"Road Sharing" is not doing very well.
As thoroughly detailed in Peter D. Norton's book "Fighting Traffic," our public right-of-ways were systematically taken from all users and given to personal motorized automobiles over the last 100 years.
Taking it back by gently introducing bicycle traffic is only killing those without 2000 pounds of steel to protect them. Treating bicycles in law as 'equal vehicles' simply isn't so in reality. Try it! The experienced knowledge of vulnerability by cyclists and pedestrians accounts partially for what many motorists consider irresponsible behavior.
The Bicycle Lobby is a valuable resource in correcting the situation but I feel many of the participants are not fully educated about the history of road use. Like me they have grown up in a world of automobile primacy regarding physical design of the road and transportation psychology.
Bike lanes are still secondary to a maximum of car lanes and may even be limiting pedestrian lanes, (sidewalks) in some cases. Car access is simply not being challenged.
Meanwhile, we have a high percentage of tax payer-funded "limited access" highways; limited to motorized vehicle traffic.
I've made the previous point that, at least in my city 100% of our right-of-ways are accessible to motorized vehicles.
It seems a reasonable proposal to remove or reduce a percentage of automobile access from "shared roads" at least equal to the percentage of existing "limited access" roads.
Some may point out a very small number of bike paths (that double as walking lanes) in our parks, but as these routes serve only a recreational purpose they can't be considered as fair treatment.
(It's also very notable that on these bike paths, walkers are properly given the right-of-way over pedaled vehicles.)
What does this mean and how may it be accomplished?
Should we take the number of limited access highways as our measure, or their total length? What about their total used space, both length and width?
Difficult to precisely assess, but not so difficult to estimate.
Removal strategies could work well in areas of high population density.
Reduction strategies could work (and have worked) anywhere.
Reduce 3 car lanes in each direction to 2, (no shared surface should have more than 2 car lanes)
Reduce 2 car lanes in each direction to 1 with a center left turn lane
Percentages apply regarding the total width of the ROW: motorized vehicles should be given no greater share of the Right Of Way than any other form of transportation:
2 Car Lanes = 2 Bike Lanes = 2 Pedestrian Lanes, all of equal width.
I may need to walk a wide cart or pull it behind my bike, after all.
Shouldn't I have the space to do so?
Saturday, September 21, 2013
Thursday, June 13, 2013
New Road Funding Models - New Road Design Categories
How does the pedestrian and cycling community assert their space on our public rights of way?
Capacity engineering has held sway for at least the last 50 years. That capacity was strictly for automobiles, though somehow most roads still have a sidewalk. Many sidewalks seem to have taken on the appearance of emergency sidewalks, like you find along the freeway bridge; only to be used in case your car breaks down.
Simply waiting for increased cycling to inspire politicians has little effect outside of cities like mine who are desperate to attract the younger crowd. That itself is not currently working all that well, though it's still in its early stages.
I suggest some basic frameworks:
Funding and Design
Much has been written about the shrinking pie of maintenance funding for all of our public infrastructure.
Roads and bridges are crumbling, stormwater flooding from sprawl is increasing un-abated, electrical blackouts and brownouts are evidence of development beyond its capability to sustain.
In the case of roadways, I propose three major funding and design classes:
Limited Access Highways
All Access Roads
Restricted Access Roads
Limited Access Highways: The high speed highway system is to be funded predominantly with a MUCH higher federal gas tax. Increasing the fuel taxes will help encourage alternative fuel technology.
As, (hopefully,) alternative fuel vehicles take a larger proportion, a use fee, such as a endorsement on your registration could provide an increasing amount of funding as gas tax revenues dwindle. Of course, at some point if everything goes well, it will become apparent that not all of our freeways can be maintained.
Excellent. Enabling sprawl, many of them are senseless 'pork' projects anyhow.
If high speed track systems, (trains) were ever made part of this geography, the requisite federal construction funding could be added for their construction and maintenance.
All-Access Roads: There should be a mixture of an equal share of that gas tax and additional, more traditional funding sources to be handled by the US State following the current status quo.
All motorized and non-motorized vehicles are required to be given EQUAL access, meaning equal space allocation, along with (those deemed necessary) segregation structures, such as car lanes, bike lanes and sufficient sidewalks. Mass Transit included.
Motorized vehicles speed limited to 20-30 MPH.
Restricted access roads: To be funded at the US State and local level with a proportion of private support. These road designs would restrict motorized vehicles to emergency or law enforcement only, along with limited, permitted small delivery vehicles. All non-motorized vehicles allowed at slow speeds with pedestrians given priority.
Commercial and Recreational development within the ROW encouraged, (alfresco dining, etc.,) within design capacity. Developers share in the maintenance cost of this development by permit.
These roadways should be the least expensive to maintain with public funds.
Capacity engineering has held sway for at least the last 50 years. That capacity was strictly for automobiles, though somehow most roads still have a sidewalk. Many sidewalks seem to have taken on the appearance of emergency sidewalks, like you find along the freeway bridge; only to be used in case your car breaks down.
Simply waiting for increased cycling to inspire politicians has little effect outside of cities like mine who are desperate to attract the younger crowd. That itself is not currently working all that well, though it's still in its early stages.
I suggest some basic frameworks:
Funding and Design
Much has been written about the shrinking pie of maintenance funding for all of our public infrastructure.
Roads and bridges are crumbling, stormwater flooding from sprawl is increasing un-abated, electrical blackouts and brownouts are evidence of development beyond its capability to sustain.
In the case of roadways, I propose three major funding and design classes:
Limited Access Highways
All Access Roads
Restricted Access Roads
Limited Access Highways: The high speed highway system is to be funded predominantly with a MUCH higher federal gas tax. Increasing the fuel taxes will help encourage alternative fuel technology.
As, (hopefully,) alternative fuel vehicles take a larger proportion, a use fee, such as a endorsement on your registration could provide an increasing amount of funding as gas tax revenues dwindle. Of course, at some point if everything goes well, it will become apparent that not all of our freeways can be maintained.
Excellent. Enabling sprawl, many of them are senseless 'pork' projects anyhow.
If high speed track systems, (trains) were ever made part of this geography, the requisite federal construction funding could be added for their construction and maintenance.
All-Access Roads: There should be a mixture of an equal share of that gas tax and additional, more traditional funding sources to be handled by the US State following the current status quo.
All motorized and non-motorized vehicles are required to be given EQUAL access, meaning equal space allocation, along with (those deemed necessary) segregation structures, such as car lanes, bike lanes and sufficient sidewalks. Mass Transit included.
Motorized vehicles speed limited to 20-30 MPH.
Restricted access roads: To be funded at the US State and local level with a proportion of private support. These road designs would restrict motorized vehicles to emergency or law enforcement only, along with limited, permitted small delivery vehicles. All non-motorized vehicles allowed at slow speeds with pedestrians given priority.
Commercial and Recreational development within the ROW encouraged, (alfresco dining, etc.,) within design capacity. Developers share in the maintenance cost of this development by permit.
These roadways should be the least expensive to maintain with public funds.
Saturday, June 1, 2013
Pocket Neighborhoods
There must be several dozen places in Cleveland where this type of car-lite development can be done.
Indeed, within a couple miles of the destroyed urban core there once existed many of these patterns, the remains of which are still discernible and ignored or worse, refitted for automobiles.
Redevelopment in the city so far has been geared towards restaurants, bars, and other playgrounds which obviously succeed best when attracting suburbanites.
Some of my friends have resigned themselves to this pattern hoping that the neighborhood they saved as pioneering artists will return to livability once 'the next neighborhood' gets hot.
Our political leaders have finally noticed the bar-resto pattern for the misleading and fickle 'vibrancy' it provides. The business owners receive preferential treatment in zoning variances on a regular basis.
