So this isn’t an entirely new conversation around here. We’ve previously discussed stop sign alternatives, crosswalk varietals til we’ve been blue in the face, and debated criminalizing certain ways of getting around.
But recently, a New York Times op-ed mentioned a “radical” shared streets plan in Chicago in a larger plea toward urging peds, bikes, cars and trucks in the city to just get along. This led Co.Exist to point out that shared streets aren’t radical at all, and have existed for years in other countries and are already beginning to pop up around the U.S. (See Seattle’s Bell Street below)
Now that shared streets are getting another 15 minutes of fame, perhaps we can take a moment to consider them for ourselves. “But what exactly does a shared street look like?”, you ask.
Well, it has no lanes, curbs and minimal signage. It often employes different colored pavers to indicate where “the street” normally ends and a “sidewalk” begins. The design works because it puts all travelers on equal footing (har), and forces them to negotiate themselves through eye contact instead of taking instruction (or inherent right!) from signage.
Would such a street of harmonic traveling be welcome in Decatur? If so, where would you argue it’s most needed?
Photo: Nate Cormier, SvR Design Company
I think if we could route the commuters that are coming through Decatur as fast ad possible to get from point A to point B, this conception could work for strictly downtown traffic.
Monderman!
You really should provide a link with your outbursts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Monderman
Fewer rules make life better for all. Who’d have thunk it?
For Ponce between Commerce and Church.
It would send drivers the message: If you’re looking to go through town, use Commerce and not the shared street. This would require traffic signal improvements on Commerce to handle the added load.
It would also create an imperative to make the ghost-town stretch (the parking structure) across from Thumbs Up more pedestrian inviting. How about a permanent outdoor artist’s market? It’s fully covered.
Commerce is hot mess right now along with W. Ponce and has been for quite some time. It’s seems to be permanently under construction and already moves at a snail’s pace during rush hour. It’s actually faster going through downtown right now and probably will be for the next who knows how long.
The right from Commerce to Clairemont backs up past Church St even at 6am. I don’t know how to speed up that interchange, but that would vastly improve the flow on Commerce.
What about reconnecting Williams St with one-way traffic from Church to Claiermont? I say “reconnecting” only because I assume it was that way at some previous point in time. I’m sure there are points to be made in opposition, but it seems there are an awful lot of cars making the Church > Commerce > Clairemont turns.
Based on some of the renderings, this is one of the expected outcomes of the Transportation Plan.
Installing traffic circles at Church/Commerce and Clairmont/Commerce would solve it instantly.
Honestly, taking off the raised curbs around each of the tree wells on our sidewalks would solve a LOT of walking problems in Decatur.
Failing that, sure, why not just walk in the street? It would be a smoother ride.
T.W.O. Restrict the heart of downtown to bicycles, scooters, and motorcycles. Everyone would be in a better mood because they are on a vehicle that is for enjoyment instead of their 4 wheel travel appliance. It will also cut down on the out of towners / tourists / commuters that others have complained about in other articles.
I’m sure all of the downtown shop and restaurant owners will heartily endorse your plan to cut down on the number of out-of-towners and tourists.
How dare they come to Decatur to spend their money.
People can’t seem to successfully focus on the task at hand as it is, whether that be walking, driving or biking. Pedestrians are crossing streets anywhere they want to and usually against the light, drivers are on their phones and playing lane jockey, and bikers who love to say “share the road” don’t seem to understand that that is a two-sided venture. How can we expect that a plan like this wouldn’t just cause more accidents and injuries? Especially with so many visitors to Decatur from other areas who won’t know or understand these new rules of the road. Sounds like a recipe for disaster. I wish I had a viable solution to offer, but I don’t think this is it.
We could reasonably expect so because it’s been tested, documented and proven in a variety of contexts all around the world.
The key is in the other thing you say: “Especially with so many visitors to Decatur from other areas who won’t know or understand these new rules of the road.” That’s exactly the psychology behind why such designs can work. In the absence of cues (delineated space, signaling, signage, etc.) telling us all is fine and to proceed without much in the way of thinking, our level of vigilance goes way up. In shared space, everyone and everything around us becomes something to be negotiated with, one-on-one. That series of negotiations is how the level of safety goes up. It’s no longer possible to be on mental cruise control.
How will this work with our soon-to-be driverless cars? They need delineated space, signaling, signage, etc. I better not have to take back over the wheel.
Driverless cars are still something that does not compute for me. Kind of like wireless communication and data transfer. I know that these things are real and other folks understand and employ them but my neurons still do not stretch that far.
COD = Jet packs only.