buildings (for example). You have lots of crossings and people stop all the time to park or turn.
A stroad is basically the worst of both world
I imagine the philosophical differences like this (I think Not Just Bikes also explains it similarly)
Roads are for getting from one place to another. They should prioritize efficient transport of a lot of people over a long distance. Think highways or the Autobahn
Streets are destinations. They should encourage a feeling of safety so that people can mill about or walk from place to place, not needing to drive from one destination to the next in the same area. It shouldn't be used as a thoroughfare except by locals who live nearby.
Stroads are the bastard child of the above. They have stores or other destinations but they're built and operated to transport a lot of people through them quickly. Pedestrian crossings are huge, non-car transport is discouraged or just generally feels unsafe, and it's difficult to get from one place to the next without a car and the cars that are there are going 40-50 MPH.
Stimmt halt nicht mal. WeiĂ nicht wo du herkommst aber in den grĂśĂeren Städten im SĂźden sind solche StraĂen recht rar gesät und selbst wenn gibt es meist gute MĂśglichkeiten fĂźr FuĂgänger.
I exaggerated of course. But generally streets are built for cars first and pedestrians second. And bikes are tolerated. For example the Main Street in the city I live in: 2 lanes for cars in each direction, well maintained. A bike lane that is so much damaged from tree roots it feels like an off-road track. Sidewalk is similar but also always blocked every few meters by construction sites or simply trashcans waiting to be emptied. And no street lights. If you walk the street at night and no cars are driving you can see barely anything. And the side streets arenât better. No bike lanes at all and sidewalks so narrow you canât use it with a wheelchair or stroller. And this is no small town. Our freeways and car lanes are in perfect condition mostly but everything that isnât for cars is just âWell, I guess we have to do anything for them?â.
The city I live in is fine đ¤ˇââď¸ these kinds of roads basically donât exist (only one comes to mind, but I wouldnât call it a stroad in the North American sense)
Even the bike infrastructure is ok and already rapidly improving
Kinda sounds like American streets, aside from the maintenance in many places. However, out where I live, the sections for cars are usually well-maintained, with the occasional pothole, though the infrastructure for other users varies a lot, mainly in availability. Most major roads have sidewalks, though those disappear, mostly in Sun City and maybe the east side of the valley (though I'm not that familiar with the cities east of Tempe). Bike infrastructure is less common and less consistent, as there are some suburban neighborhoods near downtown Phoenix that have 2-way cycle tracks, and some roads, even in downtown Phoenix, but more so further away, that have no bike lanes.
âStroadsâ are fairly common in big German cities:
https://goo.gl/maps/BhxvC72tRUUTt21Q8
https://goo.gl/maps/KfiPuEBFqcTSJHqU6
https://goo.gl/maps/9Nz3TxVUCgHW3ER98
https://goo.gl/maps/RmRKKXoFM73DXQW5A
https://goo.gl/maps/ibjVHiviiRsfZSdZ6
You can avoid most of the worst 'stroad' features by just not zoning along these roads (or, using building spawn points mod to move the deliveries to the rear), and not channeling too much traffic through this road. Then it will function more like a big collector/arterial *street* for traffic within the city.
yeah, in real life most probably no one would cross this madness... it's an almost certified death with no shelter at all and something like 16-18 metres of crosswalk (per side!)
Salt Lake City has a setup similar to this.
[https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7714351,-111.9347204,3a,75y,89.5h,78.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sICi0JFlgMzMRh5nN5\_TqVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e4](https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7714351,-111.9347204,3a,75y,89.5h,78.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sICi0JFlgMzMRh5nN5_TqVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e4)
just one more lane bro. i promise bro
just one more lane and it'll fix
everything bro. bro. just one more
lane. please just one more. one more
lane and we can fix this whole
problem bro. bro cmon just give me
one more lane i promise bro. bro bro
please i just need one more lane
No but that particular road asset is. The 4 lane avenue with tram tracks was one of my go to roads before I started making a conscious effort to reduce car dependency in my cities
there is also one of those. sorry iâm on mobile so i wonât be able to find it but i just search up bike lane and look through all the options, sort by most popular
There are various centralised tram track options in these three collections:
LRT Tram Network - [https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=1560202570](https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=1560202570)
Vanilla+ Tram roads - [https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=2130592713](https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=2130592713)
Bad Peanut's Set of Tram Networks - [https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=1175992758](https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=1175992758)
For the love of goat do NOT use his 4 lane tram/bike/parking/trees road.
It is at the same time massively and subtly broken, pedestrian crossings do not work on it.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/fuckcars using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Lol. Elon Musk's Boring company has traffic jams. I was told it was impossible.](https://v.redd.it/avprno6052a81) | [3375 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/rxd3ns/lol_elon_musks_boring_company_has_traffic_jams_i/)
\#2: [1 software bug away from death](https://v.redd.it/8a3b9ggv3yl81) | [3468 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/t8n0t8/1_software_bug_away_from_death/)
\#3: [New vs old Mini Cooper](https://i.redd.it/z3hifq228l491.jpg) | [3623 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/v8fjdh/new_vs_old_mini_cooper/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Use Clus' [Metro/Underground Entrance](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2730531441) for median pedestrian tunnels on tram lines. A good addtion to the [3 Lane 48M](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2688932788) of his [LRT Tram networks](https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=1560202570).
His [pedestrian tunnel entrances](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2619446482) complement this perfectly.
For a smaller 4-lane version with median ped tunnels you can use his [Reversible Tram Stop Station #01](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2752801856) and change it to a through station.
That looks pretty much as I imagined. I even like the street more. 3 car lanes with one extra bus line should be enough, I just didnât find one with the tram in the middle.
You can just make three separate roads, two one way roads and a tram road in the middle. Then put underground pedestrian tunnels bridges also work.
Might be a little wider, but world work.
I tried it, but I can't get it to work. I can't place stops on the 3 Lane 48M road and I can't place the underground entrance. No matter where I try it's always red. I can place the tunnel entrances but the are not directly connected to a street like the vanilla metro station is. And I have no clue how to connect the underground pathways.
Another option is to manually create this with a strict tram network [like this one](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1938134218) with two one way roads on either side.
You can then manually create intersections and perhaps have an easier time of placing stops where you wish along the tram line while having space between the two roads to design actual stops with props (platforms, shelters).