Pocket Neighborhoods, especially around a shared green-space and agricultural zone could provide the model for true urban rebirth.
In the city, a development like this would require some premeditation and multi-cultural cooperation: a particularly tricky business never successfully achieved to my knowledge.
How about a real future for CLE?
Friday, May 24, 2013
Cleveland: Hollywood Whore
Well I knew things would be tense on my way out the door during Hollywood's holiday weekend-long takeover of a major public thoroughfare in my desperate, starstruck little town.
Whoring
I had parked my bike on Euclid Ave and had to cross into the film set which extends from E 18th to E 6th.
As I unlocked my bike at E 14th and (reluctantly, shamefully) headed east along Euclid so I could cross the street and GO HOME I witnessed a Gestapo-like, 100-200 strong army of dickheads with walkie talkies herd several homeless types who had wandered down Euclid into doorways so they could film another 2 second shot of their mostly digitized 'blockbuster' crap-ass action movie.
They achieved this with derision and snide little comments of disbelief as if "doesn't everybody in this little decimated city know we are from Hollywood and have come here to save you?"
When they started at me they got a surprise.
First I heard them chuckle, "No he isn't in the movie, ha ha," before they demanded I get off the street; yes I mean demanded I get off the street, as if they were all the personal bodyguards of Samuel L. Jackson.
I told the little assholes to fuck themselves and they had no right to shut off a major public street for an entire weekend.
Keep in mind that at lunch I had already watched as the second little army of publicly funded Cleveland cops, who should be out oh, I don't know...policing the city(?) barked loudly and authoritatively at any pedestrian who even looked like they were going to cross the street.
See What Can Happen When The Cops Are Starring in Movies?
I did get the attention of a cop but he decided it was more important to keep yelling at the automobiles trying to use the street as well. Good thing or I'm sure I would have had a nightstick up my ass by the time it was over.
I was pretty damn angry.
The irony of it all is that they were filming a crazy crashy automobile scene, you know, the stock content of every superhero blockbuster since superhero blockbusters first transformed films into movies.
Yes, a celebration of automobile violence.
Last time Hollywood was here I was in a bar in my trendy neighborhood when we happened upon a couple hollywood guys on a slow Monday night.
They only seemed interested in us as characters, wanting us to perform as some sort of down and out blue collar slobs for them.
One of my friends and I are professional and amateur actors, (respectively) so they seemed surprised and disappointed after they had bought us a beer. They then wanted to know where they could go to experience the 'real Cleveland,' perhaps a bar with all Harvey Pekars all the time!
So, you may like superhero blockbusters and special effects but it's not about that. It's not about the ephemeral rise in hotel and restaurant revenue, blah blah blah.
It's about the arrogance of a billion dollar film company taking advantage of a rust-belt city to avoid paying California taxes and treating the city like shit, including its musicians:
Let us tell you how real hollywood music is done
The movie is set in Washington DC and other more important places.
Cleveland will not be mentioned, just like it wasn't in The Avengers, or Spiderman 3.
Maybe my bicycle will be famous. It was in the shot all day.
Whoring
I had parked my bike on Euclid Ave and had to cross into the film set which extends from E 18th to E 6th.
As I unlocked my bike at E 14th and (reluctantly, shamefully) headed east along Euclid so I could cross the street and GO HOME I witnessed a Gestapo-like, 100-200 strong army of dickheads with walkie talkies herd several homeless types who had wandered down Euclid into doorways so they could film another 2 second shot of their mostly digitized 'blockbuster' crap-ass action movie.
They achieved this with derision and snide little comments of disbelief as if "doesn't everybody in this little decimated city know we are from Hollywood and have come here to save you?"
When they started at me they got a surprise.
First I heard them chuckle, "No he isn't in the movie, ha ha," before they demanded I get off the street; yes I mean demanded I get off the street, as if they were all the personal bodyguards of Samuel L. Jackson.
I told the little assholes to fuck themselves and they had no right to shut off a major public street for an entire weekend.
Keep in mind that at lunch I had already watched as the second little army of publicly funded Cleveland cops, who should be out oh, I don't know...policing the city(?) barked loudly and authoritatively at any pedestrian who even looked like they were going to cross the street.
See What Can Happen When The Cops Are Starring in Movies?
I did get the attention of a cop but he decided it was more important to keep yelling at the automobiles trying to use the street as well. Good thing or I'm sure I would have had a nightstick up my ass by the time it was over.
I was pretty damn angry.
The irony of it all is that they were filming a crazy crashy automobile scene, you know, the stock content of every superhero blockbuster since superhero blockbusters first transformed films into movies.
Yes, a celebration of automobile violence.
Last time Hollywood was here I was in a bar in my trendy neighborhood when we happened upon a couple hollywood guys on a slow Monday night.
They only seemed interested in us as characters, wanting us to perform as some sort of down and out blue collar slobs for them.
One of my friends and I are professional and amateur actors, (respectively) so they seemed surprised and disappointed after they had bought us a beer. They then wanted to know where they could go to experience the 'real Cleveland,' perhaps a bar with all Harvey Pekars all the time!
So, you may like superhero blockbusters and special effects but it's not about that. It's not about the ephemeral rise in hotel and restaurant revenue, blah blah blah.
It's about the arrogance of a billion dollar film company taking advantage of a rust-belt city to avoid paying California taxes and treating the city like shit, including its musicians:
Let us tell you how real hollywood music is done
The movie is set in Washington DC and other more important places.
Cleveland will not be mentioned, just like it wasn't in The Avengers, or Spiderman 3.
Maybe my bicycle will be famous. It was in the shot all day.
Sunday, May 19, 2013
Walkable? Cleveland?
There are many great beginning points about walkable neighborhoods in this article by Freshwater Cleveland:
Walkthisway
Some of the scores granted to Cleveland neighborhoods by Walkscore are ridiculously high.
Walkscore seems to equate a relatively high number of pedestrians with 'walkablity.'
That's classic "correlation-not-causation" analysis.
The Playhouse Square neighborhood where I work receives a 98 out of 100!
This despite the fact that E 14 is a MAJOR cut-through for automobiles avoiding E 9th.
I've suggested to Cleveland that indeed Playhouse Square could be a fantastic walking district but will not be until E 14th auto traffic is re-routed to E 18th where it belongs. This is a no-brainer.
Quick Map of E 14th to E 18th Reroute
No one yet is going 'full bore' about walking neighborhoods in Cleveland.
That means NO CARS. Cleveland's leaders remain firmly convinced that more cars = greater viability.
I've been trying to get some support started to make certain old neighborhoods, (built before cars,) retro-fitted to eliminate them altogether.
Cleveland is always trying to attract people to the city, mostly building adult playgrounds for suburban tourists.
How many people around the US would come to Cleveland if it built and supported several car-free neighborhoods?
As far as I know, not other US city has attempted this.
How about it CLE?
Walkthisway
Some of the scores granted to Cleveland neighborhoods by Walkscore are ridiculously high.
Walkscore seems to equate a relatively high number of pedestrians with 'walkablity.'
That's classic "correlation-not-causation" analysis.
The Playhouse Square neighborhood where I work receives a 98 out of 100!
This despite the fact that E 14 is a MAJOR cut-through for automobiles avoiding E 9th.
I've suggested to Cleveland that indeed Playhouse Square could be a fantastic walking district but will not be until E 14th auto traffic is re-routed to E 18th where it belongs. This is a no-brainer.
Quick Map of E 14th to E 18th Reroute
No one yet is going 'full bore' about walking neighborhoods in Cleveland.
That means NO CARS. Cleveland's leaders remain firmly convinced that more cars = greater viability.
