urbanSTL

^Don't get me wrong, I think we need better enforcement too. But I don't think enforcement alone is the best solution. It's labor intensive and it only works when you're doing it. I think it's a mistake to consider this an enforcement problem alone. I think it's pretty clear that our roads are badly engineered, and we're trying to use enforcement to compensate for that. And I don't think Cherokee disproves the point. It's long and straight and the lanes are fairly wide. While it's far from our worst offender it's got some issues. It's about thirty five feet wide. Parked cars take up about six feet each, so you're left with two lanes of nearly twelve feet each. That's an interstate highway lane. (With a stop sign every block.) So let's do a thought experiment. Let's say you put a four foot parking protected bike lane on each side. Now you have a seven and a half foot driving lane with parked cars right next to it. That'll slow your traffic down a bit. Raise the crosswalks to sidewalk height and you have a built in speed hump. That not only slows down automotive traffic, but it improves accessibility for pedestrians. You could even go so far as making each intersection with a stop sign a mini roundabout. Or adding an island to the middle of select intersections with minor side streets to make them right turn only affairs forcing drivers to drive to a major intersection with a full roundabout where they can make a U-turn. Engineering can make a difference. And I very much suspect you could profitably add a roundabout to Vandeventer and Forest Park. We dedicate far too much space to cars and that is inherently the problem. We need to take quite a lot of it back and give it to other uses. And what's left needs to be designed and regulated (and enforced) more sensibly.

Agree with a lot of this just need to correct some suggested dimensions based upon what the city has allowed in projects I’ve helped get built.

Parking lane widths are 8’ and the city wouldn’t budge much further you could maybe get 7.5’ if space was very restrictive.
Bike lane is 4’ but 5’ is preferred by most cyclist as the minimum with an additional 2’ buffer zone. (See the zebra humps on union north of forest park) Cyclists have insisted that the method used on Chestnut downtown is hardly passing due to the protection being hit/removed causing driver confusion as to what’s parking and what isn’t.
Drive lanes I could not get them to go lower than 8.5’ and they only allowed it in a very specific 1 block length. They will normally only do 9’ minimum with a 10’ preferred.

Otherwise yes highly agree with raised intersections in key locations. I’m also a big proponent of curb bump outs at ends of blocks and mid block.

LArchitecture wrote: ↑

May 11, 2022

Agree with a lot of this just need to correct some suggested dimensions based upon what the city has allowed in projects I’ve helped get built.

Parking lane widths are 8’ and the city wouldn’t budge much further you could maybe get 7.5’ if space was very restrictive.
Bike lane is 4’ but 5’ is preferred by most cyclist as the minimum with an additional 2’ buffer zone. (See the zebra humps on union north of forest park) Cyclists have insisted that the method used on Chestnut downtown is hardly passing due to the protection being hit/removed causing driver confusion as to what’s parking and what isn’t.
Drive lanes I could not get them to go lower than 8.5’ and they only allowed it in a very specific 1 block length. They will normally only do 9’ minimum with a 10’ preferred.

Otherwise yes highly agree with raised intersections in key locations. I’m also a big proponent of curb bump outs at ends of blocks and mid block.

I'm no traffic engineer, just a road user spitballing off g-map measurements. Nothing official here. Wider bike lanes would certainly be better. I'm all in favor of better separation and a biffer. And if that comes at the expense of a lane, so be it. I don't doubt that there'd be friction from regulations, rules of thumb, and old hands on narrower parking and driving lanes. And Cherokee might have just enough traffic that you really need dedicated lanes in each direction, but there's something nice about side streets with parking on both sides and traffic in both directions that are only thirty feet wide. People still speed, but . . . much much less. (Enough less that you can figure out what Dodge Chargers the repeat offenders drive and where they live.)

I trust that you guys can do this better than me, but I figure we can really use things that make people slow down and look. I've found the Dutch intersections on certain YouTube channels I follow interesting and attractive. And I found the experience of walking in the land of traffic circles so much better than here. (And even the driving was fairly nice once you got used to it.)

TheWayoftheArch_V2.0 wrote: ↑

May 11, 2022

rbb wrote: ↑

May 11, 2022

When it comes to speeding, study after study shows that drivers will generally drive at the speed for which the road was designed rather than the posted speed limit. Four wide lanes plus a turn lane and shoulders? Folks will largely drive 50+ even if the speed limit says 30 mph.

