Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on August 29, 2012 at 12:06am

+1

I've got a chrome-plated heart.  Does that count?

John Greenfield said:

By the way, the Portland, OR, transportation department classifies potential cyclists into four categories, with the 18-28, diehard demographic labeled "Strong and Fearless." I propose that we coin a new term for this type of cyclist (and I once was one myself), calling them "Etheridges" because they are "Brave and Crazy." Get it?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tricolor on August 29, 2012 at 3:31am

I read Traffic when it came out, as I was always interested in the dynamics of traffic jams and all the ideas of flow dating from the fifties that have been effectively ignored either by budgets or reactive concepts such as traffic calming in general and the inconsistent speed bumps around the city in particular.  Enforcing a speed limit with occasional obstacles doesn't achieve the desired effect since traffic is speeding up and slowing down in between.  My commute along Winthrop and Kenmore most mornings does a good job illustrating the effect compared to a consistently winding mountain road.  Besides, if you want to take the approach that more dangerous is safer why not remove many of the four way stops?  There are a number of intersections in Wilmette with no signage and everyone approaching them has to take extra care.  I used to cut through those areas when I was working in Northbrook for a few years because the highways were no fun at all.

And it still doesn't address the look of the buildouts, which as I said are aesthetic disasters in every place around town I've seen them.  Widening the road does not mean widening the space for cars, but using that space to make dedicated bike lanes in each direction to get them farther away from cars.  And residents are going to be mad no matter what is done.  It may as well look good, move bikes away from traffic, and let traffic move.

Justin B Newman said:

I would encourage you to read Tom Vanderbilt's Traffic, Why We Drive the Way We Do. The meticulously researched book specifically addresses these issues.

-jbn

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on August 29, 2012 at 3:44am

Traffic is ALREADY moving -and way too fast.  

On average a pedestrian is killed in this city every week.   Traffic is moving too fast.   The roads are danger areas for anyone not in a metal, padded 4-wheeled cage. 

What this city needs is a 25MPH speed limit everywhere on all surface streets.  Signage is not enforcement, as we all know -so hire more traffic cops who aren't real cops (or trained to deal with violent criminals) who's job is to simply drive around with camera/video cars and pull over speeders and give them tickets.  Don't bother arming them, Don't bother training them to deal with violent folks at all.  Just have them record the violators and pull them over.  If they run then get dispatch to send a real cop.    

These guys would pay for themselves -but it wouldn't be about making revenue -that would be counter-productive.  Make the fines HURT, but not designed to raise money.  Otherwise it skews policy.  Eventually, after Chicago has made a reputation as a city that doesn't tolerate speeding, these folks would need to be cut back -and so would the revenue stream.   The idea is to make the roads SAFER.  And if that makes the roads less crowded with motor vehicles as drivers give up on the idiotic choice of DRIVING and instead join the mode change to other forms of transportation (mass-transit, bicycling, walking) it'll be even safer to ride and walk to the train station or all the way to work, and make the choice of living & working locations not so far apart  a no-brainer. 

But one thing we don't need or want is "letting the cars MOVE"  -it's just the opposite.   Slow them down.  Make them a bad choice, and let the folks who aren't moving around in planet-destroying heavy metal cages have a chance of surviving while using the surface streets for a change. 

Tricolor said:

 Widening the road does not mean widening the space for cars, but using that space to make dedicated bike lanes in each direction to get them farther away from cars.  And residents are going to be mad no matter what is done.  It may as well look good, move bikes away from traffic, and let traffic move.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Homebuilt on August 30, 2012 at 8:23am

Well... from what I see, it doesn't even address the part of Berteau that need it. It's impossible to go east between the river and Lincoln on a bike in that area w/o either riding on Montrose or Irving Park, or riding the wrong way. None of the streets consistently are legal for eastbound riding.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Duppie on August 30, 2012 at 8:39am

Love your way of rounding numbers! ;)

In 2010, the last year for which I found final numbers, 32 pedestrians were killed. 32/52 = .62 pedestrians killed per week. Not quite the same as "one per week".

James BlackHeron said:

[...]

On average a pedestrian is killed in this city every week.

[...]

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jared on August 30, 2012 at 9:05am

I think there has been an above average number recently.  But of course these events are not always evenly spaced.

Duppie said:

Love your way of rounding numbers! ;)

In 2010, the last year for which I found final numbers, 32 pedestrians were killed. 32/52 = .62 pedestrians killed per week. Not quite the same as "one per week".

James BlackHeron said:

[...]

On average a pedestrian is killed in this city every week.

[...]

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page