I've been trying to get some support started to make certain old neighborhoods, (built before cars,) retro-fitted to eliminate them altogether.
Cleveland is always trying to attract people to the city, mostly building adult playgrounds for suburban tourists.
How many people around the US would come to Cleveland if it built and supported several car-free neighborhoods?
As far as I know, not other US city has attempted this.
How about it CLE?
Friday, May 3, 2013
"Thanks For Not Killing Me" Crosswalks
It's telling to watch people cross a busy street within culturally established paint lines; those with no signal.
A full third of them will wait for cars to pass, then wave "Thanks!" if one should happen to approach.
We're supposed to thank them!
Note: this guy was NOT 'thankful!'
A full third of them will wait for cars to pass, then wave "Thanks!" if one should happen to approach.
We're supposed to thank them!
Note: this guy was NOT 'thankful!'
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Strict Liability Law
This is a hot topic in Scotland and the rest of the UK within the cycling community.
It is inconceivable in the US at this moment.
BBC Strict Liability Law
Basically, it explicitly affirms the simple, (maybe obvious?) but fading idea that the most powerful road users have the greatest responsibility to use the road safely.
This was once understood in the US at the outset of motorized automobile technology in public space as documented in the publication "Fighting Traffic: The Dawn Of The Motor Age In The American City" by Peter D. Norton.
It seems a no-brainer but opponents are obviously grumbling irrational fears aloud as they often and always do.
A codified standard of liability is a necessary and critical goal of road sharing. It won't happen without it.
Also, please check out this excellent lecture given by Peter Norton at Florida Atlantic University:
Peter D. Norton Lecture
Incredibly, predictably, motorists accuse cyclists of 'arrogance.'
It is inconceivable in the US at this moment.
BBC Strict Liability Law
Basically, it explicitly affirms the simple, (maybe obvious?) but fading idea that the most powerful road users have the greatest responsibility to use the road safely.
This was once understood in the US at the outset of motorized automobile technology in public space as documented in the publication "Fighting Traffic: The Dawn Of The Motor Age In The American City" by Peter D. Norton.
It seems a no-brainer but opponents are obviously grumbling irrational fears aloud as they often and always do.
A codified standard of liability is a necessary and critical goal of road sharing. It won't happen without it.
Also, please check out this excellent lecture given by Peter Norton at Florida Atlantic University:
Peter D. Norton Lecture
Incredibly, predictably, motorists accuse cyclists of 'arrogance.'
Saturday, April 20, 2013
Automobile Priority
Whereas the idea of a public right-of-way through private property has been around for hundreds of years, the idea that all of them should be given over to accommodate 200 sq ft of metal powered by an engine with the power of 3-400 horses is rather recent.
Even for the first several decades of common automobile ownership the saturation rate, particularly in urban areas was far below what it is today.
My city is 100% available to automobiles.
100%
Our addiction to convenience requires that we have as close to drive-up access for every conceivable service.
For the first time in human history we can spend an entire day, every day travelling hundreds of miles using our legs a total of 100 yards or less.
Most of my cycling friends are counting on increased participation to introduce the need for equal road access, safety and legal standing.
I have my doubts.
I know somewhere around 12 people who use a bicycle for primary daily transport:
Maybe 4-6 in the depth of a Lake Erie winter, 12-24 in nice weather.
Of those, and the additional occasional riders, I still see many of them riding 10-15 MPH on sidewalks, in the wrong direction, blowing through major traffic signals, terrified to death of sharing the proper roadway with their motorized travelers: (and for good reason.)
I am convinced that an increase in equality of access for pedestrians and cyclists will only come at the expense of that for automobiles.
This is more serious than many alternative transportation advocates realize. Automobile culture defines American culture more than anything else. If you think taking guns away is something, wait until you start removing automobiles from a small percentage of roadways, or even reducing speed allowances.
I predict even more cyclists and pedestrians will be killed, only this time 'accidentally on purpose.'
Buy and wear a camera.
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Cleveland Complete and Green Streets Off and Running
Despite a pretty good thunderstorm I attended the public uncovering of Cleveland's Complete and Green Streets program tonight.
The Ordinance, (Through Bike Cleveland)
Disappointed.
Most of the strategies, while steps in the right direction, (god I hate saying that all the time,) are really nothing new.
Mostly it involves paint: paint to segregate bikes and cars.
Also, on average, the plans call for reducing 4 lanes to 2, 6 to 4, etc., with a left turning lane AND on-street parking. Gotta have on-street parking!
Bike lanes are sacrificed to on-street parking in almost all cases.
One of the bold claims presented that I found interesting, (so interesting I didn't believe it,) was a statistic from left field somewhere that 57% of people would (was it try?) use alternative transportation if they could.
BS.
It takes a long process to separate yourself from the power that an automobile provides.
The power to:
carry things
travel quickly anytime anywhere in comfort
scream at people safely, knowing that no one can hear you or do anything to you if they did
live where nobody should just so you don't have to put up with people you don't like
Extremely powerful.
I'd put the number of people who would actually give up such power for any considerable length of time at more like 10%.
Shockingly, and I'm not exactly sure, but I believe the consultant actually said that streets are primarily for moving cars after all. It was hard to hear.
This was after I spoke up and asked why 100% of Cleveland's streets are accessible to automobiles and were there any plans to change that.
He seemed a bit surprised and annoyed.
I pointed out the suburban examples of self contained, walking shopping 'villages' such as Crocker Park and Legacy Village.
Just doesn't matter it seems.
Rather than actually take a chance on restricting automobile access, this plan seems content to preserve the ability of all vehicles, (now bikes too,) to move through, get in and more importantly get OUT of Cleveland on a daily basis.
The Ordinance, (Through Bike Cleveland)
Disappointed.
Most of the strategies, while steps in the right direction, (god I hate saying that all the time,) are really nothing new.
Mostly it involves paint: paint to segregate bikes and cars.
Also, on average, the plans call for reducing 4 lanes to 2, 6 to 4, etc., with a left turning lane AND on-street parking. Gotta have on-street parking!
Bike lanes are sacrificed to on-street parking in almost all cases.
One of the bold claims presented that I found interesting, (so interesting I didn't believe it,) was a statistic from left field somewhere that 57% of people would (was it try?) use alternative transportation if they could.
BS.
It takes a long process to separate yourself from the power that an automobile provides.
The power to:
carry things
travel quickly anytime anywhere in comfort
scream at people safely, knowing that no one can hear you or do anything to you if they did
live where nobody should just so you don't have to put up with people you don't like
Extremely powerful.
I'd put the number of people who would actually give up such power for any considerable length of time at more like 10%.
Shockingly, and I'm not exactly sure, but I believe the consultant actually said that streets are primarily for moving cars after all. It was hard to hear.
This was after I spoke up and asked why 100% of Cleveland's streets are accessible to automobiles and were there any plans to change that.
He seemed a bit surprised and annoyed.
I pointed out the suburban examples of self contained, walking shopping 'villages' such as Crocker Park and Legacy Village.
Just doesn't matter it seems.
Rather than actually take a chance on restricting automobile access, this plan seems content to preserve the ability of all vehicles, (now bikes too,) to move through, get in and more importantly get OUT of Cleveland on a daily basis.
Saturday, March 30, 2013
Guns And Cars Part 2
A local Teabagger Congressman who was invited to speak about his typical teabag fiscal position last week was instead berated by gun control activists.
The Brilliance of Renacci
Jimbo gave a little lip service to their concerns, blaming the mental status of the perpetrators (using the word 'issue' three times, twice in one sentence.) It has become the stock explanation of the NRA.
While unlike automobiles, guns are used to kill people purposefully for the most part, and a pedestrian or cyclist can share some culpability in an accident with a car, I can't help but see the parallels between the standard excuses given for gun killings as the ones offered for automobile deaths.