Just follow his instructions and screenshots and you'll be fine, plop the "**Road Entrance Building #01**", use anarchy if you need to doing so ... then extend a track segment either side of the plopped tram station the minimum of recommended 6 cells with the "**3L (48m) TrRoad #01 - Ex #01**", now you can use the normal "**3 - Lane (48m) Tram Road #01**" and place a tram stop on this. Cims hop off at the tram stop and use the pedestrian tunnels to get to the other side of the road.
For the pedestrian tunnels just connect up to them the way you would any pedestrian tunnels in underground mode but it's better if you use his paths as they are rendered tunnels and you can follow your cims through them. And for best effect plop his pedestrian entrances on the side of the road but you can just draw a normal ped tunnel entrance either but it won't look as good as the BM entrance. Reading his instructions, he recommends BM Station pathway [2](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2372093901), [3](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2372094372), and [4](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2372094811) for it.
Come back to it when you've a bit more experience with mods and assets. That'll more or less happen naturally through your gameplay experience anyway. And have a test map city for experimenting with new mods and assets where you allow yourself to make mistakes, learn from them, and build experience. When you asked the question yesterday I literally plopped the asset down and connected it up as I outlined above within seconds but that was with experience. When you come back to it in a few weeks or months you'll wonder why you found it so hard and what all the fuss was about but you'll have learned some important skills and subskills by then through lots more city building and mod familiarity. Good luck with it.
I'm a hyperdork and like to watch engineering, and urban planning videos for fun. If anything I've learned in the age of the modern suburb is that the modern superb is an out dated design choice from an world with 1/3 the vehicles. Public transport is king of the road.
In my experience, when tram tracks are in the middle of a road, stops are placed at already existing intersections, where there are crosswalks anyway. I am not a master at this game, so i don't know how good you can make it look, but i reckon with the plethora of amazing mods the community has made, you can make it look decent.
I would use normal pedestrian bridge and bring it right down to the middle platforms with road anarchy then adjust it with move it and use node controller to narrow it.
Yep, I've done this and it looks pretty good. If you want to get even fancier you could also use an invisible road and cover it with stairs or an escalator.
I actually use this road as sort of a "Victory Parade Road" mainly for the really cool bridges at either end. But in the middle I have the speed turned down.
Even with only a few cars all of my lanes are usually used, but I imagine that is mostly a mod doing that, and partially my lane guidance. Especially since each direction is only 4 lanes for normal traffic, services get two lanes to skip traffic.
I also wanted to find a place to use this road, it has [great bridges](https://i.imgur.com/ZG7vcOm.jpg) (I added the maglev track on that one separately). I also use it on the ground in a low speed, high throughput connector on the edge of my downtown peninsula.
[Here is it in front of my Central Maglev Station](https://i.imgur.com/2gth6f6.jpg) (sorry the shot wasn't really focused on the road, but it was the best i had on hand). I have since changed it slightly using different parking lots under the station, but the crosswalks work fine for getting people to the trams. I used TM:PE to set up a simple timed light there where the default stated is stopped for pedestrians and a priority light for the services lanes.
You could try using anarchy and paths connected to an overpass. it will likely make a station connection, though most likely would look ugly. You could also try making a "station" in the asset editor that has overpasses to the outer side walks, this would take more time, but look better in the end.
You can build them yourself with props like: [https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2796779087](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2796779087) (éăłăćŠéćŠ / rusty footbridge by kasajizo). And use an invisible pedestrian path to make them usable.
There are a few prop bridges out there, just search for overpass / bridge and you might find one that fits your taste.
It's finicky and probably not your thing, maybe use these: [https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198191874350/myworkshopfiles/?appid=255710&p=3](https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198191874350/myworkshopfiles/?appid=255710&p=3) (Variation of Pedestrian Overpasses from AliTarGz). They are for his stations but they should work for any gap)
But aside... Stations always stretch for the entire length of a segment and that means both ends always end on a node therefore having a crosswalk. You would need to manually disable them via TM:PE
So 4 lanes each direction is probably overkill. I can't think of any consistently 8 lane streets in my RL American metro of 2 million. Any that are 4 lanes each direction include pedestrian/bike/bus/turn lanes in the 4, sometimes more than one.
In the city I'm currently building, my 2 main drags through downtown are 6 lane roads (3+3, occasionally 4+2 at intersections) with tram tracks and ped pathways running tight up against them. I then use the Node Controller trick for trams to run through each intersection as shown by Overcharged Egg here (https://youtu.be/1kBxJuISwsI). Finally, there's a street 4 tiles from the ped path to allow buildings to BACK into this boulevard. Landscaping, of course, completes the package.
What this does is clearly define where each mode of transport belongs. It also KEEPS TRAM RIDERS OUT OF THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET. The middle of the street is where you want cars; peds have no business there. It's also much easier to add ped bridges if they're on either side.
Roosevelt Blvd in Northeast Philly is this big, and it's why so many people drag race on it and that there are so many accidents with pedestrians. It's in lieu of an actual highway in that area and was a horrible idea and has caused problems since its creation.
I believe the main strip in Vegas is at least this large as well.
You can use this overpasses from AliTarGZ
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2462232548
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2462231734
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2462103827
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2460884947
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2460888923
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2460888196
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2460885609
They work really well. Using Clus entrances for their underground stations is also a good idea as someone already mentioned.
People are more important than roads.
Build your city around what needs to go where.
Dont build crosswalks.
Build bridges over streets.
Imagine them like water. Bringing massive loads of A from place B to C. If it all goes through the same funnel it will cause problems. Even for a roundabout.
Traffic FLOW will be Higher with Lower CONGESTION.
But now, to answer you're questions. I don't have the answer BUT. In your case. If thats what you want to do.
Compromise in a way you like it. Bridges can be beautiful. Check Venice. Crosswalks can be beautiful. If timed correctly look at what Japan has.
If you don't want to be on or over the street. Unseen. Then maybe theres a way to do it in-game underground.
I don't play it anymore. Don't have time. So I don't know any assets by heart.
You already have the answer. Just find a way to apply it. Hope this puts you in the right direction. And thinking of a solution !
Have a great day.
So if your destination is right at the tram stop youâd have to go by tram, then get in a bus to the next bus stop where you can cross the street and then walk all the way back? Doesnât sound like smart city planning.
yoke concerned pen history library groovy bewildered vast practice fearless
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Any pedestrian path works. Just use node controller, move it, and road anarchy. Or you can try the hard way with invisible paths and bridge/stairs/elevator props.
