the plague of speed humps

I was inspired by Gin's discussion thread about Humboldt Park traffic calming and thought I'd talk about speed humps in general.  I don't feel that speed humps are a very good traffic calming solution overall, because so many drivers speed up between the humps to make up for the time they lost by slowing for the humps.  I often see more road rage behavior in these locations compared to the pre-speed hump configuration.  I've seen this kind of behavior many, many times on Glenwood through Edgewater.

 

If we're going to have traffic calming, shouldn't it be done in such a way to make the street *more* desirable to cyclists instead of a literal pain in the butt?  Some formerly good bike streets have become a lot less pleasant to ride over the last several years due to the proliferation of speed humps.  On the north side, Glenwood and many east-west side streets in Uptown and Edgewater are good examples of this.  From Logan Square heading west, Wrightwood used to be a good route to Montclare, Galewood and Oak Park, until it was marred by a ridiculous number of tall speed humps (often 2-3 per block), turning into a torture-fest.  We don't need to ruin good bike routes.  In some areas, we don't have enough good routes to begin with, especially going west to Oak Park.

 

One of the ideas suggested in that discussion was having a center cut through the speed hump to allow bike passage, as is done in some alleys.  If we have cut-throughs for bikes, this gives bikes an advantage and can incentivize bike use in locations like this.  Even without a full bike boulevard implementation, this change could turn a lot of currently annoying streets into better bike routes.

 

What do you think?

Views: 396

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on May 25, 2011 at 5:07am

"Traffic calming" is one of the most annoying and exasperating examples of fuzzy Peter Pan thinking gone amok. 

 

Basically it is the theory that people are driving too fast because the road is too open and clear.  The solution to having an open and clear road that seems too safe to drivers who therefore feel it is OK to drive faster than other people feel they should drive is to make it "less safe" by putting obsticals in the way, cutting down on visibility, adding excessive stop signs at every intersection and even in the middle of blocks, and pinching down the road width at spots to the bare minimum passible size.   They also employ strategies like speed bumps, huge eye-blocking planters in the middle of intersections, curbs and road paint markings that put curves and bends into a formerly straight road, and bushes and other visual obstructions to limit visibility.  These things DO slow down some drivers because they realize the road is LESS SAFE and have no choice but to navigate it at a slower speed.  

 

Unfortunately these are the same drivers who use their head when driving and aren't generally the problem with unsafe road use.  The unsafe drivers just bomb down these less-safe roads at the very same speed they did before, bouncing over the speed bumps with their SUV's that swallow them up without much drama, running through every stop sign without slowing, hopping curbs and carrening around the planters they can't see around without any consideration for unseen peds and bikers on the other side.  

 

Traffic calming doesn't calm the problem drivers, it just makes them more unsafe -especially to us bikers and peds. 

 

Not only that, but things like speed-bumps, mazes of dead-end roads that butt up against each other and make navigating residential streets without going the wrong way impossible or at least very inconvenient for us bikers, and other road obstructions actually make riding in the city harder for us.  They are not working for the problem drivers and making things worse.

 

As for center-cuts in speed bumps -that's where all the glass and nasty-sharp road debris ends up.  Using them is a good way to get a flat if not a sliced and ruined tire not matter how thick a tire-liner you are using. 

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on May 25, 2011 at 5:29am

Traffic calming doesn't calm the problem drivers, it just makes them more unsafe -especially to us bikers and peds.

 

That's been my experience all too often.

 

...things like speed-bumps, mazes of dead-end roads that butt up against each other and make navigating residential streets without going the wrong way impossible or at least very inconvenient for us bikers, and other road obstructions actually make riding in the city harder for us.  They are not working for the problem drivers and making things worse.

 

One example: a section of my neighborhood has a lot of cul de sacs where side streets meet main streets, plus some diagonal traffic diverters.  It turns this section of the neighborhood into a mostly closed maze, which is difficult to navigate for those who aren't familiar with it.  It puts nearly all the traffic burden on those few streets with stoplights at the main streets.  Most of the side streets in this area are very quiet because the streets don't go through.  It's nice for little kids and easy for cyclists, which is certainly positive.  The downside is that there are fewer people out and about to observe criminals and be a deterrent to them, making the area more vulnerable to problems like home burglary.

 

As for center-cuts in speed bumps -that's where all the glass and nasty-sharp road debris ends up.  Using them is a good way to get a flat if not a sliced and ruined tire not matter how thick a tire-liner you are using.

 

Yes, that can be a problem in some places, but my Schwalbe Marathons get through intact.

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on May 25, 2011 at 5:43am

Last summer when they repaved the side access roads on either side of Logan Blvd I was very happy at how smooth and sweet of a ride they were.  I'm often using Logan to get over to the shops over on Elston and further East on Clyborn (I'm nuts for Menards!)   I wish Logan went all the way across the river with a bike bridge and hooked up with Wrightwood  as both the Diversey and Fullerton bridges are poor bike routes and Damon is a big detour zig-zag -but wishes and beggars and all that...

 

Anyhow I was very disappointed when they put a massive speed hump in front of the church there at the far East end of Logan on the Eastbound side.   It turned a smooth (but short) bicycle-heaven route into the start of bicycle heck.  I don't really feel it is necessary to get on Logan proper and play with the cars when there is there is this perfectly flat and unused side road (what do they call this kind of road anyhow?) on each side of the busy boulevard that is much safer and often car-free most times of the day.  