(Deaths are deaths after all, and a good lawyer can show the right jury that a death by either device was 'accidental.')
Neither gun nor automobile advocates want to admit there just may be a problem.
With guns: The shooter was crazy, or the shooter was angry, or the shooter was drunk, or the shooter wasn't licensed, or the shooter had bad parents, etc.
With automobiles: the driver was drunk, or the driver was texting, or the driver wasn't licensed, or the driver wasn't paying attention, or the driver wasn't following the speed limit, etc.
Guns don't kill people, people kill people...with GUNS
Cars don't kill people, people kill people...with CARS
Jim also rushed to invoke the Second Amendment, reinforcing the view among freedom loving Americans that sensible limitations equate with a ban on all guns.
No one until very recently has ever dared to approach sensible limitations on automobile access to public places, space shared by all those same freedom loving Americans, (most of whom are enslaved to the petroleum industry.)
I expect to hear more of the same, shrill alarms from car drivers that you now hear from gun nuts as alternative transportation advocates seek their American freedoms.
The Brilliance of Renacci
Jimbo gave a little lip service to their concerns, blaming the mental status of the perpetrators (using the word 'issue' three times, twice in one sentence.) It has become the stock explanation of the NRA.
“I still believe that when it comes to guns, the biggest issue is the mental health issue,” Renacci said. “We have to take a look at that. A majority of these issues (such as the killings at Newtown, Conn., Chardon, Ohio, and Aurora, Colo.) have mental health issues behind them. I also think we have to strengthen our background checks. The House will consider what the Senate passes and take a look at it.”
While unlike automobiles, guns are used to kill people purposefully for the most part, and a pedestrian or cyclist can share some culpability in an accident with a car, I can't help but see the parallels between the standard excuses given for gun killings as the ones offered for automobile deaths.
(Deaths are deaths after all, and a good lawyer can show the right jury that a death by either device was 'accidental.')
Neither gun nor automobile advocates want to admit there just may be a problem.
With guns: The shooter was crazy, or the shooter was angry, or the shooter was drunk, or the shooter wasn't licensed, or the shooter had bad parents, etc.
With automobiles: the driver was drunk, or the driver was texting, or the driver wasn't licensed, or the driver wasn't paying attention, or the driver wasn't following the speed limit, etc.
Guns don't kill people, people kill people...with GUNS
Cars don't kill people, people kill people...with CARS
Jim also rushed to invoke the Second Amendment, reinforcing the view among freedom loving Americans that sensible limitations equate with a ban on all guns.
No one until very recently has ever dared to approach sensible limitations on automobile access to public places, space shared by all those same freedom loving Americans, (most of whom are enslaved to the petroleum industry.)
I expect to hear more of the same, shrill alarms from car drivers that you now hear from gun nuts as alternative transportation advocates seek their American freedoms.
Sunday, March 24, 2013
Profit Motive And Traffic Control
Cincinnati seeks to abandon parking enforcement and go the kickback model.
This differs in implementation from that of speed camera use, (the city is charged a high fee for their provision,) but the result is the same.
The concept here is that our cities are shifting traffic enforcement to the private sector, content to take or keep a percentage of the earnings technology can provide, as long as they don't have to manage it.
I'm waiting for traffic drones next.
A better solution is to restrict automobile access on our public streets and walkable retail commercial zones.
This will increase safety, encourage storefront development, and allow for more efficient, human traffic law enforcement by reducing vehicular traffic's expanse geographically: its hegemony.
This will increase safety, encourage storefront development, and allow for more efficient, human traffic law enforcement by reducing vehicular traffic's expanse geographically: its hegemony.
I wonder if the obvious motorist backlash against these trends will provide popular support for a return to urban functioning on a human scale?
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Who Wants To Own...Anything?
Decreasing our auto dependence will require densification of living patterns.
Much has been written about this in Academia, (and more academic blogs,) not that anyone gives a shit about intelligent analysis and recommendations.
Obviously, right? Sprawl is alive and growing.
Few will buy a house in the city and invest themselves in any community of human beings, (especially different human beings,)
No one invests in anything really. That's just not the American way anymore.
Back when home 'flipping' was going crazy I worked for a public agency that had their hands full just keeping track of who to send tax bills. Ownership of the home changed before the tax billing cycle came around: almost every tax cycle.
Talk to old people. There's no such thing as a 'starter home' anymore.
The new way is to buy as big as you can can approved for and move on. Thousands of inner ring suburban bungalows sit vacant. They happen to be of very good build quality too.
Just look at your typical bullshit, low quality, over-sized suburban house: What do you see first?
That's right, the anti-social garage door.
"Welcome to my Garage! I'm watching TV! Go Away!"
Americans have been conditioned to lease their car, rent their appliances, and over-mortgage their home, all with the security that the house must go up in value, (until it didn't.)
All the sudden "Going Mobile" by The Who is going through my head.
Much has been written about this in Academia, (and more academic blogs,) not that anyone gives a shit about intelligent analysis and recommendations.
Obviously, right? Sprawl is alive and growing.
Few will buy a house in the city and invest themselves in any community of human beings, (especially different human beings,)
No one invests in anything really. That's just not the American way anymore.
Back when home 'flipping' was going crazy I worked for a public agency that had their hands full just keeping track of who to send tax bills. Ownership of the home changed before the tax billing cycle came around: almost every tax cycle.
Talk to old people. There's no such thing as a 'starter home' anymore.
The new way is to buy as big as you can can approved for and move on. Thousands of inner ring suburban bungalows sit vacant. They happen to be of very good build quality too.
Just look at your typical bullshit, low quality, over-sized suburban house: What do you see first?
That's right, the anti-social garage door.
"Welcome to my Garage! I'm watching TV! Go Away!"
Americans have been conditioned to lease their car, rent their appliances, and over-mortgage their home, all with the security that the house must go up in value, (until it didn't.)
All the sudden "Going Mobile" by The Who is going through my head.
Mega Commute!
What is Mega Commuting?
According to the US Census Bureau it is driving more than 90 minutes and 50 miles one-way to work, (or whatever you do everyday.)
Well, now we have 586,805 of them.
Not to be confused with Extreme Commuting which is 90 minutes: 2,241,915 of these.
or
Long Distance Commuting which is 50 miles: 1,713,931 of these.
US Census Report
Quick estimate on fuel costs for a Long Distance chump:
$3.50 a gallon x (100 miles a day/25 MPG) = $14 Per Day
Approximately 250 working days a year X $14 per day = $3500 a year
For Mega Commuters, add 3 hours on to an 8 hour day. 11 hour day!
Damn!
The American Dream!
According to the US Census Bureau it is driving more than 90 minutes and 50 miles one-way to work, (or whatever you do everyday.)
Well, now we have 586,805 of them.
Not to be confused with Extreme Commuting which is 90 minutes: 2,241,915 of these.
or
Long Distance Commuting which is 50 miles: 1,713,931 of these.
US Census Report
Quick estimate on fuel costs for a Long Distance chump:
$3.50 a gallon x (100 miles a day/25 MPG) = $14 Per Day
Approximately 250 working days a year X $14 per day = $3500 a year
For Mega Commuters, add 3 hours on to an 8 hour day. 11 hour day!
Damn!
The American Dream!
Friday, March 1, 2013
Traffic Deaths, Crash Testing, and Ted Nugent
You all know the "Nuge." He's the washed up rock and roller turned right-winger celeb of the era.
You may know in defense of gun ownership he recently compared gun deaths to traffic deaths and has been one of several gun defenders spouting off the seeming apples-to-oranges logic.