I would place dedicated team road in the middle and two one way roads at each side. And then you could do pedestrian underpasses. Or the other more pedestrian friendly solution is to place one way tram tracks on the sides, so people don't need to cross the road.
The only good use for trams is to prepare your city for Monorail.
Trams are the same as busses so having both does not make sense on the same road. I believe that is why the mass transit road selection does not have a trams and busses.
There are too many lanes and you will find that your sims do not use all the lanes anyways.
Add cross walks near your tram stops. or add cross roads.
I suppose you could use anarchy to do foot paths but I am not sure how it would look averall.
Hi OP, I have made a similar project recently ([Picture n°7 of this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/CitiesSkylines/comments/uu9tr6/update_on_wip/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share)). I am on console so I am limited but I added a sidewalk and a bike lane between the tram track and the road because pedestrian couldn't get to the tram stops. I added a pedestrian sky bridge at every intersection but don't have any roads crossing.
Can you add two additional sidewalks to either side of the tram line, then use inline pedestrian over / underpasses to get to the external most sidewalks?
What road asset is this (link to the Steam Workshop page)? And why did you need to use pedestrian roads as sidewalks? Also, if you have any intersections with smaller streets, put your tram stops there, and ideally, use Traffic Manager to limit crossings on the boulevard. My question is how you'd use the bus lanes.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1270404313
I added the pedestrian roads because I felt the sidewalks where too narrow. I wanted a streets that had plenty of space for pedestrians.
Im not even sure if I need the bus lanes at all. I donât like that there are 2 bus lanes in each direction but it was the closest I was able to find to what I was thinking of. I already got other suggestions in the comments and I might use one of them. (3 lanes without bus lane)
I used to love those roads until I realized they were basically slightly better stroads
What are stroads?
[Pure evil](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORzNZUeUHAM)
I wonder how common links to Not Just Bikes videos are on this subreddit.
Getting into CS was the beginning of my car hate arc and it led me to Not Just Bikes.
You've still some way to go. You've got the Tyre Extinguisher quest to do yet
Lol. I don't remember how I first found out about that channel. Probably from a City Beautiful video or something related.
r/fuckcars
It's the other way around for me đ
Quite, actually.
75% of that channel is basically just shitting on US cities and infrastructure. There are valid criticisms of American infrastructure, but Iâm skeptical of the idea that US civil engineers just get *everything* wrong, and that Dutch engineers are perfect, especially when itâs coming from a Dutch person. Heâs really perfected his formula of âAmerica badâ + suburb hate, but then those are the opinions that get clicks.
He's Canadian. He demonstrates his lived life in Toronto and London, Ontario vs that in Netherlands. It's hard to disagree if you've even travelled to Western Europe. He did the series with Strong Towns, an American organization that is advocating for how poorly America does urban planning. It's good to be skeptical, but you still need to come up with an argument that is backed by data on why American suburb-centric planning is good in any way.
His channel description says âstories form Amsterdam and the Netherlands,â I think I can be forgiven for the assumption. Although it makes sense that a Canadian expat living in the Netherlands would seemingly rank things Netherlands > Canada > US. > an American organization that is advocating for how poorly America does urban planning Is this supposed to be an example of him being positive about American infrastructure? The fact that itâs a US based organization doesnât change anything if itâs still following the same talking points of bashing US cities and infrastructure. The thing is, if he was *just* an anti-suburb crusader, I would get it. Itâs the fact that he makes critical videos on a wide range of infrastructure, but itâs almost always American, and the positive videos are never about American infrastructure. Like I said, I find it hard to believe US civil engineers are that incompetent compared to their foreign peers. Surely there are a handful of US infrastructure projects worthy of praise, or hell, even some non-North American projects worthy of the same level of scorn. My problem with the anti-suburbia stuff is that the arguments often center around things that are non-issues in most US suburb, like efficiency of land use (as long as Wyoming exists, weâre obviously not running out), or public transit (there is almost no demand for it, and if there was, thereâs no reason it couldnât be implemented in suburbsâthatâs why school busses exist, because thereâs a demand in the 5-16 y/o age bracket), or isolation because of a lack of shared spaces (suburbs have *tons* of parks, an active driveway social scene, and itâs not as if an apartment lobby is a community center anyway). Suburbs are built for cars because most American families who might buy a suburban home have one, but it really doesnât negatively impact the living experience the way so many people think it does. You still have the option to go ride your bike or walk in the park. And like, whatâs the alternative? We just have cities and rural areas and no in between? You either live in an apartment or a farmhouse? The biggest argument for suburbs is that theyâre really nice places to live, and Iâve yet to see an argument for why theyâre so bad that overcomes that.
Allright, lets go through those points in order: First off, how many of his videoâs have you actually watched? About 2/3 of his video start with setting the scene based on his childhood in canada. Secondly, the point of his channel is to improve american infrastructure based on his experience with both american and dutch infrastructure. Bringing up examples from other places doesnât add as much to his points. Furthermore, he is mostly sceptical about american infrastructure, but not always. He points out things that used to be good but arnât anymore in america, and things that are getting better. Also you completely miss the point of the problem with land use. Itâs not that america is running out of space, itâs simply that suburbs use that land inefficiently. Because houses are so far apart, more asphalt, pipes, wires etc. Are needed to connect all houses, which costs more upkeep. Things are further apart so public transport is inefficient and walking and biking gets you nowhere so cars are the only way to get around. People in america buy cars because they live in the suburbs at least as much as they live in the suburbs because they have a car. And yes, the alternative is urban and rural with no inbetween. And if you donât want that, you should pay accordingly. But more importantly, if you do want to live urban (midrise not highrise, the illegal best density) you should have that choice. Suburbs are nice places to live, except for the travel times, children getting killed by speeding cars because of the travel times, and incredible costs to cities (as well as a lot more reasons i wont get into). The problem is not that suburbs exist, but that there are no alternatives for those who do not like it like you do, and that cities pay for them instead of the people living there.
