Archive for October, 2010

It took me a long time to, er, come around to the logic and efficacy (at least in safety terms) of the Jersey Jughandle, but following a prompt from Anthony Townsend, do any NJ DOT readers or likewise know how the Garden State came to be the leader in this somewhat rare infrastructural form? Taking a stab I’d say it had something to do with the state’s density and preponderance of highways, but can anyone elucidate us beyond that; e.g., the name of the inventor, etc.

Via a discussion at the NRDC Switchboard about a school in Orange County that does not allow students on foot, I was struck by the school’s amazing “Strike Team” document, pictured above, covering the ins-and-outs of the school drop-off.

Is it just me or does this strike you as a sign of a system that is severely out of balance? (and I’m not talking about a “design” problem)

Dusting off an old feature here, we look at NYC’s new campaign to remind drivers of one the city’s biggest secrets: It’s 30 mph citywide limit.

I was essentially asked this question recently in reference to a tragic case of a jogger killed by a cyclist in Dallas.

Based on some nastiness I’ve experienced on the Brooklyn Bridge, along the Hudson River — and even hearing stories about how people’s enthusiasm for the NYC DOT’s “Summer Streets” program was dampened by inappropriate speed choice of cyclists through the event — I myself have had doubts over this, and I’m wondering what experiences people have had around the country, what remedies they’ve seen, etc. How’s the sharing going on the new Walkway over the Hudson going, for example?

I know people will answer courtesy, common sense, etc. (as well as not listening to loud music w/ear buds while cycling/running), but are there engineering/design strategies that have been used, particularly at crossings and the like? Should fast-moving cyclists (I don’t know the velocity involved in Dallas) simply stick to the road, even when it’s a less than desirable situation?

This is not to say that the real source of pedestrian or cyclist danger is on multi-use paths, and some of the failings of multi-use paths is that they’re simply too small — the majority of room having been given over to the car. But just wondering about ideas.

Reader John reports of a swirling political controversy in Winnipeg: Roundabouts. The details are here (note the archaic phrasing of ‘traffic circles’). Somehow the device that has helped reduce crash rates from Alsace to Australia is, in Winnipeg, causing “chaos.”

I’ve said it before: If a driver cannot handle negotiating clearly labeled rights of way at simple, small intersections at low speed, why are we actually giving them the right to be maneuvering heavy, dangerous vehicles on public streets crowded with other cars, pedestrians, cyclists, etc etc? (and not having the sense to stop for a pedestrian about to cross in an intersection, as the video shows, is not down to the design but to the driver).

“It’s a hazard,” one driver said of the roundabouts. I’m glad he thinks that! Because intersections are hazardous locations! But what proceeded them — four-way stop-sign controlled intersections — are hardly a panacea, and indeed linked to far more fatal crashes than roundabouts.

[UPDATE: Good comments from engineers and others below articulating the on-the-ground realities in Winnipeg, which, I might add, I've not been to; I'd be further interested to know the difference between Winnipeg's treatments and that of Seattle — which the Winnipeg engineers say they've based their design on and which seem to not have generated much controversy, and indeed seem to be favored by residents]

Reading an enthusiastic account of bicycling in New York City from this 1879 (!) article from the New York Times, I was curious about the reference to the sort of wonder skate referred to as a possible rival to the personal rapid transit offered by the bike. It almost sounds like a proto-roller blade. Anyone know what this is, have any references, etc.?

The parking meter turns 75 years old this year, and I welcome the occasion in my latest Slate column. For such a seemingly mundane object, there’s a lot to say about it; and, alas, for space reasons, I could not go into things like the idea of using meters for charitable donations (see here for a recent example).

I was also unable to use an interesting quote from none other than Robert Moses, writing in the New York Times in 1951 (when, almost unbelievably, meters had yet to reach the shores of Manhattan), about the political fortitude required to end (don’t tell Lew Fidler) what had been seen as an inalienable right — e.g., “free” parking:

“Sobs and howls will rise from the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker with customers to serve, the doctor who can always plead emergency, the store owner who caters to teh carriage trade, the man who came to dinner, the private garage operator who will welcome meters but not competition of offstreet public parking facilities, and the public official whose time is absolutely invaluable (including of course the present writer), not to speak of the lame, the halt and the aged, and loudest of all will be the cries of crusty curmudgeons against infamous regimentation, unbridled bureaucracy and invasion of the king’s highway.

Those who must ride this storm until the benefits are apparent must have the zeal of a Savonarola, the incorruptibility of Caesar’s wife and the hide and temper of a black rhinoceros. Even those attributes will not avail unless they have luck. The seal of the City Parking Authority, if it survives, should feature a rabbit’s foot rampant.”

Echoes here of the congestion pricing debate?

High-speed driver in Israel arrested via Facebook evidence.

I wonder if the statute of limitations has run out on Claude Lelouch, whose famous ride is below.

No time to comment on this as, coincidentally, I’m about to leave for the Netherlands, but Bern Grush sifts through the ashes.