IMO, it's a similar thing with stop lights. If all of your stop lights seem unnecessarily long and poorly timed, if it seems like it's safe to proceed but you're stuck waiting every couple of blocks, some folks are going to get tired of waiting and chance it. Sharply lower traffic volumes and reduced police enforcement at the start of the pandemic made it easier, and once folks started 'getting away with it' it became easier to do again, and eventually for a minority it becomes habit.

The city's traffic and lighting division's poor execution of light timing combined with fewer traffic stops is essentially training folks to run lights by making them a frustration.

For intersections that no longer *need* a stop light, you don't have to rip them out and replace them with stop signs - just set the lights to flashing red. Would seem to be an easy fix - or even just a test for a limited time - if you can talk someone into making it.

-RBB

I understand this sentiment, but when I see such a drastic change from 2019 to now in driver behavior I can't blame the roadways.  For years you had select knuckleheads.  Now its every man for themselves.  I think the camera capture outside of STL Style rather proves you point wrong.  Cherokee does not feel like a wide street there.  It has cars parked and trees lining the street.  Just the most basic lack of consideration for their own safety and others.  

Oh, I must not have explained myself well. My point with the 'wider streets' thing was to correlate with the red light situation. Poorly timed red lights plus a low chance of getting pulled over encourages folks to break the law in much the same that a low speed limit on a a wide straight street designed for higher speeds encourages speeding. It wasn't at all to say that long straight streets automatically = people running red lights.

Cherokee is actually a great example of a street designed to slow folks down.  That doesn't mean that there will be those who speed anyway and blow through stop signs - as the STL Style videos showed. But in that case it's an example of folks speeding *in spite* of the street design, not because of it. I chalk that up to the driver's blatant disregard of any rules in that situation, not a poor intersection design.

-RBB

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

May 12, 2022

TheWayoftheArch_V2.0 wrote: ↑

May 11, 2022

I find it almost laughable that proponents of healing the grid would alternatively argue that long and straight roads create a public safety hazard.  

I think I've decided the grid is dramatically overrated. I'm interested in density, walkability, and workability. If griddiness is safe, then fine. If wiggliness is better, then that's fine too. I think "heal the grid" can often be shorthand for "we want the granular development and multi-use zoning of older city neighborhoods that, at least in the US, tend to be griddy." I want all of those things. But I don't care if the intersections are square or regular. Just that they be walkable. (Or optionally bikeable for those that roll that way.)

My understanding of "The Grid" has always been primarily from the pedestrian experience. The grid to me means short, walkable blocks providing plenty of options to get from A-to-B on foot or by bike using the shortest route possible. It means reducing the number of "superblocks" and other barriers that force people to detour well out of their way. I don't take it to mean a literal rectilinear grid with straight lines and 90 degree angles, but an urban mesh prioritizing connections. For the most part I don't mind (and I even prefer) if streets dead-end for cars or incorporate chicanes and round-abouts as long as they are seamlessly passable on foot and on bike. Cars can go a mile out of their way without sweat, but for a pedestrian that might be the difference between walking and taking a car. To me, "Heal the Grid" means restoring all those cut-throughs and small roads that made cities walkable, bikeable, and human-scaled before we bulldozed everything to prioritize the automobile, it does not mean a literal rectilinear grid pattern.

TheWayoftheArch_V2.0 wrote: ↑

May 12, 2022

So SP thinks Cherokee encourages reckless driving while rbb states that it actually a good example of a traffic calmed street.  In the meantime sc4mayor doesn't see the duplicitous argument offered up by SP, who has both noted his desire to heal the grid in many other threads with his immediate pivot in the above posts to "whatever is best." 

All the while everyone has missed dweebe's point, which I concurred with - that there is a blatant lack of personal responsibility - seemingly exponential in increase - on the roadways and that no one is holding anyone to account.  And when we point this out, there is a myriad of theories offered up as either mitigating or even a solution, while fully ignoring personal responsibility and lack of enforcement. 

And I think that is what we all miss.  Is each other's point.  Are long straight streets susceptible to idiocy?  Certainly.
Are certain traffic calming measure in all areas of the city warranted?  Absolutely.  And I really appreciate the many speed humps going in.
Should we be able to expect a certain level of decorum on our roadways?  Definitely.
Are the police enforcing traffic law?  Not that I can see.
Is this leading to a dramatic increase in lack of personal responsibility/recklessness on our roadways?  I believe so. 

I changed my mind. I learned, and with that new information I decided my previous stance wasn't necessarily always the best way to look at it. Also: I'm not advocating we close anything. Or that we don't enforce laws. None of this is either/or. We can do ALL of these at the same time. As I learn more about the subject I begin to think design is a part of the problem and that it needs to be addressed. Jesus, after living overseas for a few months I had something of an epiphany about road design. It's worth trying. I don't think we need to be belittling each other here. Let's take a step back and breathe a little.