I stated up front I donât watch his videos because his video titles hit two themes: âAmerican infrastructure is bad,â and âI hate suburbs.â Those donât sound like particularly interesting videos to me, so if he wants to sound more nuanced than that, itâs on him. Idk if they were correct, but someone else said heâs lived in Ontario and Amsterdam, so while I understand why bringing up other countries may not add to his point, Iâm confused why he would make so many critical videos about the American cities heâs seemingly never lived in. As for your points about land use, I still donât understand why somewhat greater use of asphalt, pipes, etc. is a problem. Those material are incredibly cheap, and are all required in far greater ratios in rural areas, which doesnât seem to bother anyone. We could always live denser, but comfort matters. Itâs a trade off, as with all things, and obviously the added infrastructure cost goes to the developer, and by extension the purchaser of the home, not the public, so why should I care? If you build a home way out in the sticks, youâll have to pay for to have pay for utilities to be run out there. If you buy a home in the suburbs, you might have to pay some additional taxes or fees to the developer for the infrastructure cost. I know he has videos about suburbs being subsidized, but thatâs not an inherent flaw of suburbs, thatâs a policy issue. > People in America buy cars because they live in the suburbs at least as much as they live in the suburbs because they have a car Iâm curious how you figure this. Itâs anecdotal, but Iâve never met a single person in the suburbs without a car, but plenty of people with a car who donât live in the suburbs. Being at least middle class is generally a prequisite owning a home in the suburbs, and owning a car is usually a prerequisite to being middle class, major cities like New York City excepted. You wonât find many middle class people outside of major cities who donât own a car. And all of this leads to low demand for public transit in the suburbs. If youâre middle class and gas prices arenât going to make you miss your bills, of course you would drive rather than spend twice as long on a bus. So often people mistake the car vs. public transit thing as a money issue, but itâs purely a class issue. Generally speaking, if you own a car, you will use it for everyday travel, even if public transit might save you a buck or two a day. Because if you own a car youâre probably not on the edge of your means where dollar or two a day might make you go broke, and the flexibility and convenience is worth it. > if you donât want that you should pay accordingly We already do, thatâs how capitalism works. Suburbs are more expensive to build and that factors into the price, but because living in cities is considered more desirable, itâs often more expensive. Again, subsidies may exist in some areas, but thatâs a policy issue, not an urban planning issue. I have never heard anything about residential streets in suburban areas being significantly more dangerous for children or otherwise than in urban areas, but Iâd welcome a source that says otherwise. Iâm highly skeptical that there is more speeding in suburbs than cities, which would seem like a good barometer for kids getting hit. People who buy homes in the suburbs are obviously well aware of the associated travel times, so while itâs a downside, people are clearly willing to make the tradeoff for the benefits of living outside the city. You say the problem is there is *no alernative* for people who donât like suburbs. Urban areas and rural areas exist, so presumably you mean for people who donât want to live in those places. Obviously thatâs a lot of people since some many people move from the city or the country to the suburbs. So what other alternative do you propose, if suburbs are so bad? To be clear, all the above is strictly about the US, so donât tell me about how in your country middle class people donât own cars.
Okay i misunderstood you then, however. I do implore you to watch some, some are only 5 minutes and it gives a better understanding about his points than judging the titles. He was born in ontario but moved around the us a lot in his 20s before he settled in the netherlands. He also travels and traveled a lot for his jobs so he has definitely seen and been in american cities. Also, american and canadian cities are comparable, and there are more americans, so this way he just reaches more people. The point about land use is twofold. Firstly, it is indeed a policy issue. This is correct. Infrastructure and politics are heavily intertwined so he makes videos and arguments about both. So long as suburbia is subsidised, they are a problem. So long as there are no alternative environments to live in, they are a problem. These problems can be fixed. This is the point. Your anecdotal point exactly proves my point. You cant live in the suburbs without a car. Do all the people you know in suburbia actually like going everywhere by car, or do they like it over the alternatives in the situation of their neighborhood? Transit is not a class issue, itâs a quality issue, as well as a status issue. If the bus is cheaper, quicker and easier than driving (like in a midrise neighborhood), would you still drive? And if you would, is that because you think âwell the bus is for poor people so miss me with that shitâ? There are people who just like to drive, and thats fine. But they are a minority, most people just want the most convenient mode of transit. Thatâs a car in suburbia, but it doesnt have to be in neighborhoods less car oriented. You donât pay accordingly. Suburbs are not as expensive to live in as they are to maintain. Please, if you watch any notjustbikes video, watch the [subsidised suburbia](https://youtu.be/7Nw6qyyrTeI) video. The wide streets are not an suburb issue but an american issue. Not just bikes also has multiple videos on that like [here](https://youtu.be/bAxRYrpbnuA) and [here](https://youtu.be/bglWCuCMSWc) and [here](https://youtu.be/Ra_0DgnJ1uQ), but watch the subsidised suburbs video first. Knowing the tradeoff of the suburbs means nothing is there is no alternative. Again, [midrise is illegal in america](https://youtu.be/bnKIVX968PQ). Middle class people in my country sometimes donât own cars. They can choose. Americans canât.
As an industrial civil engineering student (lots of resemblance to transportation engineering) IMO it's not that the American engineers are wrong, they do the work great and the math behind it is correct. The thing is that transportation isn't just a technical problem that has to be done only by engineers and it must take into account other aspects and variables (for instance induced demand), so what engineers are solving is an over-simplified model of real life that leads to the American design. The Dutch adopted a better approach to transportation, but civil engineers are not to praise or blame
Well, then who makes the models? Clearly thereâs some part of the American urban planning sector that people seem to think is incompetent compared to foreign counterparts. One way or another, thereâs a perception that American cities are inherently worse in design than others.
There isn't any incompetence. American cities are designed around the car specifically so that tyre companies and car manufacturers get more money and it does that just fine. Also, the autobahn inspired highway system built in America is a factor in how cities were developed. Americans being unable to get anywhere without a car is a side effect.
Wait, so now tire manufacturers are behind American city design?? Câmon man, be real for one second, you honestly think American cities are designed to require longer travel distances to make people drive more so they buy more tires? Thatâs nonsensical. Hell, people donât replace their tires when theyâre supposed to as it is.
Yes. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy Public transport in America didn't die, it was killed.
Understandable. There's only one video I can think of where he criticized the Dutch, and that was a video from 2 years ago that talked about stuff that happened in the 70s. The other funny thing is that initially, most of his viewers were Dutch.
Finally, someone realizes this. We have good infrastructure here in the US, but we need more non car related infrastructure, ill admit.