 

Installing these speed bumps is just going to convince more of us to get out on the main road and (often) block/slow a traffic lane.    Cars are nuts on Logan as it is and going under the bridge there is taking your life and putting it in the hands of idiots who aren't paying attention behind you. (I sidewalk that portion of the road because I'm a chicken and don't want to be squashed up against that Armco barrior when coming West and instead ride by the skate/bike park on the perfectly wide concrete above the curb back to the boulevard side road.)

Permalink Reply by Zomboogz on May 25, 2011 at 6:23am

They recently installed some wide speed humps in my neighborhood (South Shore). They were installed because a child was hit by a speeding motorist. I've lived in this area my whole life and in that time I have seen some pretty wicked accidents caused by distracted, reckless driving. As for biking, they aren’t that big of a deal because they are the wide and long versions as opposed to the short and sharp ones. They seem to work to some degree but I do witness a bit of what you all are describing. Cars often speed up in-between humps but the distance in between is relatively short. I guess I’m torn… I would have to do some research looking into the number of accidents pre and post.

Oh and the kids love em’ because they can pop wheelies on their BMX’s off of the hump instead of some shoddy wood creation.

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on May 25, 2011 at 6:43am

At least the kids are having some fun with 'em.

 

The ones I mentioned on Wrightwood are also fairly close together.


Zomboogz said:

They recently installed some wide speed humps in my neighborhood (South Shore). They were installed because a child was hit by a speeding motorist. I've lived in this area my whole life and in that time I have seen some pretty wicked accidents caused by distracted, reckless driving. As for biking, they aren’t that big of a deal because they are the wide and long versions as opposed to the short and sharp ones. They seem to work to some degree but I do witness a bit of what you all are describing. Cars often speed up in-between humps but the distance in between is relatively short. I guess I’m torn… I would have to do some research looking into the number of accidents pre and post.

Oh and the kids love em’ because they can pop wheelies on their BMX’s off of the hump instead of some shoddy wood creation.

Permalink Reply by Zomboogz on May 25, 2011 at 7:18am
Yeh... Those kids are good.

Anne Alt said:

At least the kids are having some fun with 'em.

 

The ones I mentioned on Wrightwood are also fairly close together.

 

Permalink Reply by Adam "Cezar" Jenkins on May 25, 2011 at 7:23am
Permalink Reply by lauren sailor on May 25, 2011 at 7:46am
i call them "service roads." apparently frontage road is a thing as well.

James Baum said:

 there is this perfectly flat and unused side road (what do they call this kind of road anyhow?) on each side of the busy boulevard that is much safer and often car-free most times of the day.  

 

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on May 25, 2011 at 7:56am

I'm not arguing about overall reduction in speed.  That is a good effect.  However, these studies gloss over the fine details, such as drivers speeding up in between the humps, negative effects on cyclists, negative effects on parking behavior, localized street flooding if speed humps are poorly placed, snow plows taking chunks out of the edges of humps (creating vertical edges - even WORSE for cyclists), etc.  If you look at big picture statistics, they may look good, but the fine details aren't so great.

 

Sorry, still not interested in drinking the speed hump kool aid. 


Adam "Cezar" Jenkins said:

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on May 25, 2011 at 8:09am

I'll give you an example from Beverly.  There are speed humps along a few blocks of Leavitt, one of the few residential streets that goes through the entire neighborhood and has stop lights or 4-way stops at all intersections with major streets.  The street has speed humps around Sutherland School between 99th & 103rd.

 

Because it's a through street, it does get a higher traffic volume than nearby parallel streets.  Speed humps have been there several years, so they've been severely chewed up by the snow plows.  On some of those humps, it's difficult to find a spot that still offers a sloped entry point instead of a few inches of vertical surface, so it's like riding your bike over a low curb, then going over the hump.  It's a real joy with a bike trailer loaded with groceries.  Pavement is generally lousy, offering supplemental speed control in the form of potholes.

 

Humps have been installed on some narrower one-way streets such as Wood (99th to 95th)  where there is a gap between the edge of the hump and the curb - wide enough to allow cyclists to pass on that no-parking side of the street.  Between lower hump height and gaps by the curb, this is a less odious, more functional solution.  It doesn't make me like the humps any better.  They're just a little easier to tolerate in this form.

 

On most of the streets where I've been speed humps installed, there is parking on both sides of the street, so there is no opportunity to take advantage of such gaps, even if they exist.

Permalink Reply by Becca on May 25, 2011 at 10:16am
Speed bumps actually make your street less safe, regardless of if you're on a bike.  Cars can get over speed bumps ok, but emergency vehicles like ambulances and fire trucks have to come to almost a complete stop to navigate them.  So if you live on a street that has speed bumps and have a heart attack, the ambulance can't respond as quickly.  All this to *maybe* keep someone from being hit by a car. 
Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on May 25, 2011 at 10:33am

I can tell you from experience riding in an ambulance that bumps and potholes can make an already stressful ride excruciating to the patient, especially if that person is on a backboard and in a c-collar.

 

It seems that most traffic calming methods have the unfortunate side effect of slowing emergency response.

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service