Sure, we could use better enforcement. For what it's worth I also changed my mind about automated enforcement. I'm inclined to think speed cameras and red light cameras are useful and we should have more of them. Make enforcement consistent and fair. And find a way to make registration automatic while we're at it, so everyone's car is in the system. Please understand, I'm not opposed to enforcement.

And again, I'm not saying Cherokee is our worst offender or what we should fix first. I'm just saying even that can be better. (And I think it can.) Gravois is a bigger problem. And Hall Street. And Grand. And Kingshighway. Natural Bridge. Riverview. Cherokee is a pretty minor consideration, but it's come up because STL Rainbow has a camera on his shop, so . . . we get to see those accidents in greater detail.

Holy cow, folks. I'm a musician and stagehand, not a traffic engineer. I'm spitballing. There's, what, two or three people on this thread that are traffic engineers. DBinSouthCity, I think has some experience in that area. LAArchitecture. Maybe a few other people. The rest of us are interested amateurs maybe trying to learn a thing or two. I think it's healthy to discuss this stuff, since it can be addressed by city policy that our elected officials set. It's what an engaged citizen should do. But let's play nice. This isn't the comment section of the daily paper. (Or it shouldn't be.)

dweebe wrote: ↑

May 11, 2022

rbb wrote: ↑

May 11, 2022

When it comes to speeding, study after study shows that drivers will generally drive at the speed for which the road was designed rather than the posted speed limit. Four wide lanes plus a turn lane and shoulders? Folks will largely drive 50+ even if the speed limit says 30 mph.

IMO, it's a similar thing with stop lights. If all of your stop lights seem unnecessarily long and poorly timed, if it seems like it's safe to proceed but you're stuck waiting every couple of blocks, some folks are going to get tired of waiting and chance it. Sharply lower traffic volumes and reduced police enforcement at the start of the pandemic made it easier, and once folks started 'getting away with it' it became easier to do again, and eventually for a minority it becomes habit.

The city's traffic and lighting division's poor execution of light timing combined with fewer traffic stops is essentially training folks to run lights by making them a frustration.

For intersections that no longer *need* a stop light, you don't have to rip them out and replace them with stop signs - just set the lights to flashing red. Would seem to be an easy fix - or even just a test for a limited time - if you can talk someone into making it.

-RBB

The city's inability to time Tucker correctly is amazing. One should not get stopped at every single light between Cass and Choteau.

And don't get me started on the anger at how long the red light is for non existent traffic at 18th and Gratiot in front of Ameren.

This fellow in Arlington, VA feels your pain

I'd say crossing in the middle of Chippewa there is the norm, and I cross there almost every day. The nearby crosswalks are at overbuilt intersections that are downright scary to cross at most of the time.

I'd take a crosswalk over jaywalking Chippewa pretty much every time.

I do a lot of work in that Chippewa area and I've chosen to jaywalk Chippewa a few times. I hate the experience.

I do it occasionally because crosswalk intersections seem so sparse. As a result, some cars really come zipping along.

And I would think it's likely that's what happened to the deceased. Took a few steps out and realized this car was moving way faster than he thought. 

Vice - Automakers Promised Technology Would Make Roads Safer. It Hasn’t.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7d9j8/ ... r-it-hasnt

^Nice find.

KMOV - Caught on camera: Car flips multiple times in deadly St. Louis crash

https://www.kmov.com/2022/06/07/caught- ... uis-crash/

Was driving downtown Sunday with my family just before 1PM and saw the aftermath of a pedestrian being hit by a car at the intersection of Gravois & Gustine.  Car was in the middle of the intersection and the man was lying next to the car and bleeding.  Believe he was on a scooter without a helmet as their was a scooter in the road too.  He was responsive, so not sure how badly he was injured.  Shook us up quite a bit.

^ you were not in downtown, you were
at the southern edge of Tower Grove South or northern edge of Dutchtown.   Downtown is one of 79 STL city neighborhoods.   Carry on

"dbInSouthCity:
^ you were not in downtown,  you were

at the southern edge of Tower Grove South or northern edge of Dutchtown.   Downtown is one of 79 STL city neighborhoods.   Carry on

I read that as he was driving to Downtown.

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

Jun 13, 2022

^ you were not in downtown, you were
at the southern edge of Tower Grove South or northern edge of Dutchtown.   Downtown is one of 79 STL city neighborhoods.   Carry on

You good, bro? “Carry on”??? I guess you only care about people getting hit by cars if it happens downtown…