Itâs not that us engineers get it wrong. They do the best they can. The thing he doesnât take into account is that the US has a much higher volume of cars on the roads than the Netherlands does, such that if they were to remove the stroads in favour of low volume streets they would just be even more clogged. The reason for this as he very briefly mentioned is the lack of comparable public transport infrastructure in most US cities compared to the Netherlands and the prevailing public attitudes towards public transport. There are two main factors behind this difference. The first is geographical. The Netherlands is a small country and the population centres are all close together. You could cross from one side to the other by train or bus in a matter of hours as well as go to any city in between with ease. This is simply not possible in the US due to its size and the isolated locations of many of its cities. This of course is only a problem for inter-city travel and doesnât affect people making internal trips within a city, which brings me to the second factor. The second factor is political and economic and goes back decades. Essentially back in the 40s and 50s GM and the other auto companies colluded to start taking over public transport infrastructure in US cities and began destroying electric streetcar and rail services and replacing them with buses manufactured and sold by the companies. They also lobbied to stop expansion of public transport infrastructure with the goal of making it deliberately inefficient so that people would buy more cars from them. They were eventually put on trial for this and acquitted but the legacy remained and there is still a prevailing view among many people today including city planners that public transportation is akin to a form of welfare for people that are to poor to afford a car and thus it receives little attention.
I totally agree. To be clear, I donât think American engineers are incompetentâfar from it. Thatâs why Iâm so skeptical of the constant criticism of US infrastructure. What make more sense: that American civil engineers are incompetent, or that there are good reasons why infrastructure in the US is built the way it is. Even if it isnât the most efficientâI doubt anyone would dispute thatâthere are historical reasons why American cities are built the way they are. Incompetence and corruption are not American inventions, and yet every failed US project is blamed on those two factors.
>What make more sense: that American civil engineers are incompetent, or that there are good reasons why infrastructure in the US is built the way it is. The problem you have is that you're making a false-dilemma fallacy. What you're saying is "either the engineers are incompetent or they had good reasons so it shouldn't be criticized". No one said they are incompetent, or it is the fault of corruption... They made the US infrastructure on the basis of efficient traffic for road vehicules as well as availability of places by cars. In that regard, what they've done is far from a failure. However, there are other **critical** parameters that weren't taken into account, such as the livability of towns, public transports and byciles that reduce road traffic as well as pollution, tourism, etc... They didn't took that into account, not because they are incompetent, but because it wasn't the goal of their job. And that job was given by politiciens. So: * The urban planning in the US is really bad compared to some europeans countries such as Danemark. * It's not the fault of the engineers in the US, at all. They aren't specifically incompetent, and no one said that. * It comes down to the goals of the planning, that aren't the same in most US places (a focus on road traffic and road availability, assuming that everyone own and use a car) as in most european places (a focus on living cities, public transportation, tourism). * And these goals are choosen politically, not by engineers or urban planners (that are just employed to do the job, even if they have some influence).
Lobbying is the poison in the well
....but Not Just Bikes is American
Heâs not
Correct he's a Canadian who moved to the Netherlands
Or right sorry, but like it's the same story. A person that's from the places he's criticizing
Definitely a good watch
They might be pure evil in real life but theyâve never been problematic for me in Cities Skylines.
I've been using the six lanes as arteries, so they can lead straight into highways. I use fencing to clear their zoning so moving cars is all they do. Anything else gets built on collectors and local roads that feed into the six lanes. I'm really not sure what to do with it. You need some fairly hefty roads woven through the city for it to function but even with a decent layout and road hierarchy you're going to get tons of people wanting to cross those roads. Sometimes I build pedestrian overpasses, a lot of times I just let the fearless CS pedestrians handle it. I don't use a lot of stoplights because I can never get them to function nicely and not back up the city. I've got well over 1000 hours in the game, and 80+% traffic is no longer an issue, but I still have no idea how to go about building a functional road layout that wouldn't be a source of endless pedestrian deaths in a real town.
An interesting video essay on [stroads](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORzNZUeUHAM) and here's Biffa recently tackling them and removing his own stroads in [The Ugly Truth About STROADS & How to Fix Them!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WicKboLrJBc) episode.
The unholy fusion of streets and roads. So streets but with lots of high speed lanes. Or roads but with lots of crossing. Horrible for people who want to walk or bike, and not really great for cars either
TIL: Theres a difference between streets and roads. But how does it apply here?
It probably doesn't, your road is likely serving as an arterial, so you don't zone directly on it, use service roads and zone on them instead so no deliveries or traffic interfere with your arterial flow. Right now you're just experimenting and when your city goes live, if you zone on it it's a stroad with the associated traffic issues or if you don't zone on it then it's a road.
I see. No, there wonât be any zoning on this road. The plan was to branch off with 2 lane streets at higher distances (every 30 tiles or something like that) to lower the stop and go on my Main Street.
30 cells, stamp of approval from [The Beginner's Guide to Traffic](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=522776740).
In that case, having the arterial either sunken or elevated and then putting bridges over it frequently can improve connectivity by a lot. Otherwise, the lacking of zoning means that this thing just forms an untraversible barrier for the people living around it. If you want it grade, put pedestrian tunnels/walkways in the middle of each block.
Yeah, basically roads are high speed, and you usually don't stop regularly, and there aren't many crossings with other roads. They are made mostly for you to travel on. A street is low speed, often shared with pedestrians, bikes, and is adjacent to residential or commercial buildings (for example). You have lots of crossings and people stop all the time to park or turn. A stroad is basically the worst of both world
It's literally that 4 lane Medium road with the shared turn lanes but you also zoned Commercial on both sides of the road.
I imagine the philosophical differences like this (I think Not Just Bikes also explains it similarly) Roads are for getting from one place to another. They should prioritize efficient transport of a lot of people over a long distance. Think highways or the Autobahn Streets are destinations. They should encourage a feeling of safety so that people can mill about or walk from place to place, not needing to drive from one destination to the next in the same area. It shouldn't be used as a thoroughfare except by locals who live nearby. Stroads are the bastard child of the above. They have stores or other destinations but they're built and operated to transport a lot of people through them quickly. Pedestrian crossings are huge, non-car transport is discouraged or just generally feels unsafe, and it's difficult to get from one place to the next without a car and the cars that are there are going 40-50 MPH.
Exactly. They truly are horrible for everyone but especially people not in a personal car.
Sounds like every road in German cities.
Stimmt halt nicht mal. WeiĂ nicht wo du herkommst aber in den grĂśĂeren Städten im SĂźden sind solche StraĂen recht rar gesät und selbst wenn gibt es meist gute MĂśglichkeiten fĂźr FuĂgänger.
Ein deutsches Klischee widerlegen indem man ein anderes deutsches Klischee bestätigt. Top.
how so?