Here's a crappy USA Today link that attempts to bring it all together:
USA Today on Nuge's Gun Claims
The article opens with an 'interpretable' claim itself:
Wikipedia Traffic Deaths
A more or less constant yearly total in the 30-50 K range since the 1930s is not my idea of safe.
Also, there was a 5% increase in 2012, read here:
National Safety Council
We're not really getting anywhere.
Show me a reduction to less than 10K and I'll see real progress.
So Ted, the correct answer is that any gun and any car can be a weapon in the wrong hands.
And guns designed to kill people efficiently are more dangerous than say, a .22 caliber rifle.
High caliber weaponry is much harder to handle and control in most cases. I know. I've shot them.
Here's the funny thing though:
With the automobile-as-weapon, any idiot knows that in regards to crash testing, all the 'crumple zones,' and air bags in the industry don't mean shit when a large automobile hits a smaller one.
I know many fathers who buy their texting teenagers huge SUVs, (as big as a bathroom,) for safety.
As I've stated before, for the driver, current automobile safety technology has made them exponentially more controllable on the road than the deathtraps made in earlier eras, but the sheer size and power of these vehicles makes them devastating to what or who they may hit.
A safer car for its occupants is less safe for its target. It's an inverse relationship.
We value safe vehicles. Too bad we don't value safety for those that share the street with them.
You may know in defense of gun ownership he recently compared gun deaths to traffic deaths and has been one of several gun defenders spouting off the seeming apples-to-oranges logic.
Here's a crappy USA Today link that attempts to bring it all together:
USA Today on Nuge's Gun Claims
The article opens with an 'interpretable' claim itself:
"Deaths from traffic accidents have dropped dramatically over the last 10 years"Here's the ever-handy wiki of traffic deaths as a percentage of the population and the raw total to the left:
Wikipedia Traffic Deaths
A more or less constant yearly total in the 30-50 K range since the 1930s is not my idea of safe.
Also, there was a 5% increase in 2012, read here:
National Safety Council
We're not really getting anywhere.
Show me a reduction to less than 10K and I'll see real progress.
So Ted, the correct answer is that any gun and any car can be a weapon in the wrong hands.
And guns designed to kill people efficiently are more dangerous than say, a .22 caliber rifle.
High caliber weaponry is much harder to handle and control in most cases. I know. I've shot them.
Here's the funny thing though:
With the automobile-as-weapon, any idiot knows that in regards to crash testing, all the 'crumple zones,' and air bags in the industry don't mean shit when a large automobile hits a smaller one.
I know many fathers who buy their texting teenagers huge SUVs, (as big as a bathroom,) for safety.
As I've stated before, for the driver, current automobile safety technology has made them exponentially more controllable on the road than the deathtraps made in earlier eras, but the sheer size and power of these vehicles makes them devastating to what or who they may hit.
A safer car for its occupants is less safe for its target. It's an inverse relationship.
We value safe vehicles. Too bad we don't value safety for those that share the street with them.
Attack The Tool
In a measure sure to be drooled over by our gas guzzling, increasingly aggravated and violent driver class, the State of Ohio prepares to attack speed and red light cameras:
WKYC Populist Journalism
The Congressman intends to force the city to 'prove' safety has increased because of Traffic Cameras.
What a joke.
No police force can prove any safety measures in any other way than a comparison to the absence of it over time.
Shall we stop arresting people for assault to see if assault decreases, increases, or remains the same in 10 years?
The problem is speeding.
Unless the opponents can prove that an inordinate number are being falsely ticketed there is no reason to pull speed cameras other than the outrageous fees Xerox is charging.
A real improvement would be to use traffic monitors in concert with real live cops.
UPDATE:
Battle in my regressive state of Ohio heating up:
It's Official
UPDATE 2:
Please sign this petition at the Ohio Traffic Safety Coalition:
Petition for Safety
WKYC Populist Journalism
The Congressman intends to force the city to 'prove' safety has increased because of Traffic Cameras.
What a joke.
No police force can prove any safety measures in any other way than a comparison to the absence of it over time.
Shall we stop arresting people for assault to see if assault decreases, increases, or remains the same in 10 years?
The problem is speeding.
Unless the opponents can prove that an inordinate number are being falsely ticketed there is no reason to pull speed cameras other than the outrageous fees Xerox is charging.
A real improvement would be to use traffic monitors in concert with real live cops.
UPDATE:
Battle in my regressive state of Ohio heating up:
It's Official
UPDATE 2:
Please sign this petition at the Ohio Traffic Safety Coalition:
Petition for Safety
Saturday, February 23, 2013
Six Lanes of Bullshit
I've been driving my car too much lately.
I perform in theater here and there, and need to travel between my centrally-located home east to Cleveland Hts and/or west to Lakewood, often within a half hour as my schedule dictates.
On my recent east-bound trips I travel the Carnegie gauntlet, which along with Chester, is the street everybody uses to hurtle through the decimated east side of Cleveland up to the Heights communities.
One of my contentions is that you don't need to accomodate high flow-rate automobile access for a healthy retail economy.
The high volume of traffic on these streets doesn't seem to be doing any businesses there any good. In fact, any businesses that do thrive, such as my optometrist have long since sealed off their street-side doors in favor of a rear parking lot.
Walking along these streets is quite unpleasant and unsafe since they've been widened as much as possible for automobile traffic at the expense of the sidewalk.
These streets have become the de-facto freeways ever since the Heights communities bravely stopped the extension of I-490 in the 1960s, which would have torn Shaker Heights in half.
A good history of the battle is documented here:
Bad Freeways
They're at it again, promoting the "Opportunity Corridor" as some sort of high traffic rate economic engine:
Six lanes of "Economic Opportunity"
How can they not see the affect high traffic rates have had on Carnegie and Chester Avenues?
Chester Ave is a particular disaster: a wide R.O.W. in a residential area, yet no consideration of Bicycles or pedestrians whatsoever.
Between Chester and Carnegie sits Euclid Ave.
This road was recently redesigned, in my opinion, brilliantly. It's 25 MPH, with one lane for automobiles, one lane for buses, and a consistent bike lane.
The bike lane had to be fought for of course, and ends too soon, before it reaches downtown from the east at around E 22.
Guess which road is experiencing commercial re-birth?
The 25 MPH, restricted flow one: Euclid Ave.
An acceptable exchange regarding the Opportunity Corridor is if they henceforth reduce speeds on Carnegie and Chester and build Chester Avenue into the marvelous boulevard it should be.
I perform in theater here and there, and need to travel between my centrally-located home east to Cleveland Hts and/or west to Lakewood, often within a half hour as my schedule dictates.
On my recent east-bound trips I travel the Carnegie gauntlet, which along with Chester, is the street everybody uses to hurtle through the decimated east side of Cleveland up to the Heights communities.
One of my contentions is that you don't need to accomodate high flow-rate automobile access for a healthy retail economy.
The high volume of traffic on these streets doesn't seem to be doing any businesses there any good. In fact, any businesses that do thrive, such as my optometrist have long since sealed off their street-side doors in favor of a rear parking lot.
Walking along these streets is quite unpleasant and unsafe since they've been widened as much as possible for automobile traffic at the expense of the sidewalk.
These streets have become the de-facto freeways ever since the Heights communities bravely stopped the extension of I-490 in the 1960s, which would have torn Shaker Heights in half.
A good history of the battle is documented here:
Bad Freeways
They're at it again, promoting the "Opportunity Corridor" as some sort of high traffic rate economic engine:
Six lanes of "Economic Opportunity"
How can they not see the affect high traffic rates have had on Carnegie and Chester Avenues?
Chester Ave is a particular disaster: a wide R.O.W. in a residential area, yet no consideration of Bicycles or pedestrians whatsoever.
Between Chester and Carnegie sits Euclid Ave.
This road was recently redesigned, in my opinion, brilliantly. It's 25 MPH, with one lane for automobiles, one lane for buses, and a consistent bike lane.
The bike lane had to be fought for of course, and ends too soon, before it reaches downtown from the east at around E 22.
Guess which road is experiencing commercial re-birth?
The 25 MPH, restricted flow one: Euclid Ave.
An acceptable exchange regarding the Opportunity Corridor is if they henceforth reduce speeds on Carnegie and Chester and build Chester Avenue into the marvelous boulevard it should be.
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Speeders Hate Being Caught!
Yes that's about all you can conclude about our city's speed camera program.
That and how poorly it's run: like many other things in the city.
This piece of video 'journalism' is all over the map, primarily using tried and true sensationalism to enflame drivers' expected anti-camera rage.
(Having repeat offender Zack Reed as the Council spokesman is a bizzare joke.)
Cleveland Councilman Zack Reed arrested this morning in DUI traffic stop:
http://bit.ly/XTPfeY
Speed Cameras Suck!
If you actually listen to the report you discover that the problem isn't with speed cameras, it's with the administration of the program. And yes, Xerox is ripping us off horribly.
Here's the facts folks:
Cameras don't speed, they don't even drive. Stop blaming a camera for your transgression.
Cameras also don't issue tickets. Police officers and Police department staff does, (or doesn't as the case seems to be.)
Cameras don't make streets safer. Enforcement of driving rules makes streets safer. Cameras can help.
Cameras are giving the police department more work. Nobody likes more work.
Speeding is against the law and kills people and other living things. Don't do it.
That and how poorly it's run: like many other things in the city.
This piece of video 'journalism' is all over the map, primarily using tried and true sensationalism to enflame drivers' expected anti-camera rage.
(Having repeat offender Zack Reed as the Council spokesman is a bizzare joke.)
Cleveland Councilman Zack Reed arrested this morning in DUI traffic stop:
http://bit.ly/XTPfeY
Speed Cameras Suck!
If you actually listen to the report you discover that the problem isn't with speed cameras, it's with the administration of the program. And yes, Xerox is ripping us off horribly.
Here's the facts folks:
Cameras don't speed, they don't even drive. Stop blaming a camera for your transgression.
Cameras also don't issue tickets. Police officers and Police department staff does, (or doesn't as the case seems to be.)
Cameras don't make streets safer. Enforcement of driving rules makes streets safer. Cameras can help.
Cameras are giving the police department more work. Nobody likes more work.
Speeding is against the law and kills people and other living things. Don't do it.
Monday, February 18, 2013
Dead Squirrel, Dead Inside and Out
On my ride home in a brisk Cleveland winter morn, I bore witness as a car nailed a squirrel.
This particular car, probably rocking some tunes, texting, or finishing some bathroom touchups didn't even slow down and (I assume) wasn't even aware.
"Sad, but it happens all the time," you may say. Dumb squirrel. I'm quite fond of critters, not insane or anything but the issue's more than just one more rodent pizza.
So, well, now the bold print:
Our culture, in its relentless drive for comfort and convenience has lost a necessary connection to the outside as a matter of daily routine.
Ditching the car for a bicycle or hoofing it on foot can invigorate us with the reality that is weather, (woah...) and the sights and sounds of the outside: the squirrels, the cats, dogs, deer, other human beings, ya know? (You'll also discover the sounds of the automobile to be the most unpleasant ones of all.)
You really come to appreciate a good hat, scarf, gloves, stuff a friend may knit or sell in a local craft market. Like Mom said, dress appropriate and you can stay outside all day, almost a kid again!
Food tastes better after being outside, rather than stuffing it in your face one hand on the wheel.
Try it sometime, while coincidentally saving some gas money.
Get Weatherenergized!
This particular car, probably rocking some tunes, texting, or finishing some bathroom touchups didn't even slow down and (I assume) wasn't even aware.
"Sad, but it happens all the time," you may say. Dumb squirrel. I'm quite fond of critters, not insane or anything but the issue's more than just one more rodent pizza.
So, well, now the bold print:
Our culture, in its relentless drive for comfort and convenience has lost a necessary connection to the outside as a matter of daily routine.
Ditching the car for a bicycle or hoofing it on foot can invigorate us with the reality that is weather, (woah...) and the sights and sounds of the outside: the squirrels, the cats, dogs, deer, other human beings, ya know? (You'll also discover the sounds of the automobile to be the most unpleasant ones of all.)
You really come to appreciate a good hat, scarf, gloves, stuff a friend may knit or sell in a local craft market. Like Mom said, dress appropriate and you can stay outside all day, almost a kid again!
Food tastes better after being outside, rather than stuffing it in your face one hand on the wheel.
Try it sometime, while coincidentally saving some gas money.
Get Weatherenergized!
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Induced Demand
The concept of "Induced Demand" is often described in physical, mathematical terms, for example: a wider highway rapidly fills to an extent that it needs to be widened again.
While this is true, I also believe the the more psychological characteristics of "fulfilling capacity" and related pressures of social acceptance are the greatest drivers of MVH.
In our world, we are expected to be able to travel ever greater distances in a short period of time simply because the technology exists to do so, and to do it in style.
This is conformist pressure just as powerful as pop culture and mass marketing. Not only how quickly we get from here to there, but also how impressively we travel that distance is one of a few, top ranked ways society has come to judge us and classify our status.
I'm reminded of a bar conversation I had with a 'dating expert' who related a date she had with a mutual acquaintance of ours, (oh so gossipy!)
She took great pleasure in describing the "piece of shit" that the person drove up to her home and how ridiculous it was that she should get in such a vehicle.
It wasn't a mean-spirited jibe, but more a way to present this assumed universally agreed principle for the purpose of a humorous conversation: which makes it even more relevant to my point!
I wonder what a date would say to me if I suggested we meet at the Rapid station downtown?
While this is true, I also believe the the more psychological characteristics of "fulfilling capacity" and related pressures of social acceptance are the greatest drivers of MVH.
In our world, we are expected to be able to travel ever greater distances in a short period of time simply because the technology exists to do so, and to do it in style.
This is conformist pressure just as powerful as pop culture and mass marketing. Not only how quickly we get from here to there, but also how impressively we travel that distance is one of a few, top ranked ways society has come to judge us and classify our status.
I'm reminded of a bar conversation I had with a 'dating expert' who related a date she had with a mutual acquaintance of ours, (oh so gossipy!)
She took great pleasure in describing the "piece of shit" that the person drove up to her home and how ridiculous it was that she should get in such a vehicle.
It wasn't a mean-spirited jibe, but more a way to present this assumed universally agreed principle for the purpose of a humorous conversation: which makes it even more relevant to my point!
I wonder what a date would say to me if I suggested we meet at the Rapid station downtown?
Directions and Parking Lot Assholes
One of my 'favorite' things regarding MVH is when I'm walking my dog and a car stops to ask me directions in my somewhat confusing neighborhood.
As I'm describing the way to the Christmas Story House or the Steelyard shopping development, anybody stopped in a car behind that person becomes enraged within several seconds.
They invariably lay on the horn or go squealing around the stopped driver, which makes me want to take even more time to help my fellow citizen.
I almost got in a fight with some asshole in a shopping center parking lot in the burbs over this once.
Somebody wanted directions and it took about 15 seconds to explain them, keeping an asshole behind the person I was helping from exiting the funneled design of the parking lot.
I informed the asshole after he issued some unintelligible aggro that indeed life was short and I was (not) sorry that I kept him immobile for a short moment of it.
Asshole made a move to get out and engage me and I welcomed it. Didn't happen.
Yet another incident occurred once when, years ago, I was driving to a restaurant and a friend was coming from her home in her vehicle.