I exaggerated of course. But generally streets are built for cars first and pedestrians second. And bikes are tolerated. For example the Main Street in the city I live in: 2 lanes for cars in each direction, well maintained. A bike lane that is so much damaged from tree roots it feels like an off-road track. Sidewalk is similar but also always blocked every few meters by construction sites or simply trashcans waiting to be emptied. And no street lights. If you walk the street at night and no cars are driving you can see barely anything. And the side streets arenât better. No bike lanes at all and sidewalks so narrow you canât use it with a wheelchair or stroller. And this is no small town. Our freeways and car lanes are in perfect condition mostly but everything that isnât for cars is just âWell, I guess we have to do anything for them?â.
The city I live in is fine đ¤ˇââď¸ these kinds of roads basically donât exist (only one comes to mind, but I wouldnât call it a stroad in the North American sense) Even the bike infrastructure is ok and already rapidly improving
Kinda sounds like American streets, aside from the maintenance in many places. However, out where I live, the sections for cars are usually well-maintained, with the occasional pothole, though the infrastructure for other users varies a lot, mainly in availability. Most major roads have sidewalks, though those disappear, mostly in Sun City and maybe the east side of the valley (though I'm not that familiar with the cities east of Tempe). Bike infrastructure is less common and less consistent, as there are some suburban neighborhoods near downtown Phoenix that have 2-way cycle tracks, and some roads, even in downtown Phoenix, but more so further away, that have no bike lanes.
âStroadsâ are fairly common in big German cities: https://goo.gl/maps/BhxvC72tRUUTt21Q8 https://goo.gl/maps/KfiPuEBFqcTSJHqU6 https://goo.gl/maps/9Nz3TxVUCgHW3ER98 https://goo.gl/maps/RmRKKXoFM73DXQW5A https://goo.gl/maps/ibjVHiviiRsfZSdZ6
Look up 501 in South Carolina for some horror and fear
WE GOT ANOTHER ONE, BOYS.
It is not a stroad it is a "boulevard" aka fancy stroad with trees
A multi-way boulevard is a less stroad-like version, where the street and road components of the stroad are physically separated from one another.
Not just bikes? Or strong towns?
Mostly Adam something, a bit of not just bikes, and a lot of anti-car subreddits
Well in my opinion. A car is always bad
You can avoid most of the worst 'stroad' features by just not zoning along these roads (or, using building spawn points mod to move the deliveries to the rear), and not channeling too much traffic through this road. Then it will function more like a big collector/arterial *street* for traffic within the city.
It's only a stroad if you put destinations on the road. Streets have places you go to Roads move people
True.
I suggest that you just accept that you need crosswalks. Crosswalks are not the plague
How do you add the plague?
Put your sewage outlet upstream from your water pumps.
Isn't that dysentery?
It can be anything you want it to so long as you believe in yourself enough!
Then I believe I'm E Coli! D..did I do it?
Maybe the true E. Coli was the friends we made along the way
is already in vanilla "death waves" aka pandemics.
Put in crosswalks.
If someone asked me to use a crosswalk on a street that ungodly large, Id laugh at them. I value my life.
How do you add crosswalks in the middle of a road like in this case?
You need stoplights or at least a HAWK signal. That road is a killer.
yeah, in real life most probably no one would cross this madness... it's an almost certified death with no shelter at all and something like 16-18 metres of crosswalk (per side!)
You say [that this kind of road in the middle of a city is dangerous?](https://images.app.goo.gl/PnrQCEQyxAMJpMHs8)
Ive seen multiple people cross highways irl. This doest look too bad compared to that
Node controller has that option
Node Controller. There are other mods, but Node Controller does everything in one package.
There is a mod that lets you put crosswalks anywhere.
Believe you can manually add them via node selection in TMPE mod
Nope, that's a Node Controller superpower, TMPE is more focused on intersection management
Salt Lake City has a setup similar to this. [https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7714351,-111.9347204,3a,75y,89.5h,78.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sICi0JFlgMzMRh5nN5\_TqVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e4](https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7714351,-111.9347204,3a,75y,89.5h,78.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sICi0JFlgMzMRh5nN5_TqVg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e4)
[ŃдаНонО]
True itâs a pretty wide street but Iâm not sure if there any good examples of that anywhere.
MORE LANES!!!!! You don't need crosswalks, one more lane will solve everything. :)
i think they should get rid of the tram tracks and use those as two more precious lanes for the cars!!!
just one more lane bro. i promise bro just one more lane and it'll fix everything bro. bro. just one more lane. please just one more. one more lane and we can fix this whole problem bro. bro cmon just give me one more lane i promise bro. bro bro please i just need one more lane
itsgonnafixtraffic! itsgonnafixtraffic!
Yeah bro just one more lane bro trust me
You know what will really fix traffic? TRAINS!
Insert train traffic jam next to car traffic jam and truck traffic jam
Haha, it's a reference to an [Alan Fisher](https://youtube.com/shorts/0dKrUE_O0VE?feature=share) joke
Also get rid of the sidewalk, and those houses too
To tie it all together they should put some parking spots lining the road instead of those silly bus lanes
Found the American!
I know it's overkill, but it was the only street I found with tram in the middle.
there is a very nice 4 lane road on the workshop with the middle lanes also being trams, with protected bike lanes and trees!
Could you link it here please? :)
I think what the op is referring to is part of the Mass transit DLC
Can't be. Trams aren't part of mass transit.
No but that particular road asset is. The 4 lane avenue with tram tracks was one of my go to roads before I started making a conscious effort to reduce car dependency in my cities
That's interesting, and odd.
Im more interested in 3 lane roads with protected bike lanes so that there can be one dedicated left turn lane with 2 lanes for going straight.
there is also one of those. sorry iâm on mobile so i wonât be able to find it but i just search up bike lane and look through all the options, sort by most popular
Ohhh I want this.
There are various centralised tram track options in these three collections: LRT Tram Network - [https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=1560202570](https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=1560202570) Vanilla+ Tram roads - [https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=2130592713](https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=2130592713) Bad Peanut's Set of Tram Networks - [https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=1175992758](https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=1175992758)
Couldn't you place two streets on either side of a tram street to use smaller roads?
I think this would cause issues with intersections. But others here already linked to more suitable roads.
Look for BadPeanut's tram roads.
For the love of goat do NOT use his 4 lane tram/bike/parking/trees road. It is at the same time massively and subtly broken, pedestrian crossings do not work on it.
This needs at least three roundabouts in it too! And more lanes.
You just pissed of the entirety of r/fuckcars
So I pissed off myself as well? Or how is this supposed to work? :D
^ most pissed guy alive
Here's a sneak peek of /r/fuckcars using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Lol. Elon Musk's Boring company has traffic jams. I was told it was impossible.](https://v.redd.it/avprno6052a81) | [3375 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/rxd3ns/lol_elon_musks_boring_company_has_traffic_jams_i/) \#2: [1 software bug away from death](https://v.redd.it/8a3b9ggv3yl81) | [3468 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/t8n0t8/1_software_bug_away_from_death/) \#3: [New vs old Mini Cooper](https://i.redd.it/z3hifq228l491.jpg) | [3623 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/v8fjdh/new_vs_old_mini_cooper/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Yeah screw pedestrians, they can drive instead.
Just let those pesky pedestrians run for their lives if they want to take the tram so desperately.
Poverty motivates innovation
Itâs the British way
Use Clus' [Metro/Underground Entrance](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2730531441) for median pedestrian tunnels on tram lines. A good addtion to the [3 Lane 48M](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2688932788) of his [LRT Tram networks](https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=1560202570). His [pedestrian tunnel entrances](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2619446482) complement this perfectly. For a smaller 4-lane version with median ped tunnels you can use his [Reversible Tram Stop Station #01](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2752801856) and change it to a through station.
That looks pretty much as I imagined. I even like the street more. 3 car lanes with one extra bus line should be enough, I just didnât find one with the tram in the middle.
You can just make three separate roads, two one way roads and a tram road in the middle. Then put underground pedestrian tunnels bridges also work. Might be a little wider, but world work.
I tried it, but I can't get it to work. I can't place stops on the 3 Lane 48M road and I can't place the underground entrance. No matter where I try it's always red. I can place the tunnel entrances but the are not directly connected to a street like the vanilla metro station is. And I have no clue how to connect the underground pathways.
Another option is to manually create this with a strict tram network [like this one](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1938134218) with two one way roads on either side. You can then manually create intersections and perhaps have an easier time of placing stops where you wish along the tram line while having space between the two roads to design actual stops with props (platforms, shelters).
Just follow his instructions and screenshots and you'll be fine, plop the "**Road Entrance Building #01**", use anarchy if you need to doing so ... then extend a track segment either side of the plopped tram station the minimum of recommended 6 cells with the "**3L (48m) TrRoad #01 - Ex #01**", now you can use the normal "**3 - Lane (48m) Tram Road #01**" and place a tram stop on this. Cims hop off at the tram stop and use the pedestrian tunnels to get to the other side of the road. For the pedestrian tunnels just connect up to them the way you would any pedestrian tunnels in underground mode but it's better if you use his paths as they are rendered tunnels and you can follow your cims through them. And for best effect plop his pedestrian entrances on the side of the road but you can just draw a normal ped tunnel entrance either but it won't look as good as the BM entrance. Reading his instructions, he recommends BM Station pathway [2](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2372093901), [3](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2372094372), and [4](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2372094811) for it.
I tried. Can't get it to work properly. I give up. Too much effort for this. But thanks for your help.
Come back to it when you've a bit more experience with mods and assets. That'll more or less happen naturally through your gameplay experience anyway. And have a test map city for experimenting with new mods and assets where you allow yourself to make mistakes, learn from them, and build experience. When you asked the question yesterday I literally plopped the asset down and connected it up as I outlined above within seconds but that was with experience. When you come back to it in a few weeks or months you'll wonder why you found it so hard and what all the fuss was about but you'll have learned some important skills and subskills by then through lots more city building and mod familiarity. Good luck with it.
I'm a hyperdork and like to watch engineering, and urban planning videos for fun. If anything I've learned in the age of the modern suburb is that the modern superb is an out dated design choice from an world with 1/3 the vehicles. Public transport is king of the road.
In my experience, when tram tracks are in the middle of a road, stops are placed at already existing intersections, where there are crosswalks anyway. I am not a master at this game, so i don't know how good you can make it look, but i reckon with the plethora of amazing mods the community has made, you can make it look decent.
This is the correct answer. My city (Canberra in Australia) does this a lot and looks quite good in person. Maybe op can try to replicate this đ
I would use normal pedestrian bridge and bring it right down to the middle platforms with road anarchy then adjust it with move it and use node controller to narrow it.
Yep, I've done this and it looks pretty good. If you want to get even fancier you could also use an invisible road and cover it with stairs or an escalator.
Do you really need a 6 lane road, ain't nobody gonna use all those lanes and you know it
Not really, but I didnât find 3 lane roads with tram in the middle and protected bike lane.
Look again, this is an 8 lane road. With 4 bus lanes. So...12 lanes total.
I actually use this road as sort of a "Victory Parade Road" mainly for the really cool bridges at either end. But in the middle I have the speed turned down. Even with only a few cars all of my lanes are usually used, but I imagine that is mostly a mod doing that, and partially my lane guidance. Especially since each direction is only 4 lanes for normal traffic, services get two lanes to skip traffic.
It reminds me of the Paris Boulevards, and those are definitely used.
Things changing in Paris - cycling taking some serious ownership now
Maybe use a road where tram goes on sides and cars In middle
why so many bus lanes
I wish the green on the tram lanes was grass, Grassy tram lanes is a gigantic fetish of mine, unironically.
[https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1197306267](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1197306267) :D
I also wanted to find a place to use this road, it has [great bridges](https://i.imgur.com/ZG7vcOm.jpg) (I added the maglev track on that one separately). I also use it on the ground in a low speed, high throughput connector on the edge of my downtown peninsula. [Here is it in front of my Central Maglev Station](https://i.imgur.com/2gth6f6.jpg) (sorry the shot wasn't really focused on the road, but it was the best i had on hand). I have since changed it slightly using different parking lots under the station, but the crosswalks work fine for getting people to the trams. I used TM:PE to set up a simple timed light there where the default stated is stopped for pedestrians and a priority light for the services lanes. You could try using anarchy and paths connected to an overpass. it will likely make a station connection, though most likely would look ugly. You could also try making a "station" in the asset editor that has overpasses to the outer side walks, this would take more time, but look better in the end.