I found a spot and saw her approaching where I was walking towards our destination. There were a fair amount of parking spaces available, by no means was it full.
As she approached I stood in one spot waving her over when, from behind me some asshole in a BMW comes careening into the same space stopping just short of hitting me.
From the asshole's car, the asshole screams, believe it or not, "Get The Fuck Out Of My Way," as if the asshole had a constitutional right to a share of lined asphalt.
Shamefully, I stepped aside and glared through the window. Asshole jumped on the horn. I walked away laughing.
MVH does horrible things to people, (and the environment and the economy, etc.)
As I'm describing the way to the Christmas Story House or the Steelyard shopping development, anybody stopped in a car behind that person becomes enraged within several seconds.
They invariably lay on the horn or go squealing around the stopped driver, which makes me want to take even more time to help my fellow citizen.
I almost got in a fight with some asshole in a shopping center parking lot in the burbs over this once.
Somebody wanted directions and it took about 15 seconds to explain them, keeping an asshole behind the person I was helping from exiting the funneled design of the parking lot.
I informed the asshole after he issued some unintelligible aggro that indeed life was short and I was (not) sorry that I kept him immobile for a short moment of it.
Asshole made a move to get out and engage me and I welcomed it. Didn't happen.
Yet another incident occurred once when, years ago, I was driving to a restaurant and a friend was coming from her home in her vehicle.
I found a spot and saw her approaching where I was walking towards our destination. There were a fair amount of parking spaces available, by no means was it full.
As she approached I stood in one spot waving her over when, from behind me some asshole in a BMW comes careening into the same space stopping just short of hitting me.
From the asshole's car, the asshole screams, believe it or not, "Get The Fuck Out Of My Way," as if the asshole had a constitutional right to a share of lined asphalt.
Shamefully, I stepped aside and glared through the window. Asshole jumped on the horn. I walked away laughing.
MVH does horrible things to people, (and the environment and the economy, etc.)
Monday, February 4, 2013
Options
It's true enough that most people need to be within 10 miles round trip of 80% of the places they go to make alternatives to the car work for them.
My daily commute is 6 miles round trip.
Assuming light traffic, round trip times:
By car: 30 minutes + 5-10 minutes to park and walk to office
$5-10 to park per day + gas and proportionate maintenance, fees, and insurance
By bus: 60 minutes + 10-15 minutes walking to office
$4.50 per day
By bicycle: 40 minutes + 10 minutes changing clothes, prepping saddle bags, walk to office
No daily fees. $10-20 a month bike maintenance?
By walking: 90 - 100 minutes
Free all round!
Curiously, increasing my distance to 10 miles round trip would only slightly increase my walking time.
The other times wouldn't change much.
My daily commute is 6 miles round trip.
Assuming light traffic, round trip times:
By car: 30 minutes + 5-10 minutes to park and walk to office
$5-10 to park per day + gas and proportionate maintenance, fees, and insurance
By bus: 60 minutes + 10-15 minutes walking to office
$4.50 per day
By bicycle: 40 minutes + 10 minutes changing clothes, prepping saddle bags, walk to office
No daily fees. $10-20 a month bike maintenance?
By walking: 90 - 100 minutes
Free all round!
Curiously, increasing my distance to 10 miles round trip would only slightly increase my walking time.
The other times wouldn't change much.
The Cost of Sprawl: An Ongoing Tragedy
Just got some fee costs for installing water and sewer service in an exurb that shouldn't even be developed:
$13,118 for sewer
$4,534 for water
Grand total of $17,652 (+ $2,453 if your sewer is tributary to another exurb)
This is before you pay the contractor to lay the pipe. (Gotta be another 20k, I imagine.)
Connection is required BTW.
All that for the privilege of driving your gas hog over 50 miles a day and destroying forestland.
All these amenities and more already exist in the city.
There are probably 100s of entire, quality houses available in the city for less than $10,000.
$13,118 for sewer
$4,534 for water
Grand total of $17,652 (+ $2,453 if your sewer is tributary to another exurb)
This is before you pay the contractor to lay the pipe. (Gotta be another 20k, I imagine.)
Connection is required BTW.
All that for the privilege of driving your gas hog over 50 miles a day and destroying forestland.
All these amenities and more already exist in the city.
There are probably 100s of entire, quality houses available in the city for less than $10,000.
Saturday, February 2, 2013
RTA Commuter Lines: A Proposal
No doubt many proposals are submitted to Cleveland's Regional Transit Authority.
Many people care about the state of transportation, and particularly public transportation in our region.
This is mine.
I've created a Google map:
Commuter Line Map
with a set of proposed stops to be served by dedicated commuter vehicles to pick up passengers at one and only one stop, to be transported downtown to the brand spanking new Stephanie Tubbs Jones Transit Center:
STJ Transit Center
The idea of this proposal is for these commuter vehicles to run AROUND THE CLOCK
Blue Markers (Stops) every 30 Minutes
Red Markers (Stops) every 60 Minutes.
Also, one vehicle to run between each Red Stop East and one vehicle between Red Stops West.
Late night transit in Cleveland is extremely sparse, like in many cities.
Several Years ago RTA abandoned their 'Circulator' routes for a variety of mysterious reasons, some of which may be here:
Circulator Woes
These were smaller vehicles that served shorter routes and were very popular, but VERY poorly thought out.
I believe the idea was to use them merely to get customers to other Bus routes or the Rapid Train.
It's time to bring these back as actual dedicated commuter vehicles!
Many people care about the state of transportation, and particularly public transportation in our region.
This is mine.
I've created a Google map:
Commuter Line Map
with a set of proposed stops to be served by dedicated commuter vehicles to pick up passengers at one and only one stop, to be transported downtown to the brand spanking new Stephanie Tubbs Jones Transit Center:
STJ Transit Center
The idea of this proposal is for these commuter vehicles to run AROUND THE CLOCK
Blue Markers (Stops) every 30 Minutes
Red Markers (Stops) every 60 Minutes.
Also, one vehicle to run between each Red Stop East and one vehicle between Red Stops West.
Late night transit in Cleveland is extremely sparse, like in many cities.
Several Years ago RTA abandoned their 'Circulator' routes for a variety of mysterious reasons, some of which may be here:
Circulator Woes
These were smaller vehicles that served shorter routes and were very popular, but VERY poorly thought out.
I believe the idea was to use them merely to get customers to other Bus routes or the Rapid Train.
It's time to bring these back as actual dedicated commuter vehicles!
Back To The City: Part 1
Any decrease in car dependency will require re-establishing dense population patterns: it's simple geography.
I started out to write about the current state of the 'inner city,' schools, race, crime, etc., but this contribution from Meagen Farrell on +Rust Wire , an important blog by +Angie Schmitt once again knocked me on my ass:
Living in Hough
You absolutely must read not only that contribution, but the 4 preceding ones, to which links are provided at the top.
I live in a Cleveland neighborhood known as Tremont, (or The Southside if you're a traditionalist,) in which I was lucky enough to purchase a house in 1993, just as the area was beginning to grow in popularity.
First, the usual suspects, The Artists began purchasing crappy homes from slumlords and the children of older ethnic families in the 1980s. Then the Bars and Restaurants moved in. (Michael Symon's first big hit "Lola" started here.)
It is now too expensive for most young people to acquire a house despite the poor quality of the late 1800s (worse) to early 1900s (better) construction.
There are many expensive rehabs and expensive modern construction homes in the last 2-10 years as well.
All well and good. I expect, and have personally benefitted from this kind of change, well aware of the anger, unfairness, and controversy it can cause among the dispossessed and/or early 'pioneers' not as lucky as myself. I am willing to move again however, as the disparity on display here has begun to bother me.