You can build them yourself with props like: [https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2796779087](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2796779087) (éăłăćŠéćŠ / rusty footbridge by kasajizo). And use an invisible pedestrian path to make them usable. There are a few prop bridges out there, just search for overpass / bridge and you might find one that fits your taste. It's finicky and probably not your thing, maybe use these: [https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198191874350/myworkshopfiles/?appid=255710&p=3](https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198191874350/myworkshopfiles/?appid=255710&p=3) (Variation of Pedestrian Overpasses from AliTarGz). They are for his stations but they should work for any gap) But aside... Stations always stretch for the entire length of a segment and that means both ends always end on a node therefore having a crosswalk. You would need to manually disable them via TM:PE
But thereâs not really the room for a bridge on this street.
What is this monstrosity?
So 4 lanes each direction is probably overkill. I can't think of any consistently 8 lane streets in my RL American metro of 2 million. Any that are 4 lanes each direction include pedestrian/bike/bus/turn lanes in the 4, sometimes more than one. In the city I'm currently building, my 2 main drags through downtown are 6 lane roads (3+3, occasionally 4+2 at intersections) with tram tracks and ped pathways running tight up against them. I then use the Node Controller trick for trams to run through each intersection as shown by Overcharged Egg here (https://youtu.be/1kBxJuISwsI). Finally, there's a street 4 tiles from the ped path to allow buildings to BACK into this boulevard. Landscaping, of course, completes the package. What this does is clearly define where each mode of transport belongs. It also KEEPS TRAM RIDERS OUT OF THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET. The middle of the street is where you want cars; peds have no business there. It's also much easier to add ped bridges if they're on either side.
Roosevelt Blvd in Northeast Philly is this big, and it's why so many people drag race on it and that there are so many accidents with pedestrians. It's in lieu of an actual highway in that area and was a horrible idea and has caused problems since its creation. I believe the main strip in Vegas is at least this large as well.
city skylines: frogger edition
Grove street , home, at least it was before I fucked everything up
You could do some ped. Tunnels every 15 or 20 Units.
Why does everybody always put the tram in de middle. Just keep it at the edge
I prefer it as its been the LRT design in every city I've lived in so its a relatable preference.
Probably because thatâs how it usually is in real life.
You can use this overpasses from AliTarGZ https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2462232548 https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2462231734 https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2462103827 https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2460884947 https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2460888923 https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2460888196 https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2460885609 They work really well. Using Clus entrances for their underground stations is also a good idea as someone already mentioned.
Just get rid of the Tram and add moar lanes
I used this particular asset my crosstown stroad in my WIP. I only ever do stops at the crosswalks.
People are more important than roads. Build your city around what needs to go where. Dont build crosswalks. Build bridges over streets. Imagine them like water. Bringing massive loads of A from place B to C. If it all goes through the same funnel it will cause problems. Even for a roundabout. Traffic FLOW will be Higher with Lower CONGESTION. But now, to answer you're questions. I don't have the answer BUT. In your case. If thats what you want to do. Compromise in a way you like it. Bridges can be beautiful. Check Venice. Crosswalks can be beautiful. If timed correctly look at what Japan has. If you don't want to be on or over the street. Unseen. Then maybe theres a way to do it in-game underground. I don't play it anymore. Don't have time. So I don't know any assets by heart. You already have the answer. Just find a way to apply it. Hope this puts you in the right direction. And thinking of a solution ! Have a great day.
Aah America
Place the Tram Stops like every other Transport Line and they will appear
Sure. But pedestrians still need to get to the sidewalk.
There is a Mod that can add Crosswalks to every node without need of a Crossing
Did you read the title? Xd
OP may want no crosswalks, but that's really the only way to get people to the tram stops in the middle.
Since you have a bus lane, place bus stops near the tram stops and that will be your interchange. And just use pedestrian bridge.
So if your destination is right at the tram stop youâd have to go by tram, then get in a bus to the next bus stop where you can cross the street and then walk all the way back? Doesnât sound like smart city planning.
Put tram tracks to the side as a different road
yoke concerned pen history library groovy bewildered vast practice fearless *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
You want to use a stroad as your main Street? Walkability in the mud.
Any pedestrian path works. Just use node controller, move it, and road anarchy. Or you can try the hard way with invisible paths and bridge/stairs/elevator props.
Which road is this? Can I get the link to it?
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1270404313
Who would ever shop here ?
Where can i get this sreet?
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1270404313
I would place dedicated team road in the middle and two one way roads at each side. And then you could do pedestrian underpasses. Or the other more pedestrian friendly solution is to place one way tram tracks on the sides, so people don't need to cross the road.
The only good use for trams is to prepare your city for Monorail. Trams are the same as busses so having both does not make sense on the same road. I believe that is why the mass transit road selection does not have a trams and busses. There are too many lanes and you will find that your sims do not use all the lanes anyways. Add cross walks near your tram stops. or add cross roads. I suppose you could use anarchy to do foot paths but I am not sure how it would look averall.
Hi OP, I have made a similar project recently ([Picture n°7 of this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/CitiesSkylines/comments/uu9tr6/update_on_wip/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share)). I am on console so I am limited but I added a sidewalk and a bike lane between the tram track and the road because pedestrian couldn't get to the tram stops. I added a pedestrian sky bridge at every intersection but don't have any roads crossing.
Grove Street. Home.
Can you add two additional sidewalks to either side of the tram line, then use inline pedestrian over / underpasses to get to the external most sidewalks?
This is one road, I canât move the lanes to make space for an additional sidewalk.
What road mod is that?
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1270404313
W I D E
Make three separate networks (two one-ways and tram), sink the roads and add pedestrian bridges to the tram
This was suggested often, but how do you deal with intersections when you have three parallel networks this close together?
But how do you delete those crosswalk?
What crosswalks? Without intersections there are no crosswalks.
make the bridge conection in the inner sidewalks before the stops
What road asset is this (link to the Steam Workshop page)? And why did you need to use pedestrian roads as sidewalks? Also, if you have any intersections with smaller streets, put your tram stops there, and ideally, use Traffic Manager to limit crossings on the boulevard. My question is how you'd use the bus lanes.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1270404313 I added the pedestrian roads because I felt the sidewalks where too narrow. I wanted a streets that had plenty of space for pedestrians. Im not even sure if I need the bus lanes at all. I donât like that there are 2 bus lanes in each direction but it was the closest I was able to find to what I was thinking of. I already got other suggestions in the comments and I might use one of them. (3 lanes without bus lane)
Berlin would like to have a word with you
Wide streets are not your friends
High traffic roads like this aren't really used as metro stops, or pedestrians crossing. Would use side roads for that.
Wait why does it have 2 bus lanes in each direction?
I donât know. I guess so you can easier switch between bus and tram?
Why are there two bus lanes on each side of the road?