Point is, most people are wondering where the next neighborhood is going to be.
Freshwater Cleveland is publishing a series on that very topic, such as this one on the North Collinwood effort:
Next Neighborhood
Distressingly, I see most people forced out of Tremont heading West in a pattern eerily similar to that of my parents, who ended up far East in Mentor, Ohio where I went to school, and learned nothing. (So much for good school systems.)
Mentor was once a tiny, quaint village now turned into a hellhole of strip mall sprawl by the federally supported mandate to clear the cities, provided by the gazillions of dollars invested in the highway system.
The way the Feds still pour money into these systems, you would think the mandate were still in place.
Why are my friends trickling West, (even those who started East as I did?)
I am a white guy.
My father, (born in Hough) is a frightening spectre on the beach. That side of my family is as white as Obama's maternal grandfather:
Chris Rock
This is where black people live in Cuyahoga County:
Nodis GIS
None of my friends are racist. They are all good-hearted and right-minded people. We are all deeply affected by racism.
This is a conversation avoided for over 50 years.
It may finally be happening.
I started out to write about the current state of the 'inner city,' schools, race, crime, etc., but this contribution from Meagen Farrell on +Rust Wire , an important blog by +Angie Schmitt once again knocked me on my ass:
Living in Hough
You absolutely must read not only that contribution, but the 4 preceding ones, to which links are provided at the top.
I live in a Cleveland neighborhood known as Tremont, (or The Southside if you're a traditionalist,) in which I was lucky enough to purchase a house in 1993, just as the area was beginning to grow in popularity.
First, the usual suspects, The Artists began purchasing crappy homes from slumlords and the children of older ethnic families in the 1980s. Then the Bars and Restaurants moved in. (Michael Symon's first big hit "Lola" started here.)
It is now too expensive for most young people to acquire a house despite the poor quality of the late 1800s (worse) to early 1900s (better) construction.
There are many expensive rehabs and expensive modern construction homes in the last 2-10 years as well.
All well and good. I expect, and have personally benefitted from this kind of change, well aware of the anger, unfairness, and controversy it can cause among the dispossessed and/or early 'pioneers' not as lucky as myself. I am willing to move again however, as the disparity on display here has begun to bother me.
Point is, most people are wondering where the next neighborhood is going to be.
Freshwater Cleveland is publishing a series on that very topic, such as this one on the North Collinwood effort:
Next Neighborhood
Distressingly, I see most people forced out of Tremont heading West in a pattern eerily similar to that of my parents, who ended up far East in Mentor, Ohio where I went to school, and learned nothing. (So much for good school systems.)
Mentor was once a tiny, quaint village now turned into a hellhole of strip mall sprawl by the federally supported mandate to clear the cities, provided by the gazillions of dollars invested in the highway system.
The way the Feds still pour money into these systems, you would think the mandate were still in place.
Why are my friends trickling West, (even those who started East as I did?)
I am a white guy.
My father, (born in Hough) is a frightening spectre on the beach. That side of my family is as white as Obama's maternal grandfather:
Chris Rock
This is where black people live in Cuyahoga County:
Nodis GIS
None of my friends are racist. They are all good-hearted and right-minded people. We are all deeply affected by racism.
This is a conversation avoided for over 50 years.
It may finally be happening.
Wednesday, January 30, 2013
War On Cars
Ha Ha Ha!
I love the use of Tea Party phrases in vogue right now.
I prefer 'Taking the ROW Back!'
Today's automobiles are the peak of technology.
I don't think they can be improved much in terms of safety, comfort, agility and power. They truly are marvels of the modern world and a far cry from the crapbuckets I drove in the 70s.
I retain a small, modern, efficient car and a motorscooter. (Personally, I hope this is my last four-wheeler.)
What preceded even me however were hundreds of years of Private vs. Public space, or 'property' if you like.
The tenets of public space demand that public space be shared equally, providing as close to a perfect opportunity of access as possible.
For only the last hundred years our public Rights Of Way have been given to automobiles. Even sidewalks are shrinking in the case where some brainwashed 'traffic engineer' believes 'increased flow' is the answer to volume.
No one should expect to move any faster than 20-25 MPH in an urbanized area. Residential neighborhoods should be even slower.
There's no 'war on cars.' Cars are gonna be just fine!
I love the use of Tea Party phrases in vogue right now.
I prefer 'Taking the ROW Back!'
Today's automobiles are the peak of technology.
I don't think they can be improved much in terms of safety, comfort, agility and power. They truly are marvels of the modern world and a far cry from the crapbuckets I drove in the 70s.
I retain a small, modern, efficient car and a motorscooter. (Personally, I hope this is my last four-wheeler.)
What preceded even me however were hundreds of years of Private vs. Public space, or 'property' if you like.
The tenets of public space demand that public space be shared equally, providing as close to a perfect opportunity of access as possible.
For only the last hundred years our public Rights Of Way have been given to automobiles. Even sidewalks are shrinking in the case where some brainwashed 'traffic engineer' believes 'increased flow' is the answer to volume.
No one should expect to move any faster than 20-25 MPH in an urbanized area. Residential neighborhoods should be even slower.
There's no 'war on cars.' Cars are gonna be just fine!
Sprawl and Valuation
Some Observations
Related: Automobiles are now estimated to cost around $10,000 per year to own over their life span.
Those costs will never go down. 6-8 YRS = 60 to 80K.
As the inner and even second ring suburbs now struggle with housing maintenance and infrastructure costs, I feel there are only two places to purchase a home that will protect your 'investment':
1. Any of the pseudo-trendy 'new' exurbs.
This is a false value in most cases. The housing is typically poor quality and only of a certain 'perceived' value, which is best 'flipped' before another exurb becomes more trendy, or ex-urban expansion over-extends as we saw in the recent housing crash. Needless to say, an exurb needs a car with its additional costs. Your tax rates may be low however, as there is no infrastructure to fix: yet.
2. A trendy neighborhood in a city.
Of course we're all aware of the issues involved: poor schools, ineffective political 'leadership,' crime, etc.
The benefits of living in a city include the Arts and social interaction, existing infrastructure, and, well LIFE.
We're in a lukewarm period of return: Neighborhoods are 'hot,' existing residents are squeezed, invaders eventually leave to send their kids to a 'good' school, (which actually means 'culturally similar to their own.')
My 125 year-old crappy house has increased in value 5 fold.
Just sayin.
Come back and start a new 'trendy' neighborhood. I'll move there with ya.
Related: Automobiles are now estimated to cost around $10,000 per year to own over their life span.
Those costs will never go down. 6-8 YRS = 60 to 80K.
As the inner and even second ring suburbs now struggle with housing maintenance and infrastructure costs, I feel there are only two places to purchase a home that will protect your 'investment':
1. Any of the pseudo-trendy 'new' exurbs.
This is a false value in most cases. The housing is typically poor quality and only of a certain 'perceived' value, which is best 'flipped' before another exurb becomes more trendy, or ex-urban expansion over-extends as we saw in the recent housing crash. Needless to say, an exurb needs a car with its additional costs. Your tax rates may be low however, as there is no infrastructure to fix: yet.
2. A trendy neighborhood in a city.
Of course we're all aware of the issues involved: poor schools, ineffective political 'leadership,' crime, etc.
The benefits of living in a city include the Arts and social interaction, existing infrastructure, and, well LIFE.
We're in a lukewarm period of return: Neighborhoods are 'hot,' existing residents are squeezed, invaders eventually leave to send their kids to a 'good' school, (which actually means 'culturally similar to their own.')
My 125 year-old crappy house has increased in value 5 fold.
Just sayin.
Come back and start a new 'trendy' neighborhood. I'll move there with ya.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)