This letter was in response to this article that appeared in the Chicago Tribune Oct. 18:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-after-mayaoct18-story,0,6304244.story
A four-year-old girl was killed while in a crosswalk at Lincoln Park Zoo by a motorist whose license had been revoked. He ran a stop sign and hit her. The editor cut my favorite part--the bullet points.
Dear Editor:
Motorists shouldn't run stop signs. ("After Maya," Page One, Oct. 18.) That is absolutely true.
Unfortunately the sharp increase in stop signs in Chicago over the last decade, especially at intersections that hardly warrant four-way stops, causes some drivers to ignore them or slide through them. Consider just a few examples from West Rogers Park, where I lived for several years:
* A sign stopping traffic at the alderman's condo tower, but not the other three identical towers.
* A sign protecting a baseball field used perhaps a dozen times a year.
* A sign stopping traffic on Touhy Avenue--the only one for about 10 miles--protecting a school a quarter-mile off Touhy. There is a crossing guard helping children across that intersection anyway.
* A sign on congested Devon Avenue for no apparent reason that backs up traffic for a block in either direction while the cross street has neither traffic nor pedestrians.
* A sign next to a park at a T-intersection at which the cross street runs one-way away from the intersection.
All over town, stop signs protect children near schools and parks a few hours a day, half the days of the year. Electric or temporary stop signs would ease congestion and save motorists time and fuel. I understand the Hirsch family's focus on enforcement. But reason and careful consideration with regard to stop-sign installation would also be helpful in drivers' observance of the law.
***************
If you like, you can comment on my letter online: http://bit.ly/2rJ298 Someone already made a nasty comment and called my opinion "nonsense." He sarcastically suggested that I believe the few seconds it takes me to stop is worth more than a four-year-old girl's life. No. I don't believe that. I do believe that the very high number of stop signs in Chicago actually makes intersections more dangerous for pedestrians. Furthermore, it's not just a few seconds for me. It's thousands of hours and thousands of dollars of wasted time, money and fuel as thousands of drivers per year must slow, stop and accelerate at each stop sign. These signs often exist for no reason at all other than the neighbors who wanted a stop sign installed there. I have seen several instances where stop signs facing major streets create congestion where there previously had been none. A number of streets that were once major thoroughfares across neighborhoods are now almost impassable with stop signs at every block.
*****************
If you have time: an op-ed piece about how the recession personally affects the writer and her family, by someone I know, who went to my high school, appeared in the Oct. 25 Chicago Tribune:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-oped1025luckoct25,0,809561.story
Showing posts with label stop sign. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stop sign. Show all posts
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Howard Street, Crawford Avenue to Skokie Boulevard
Just out of range of Ald. Bernie Stone's stop-sign trigger fingers, there lies a major street that cuts through a residential neighborhood for a mile. Between Crawford/Pulaski Avenue and Skokie Boulevard, there are 13 side streets. Yet between the traffic lights at Crawford/Pulaski and Skokie, there are no stop signs or lights. It's just a pleasant ride in a 35mph zone.
No stop signs? But it's residential! People need to be able to cross the street!
Lyon Park borders Howard Street! We need a stop sign or a traffic light! For the children!
If we don't put in some type of traffic control, why, people will just fly down Howard at 60mph!
In Chicago, all those arguments would ring true, and Howard Street would probably have at least a half-dozen stop signs in that one-mile stretch. The difference is that this part of Howard is in Skokie. Skokie has a few stupid stop signs of its own, including a slew near Church Street protecting a series of walking/bike paths. They make the streets more dangerous because most drivers don't bother stopping for them. But Skokie draws the line somewhere, and it declined to impede traffic on Howard, a major street that correctly should not have stop signs. So between Crawford/Pulaski and Skokie Boulevard, traffic continues to flow, people manage to turn left and cross the street, and everyone is happy. See? It really works.
No stop signs? But it's residential! People need to be able to cross the street!
Lyon Park borders Howard Street! We need a stop sign or a traffic light! For the children!
If we don't put in some type of traffic control, why, people will just fly down Howard at 60mph!
In Chicago, all those arguments would ring true, and Howard Street would probably have at least a half-dozen stop signs in that one-mile stretch. The difference is that this part of Howard is in Skokie. Skokie has a few stupid stop signs of its own, including a slew near Church Street protecting a series of walking/bike paths. They make the streets more dangerous because most drivers don't bother stopping for them. But Skokie draws the line somewhere, and it declined to impede traffic on Howard, a major street that correctly should not have stop signs. So between Crawford/Pulaski and Skokie Boulevard, traffic continues to flow, people manage to turn left and cross the street, and everyone is happy. See? It really works.
Stop signs: the debate continues
A couple of friends begged me to go on the stop-sign warpath again. So here we go.
There are a number of members of Young Israel of West Rogers Park who love the new stop sign on Touhy at Washtenaw, right next to the shul. I asked one of them, "J.D.," "What if there were stop signs on Touhy at Campbell, Francisco and Albany?" That would mean Touhy Avenue would have traffic controls--either a stop sign or traffic light--at every intersection from Western to Kedzie, a one-mile stretch:
Campbell: No current stop sign.
Rockwell: traffic light.
Washtenaw: new stop sign (installed at the alderman's direction in November, 2008.)
California: traffic light.
Francisco: residents have begged the alderman for a stop sign here for years. Francisco does not run through here; there is a townhome development entrance on the north side of this intersection. No current stop sign.
Sacramento: traffic light.
Albany: a stop sign was here for about a month, in January, 2008. Bowing to pressure, the alderman ended up removing it either because people were disobeying it, or it was causing accidents. Albany is where eastbound traffic narrows from two lanes to one.
Kedzie: traffic light.
J.D. said he thought stop signs at the three intersections that currently have none would be "overkill," in his words. Well, that's the whole point. Every neighborhood resident has his own "favorite stop sign," whether it exists or not. If it doesn't yet exist, you can be sure there are some busybodies who have plenty of time to start petitions and lobby the alderman to install a stop sign. With the new stop sign at Washtenaw, the residents near Campbell, Francisco and Albany will have fresh ammunition for their arguments for their own stop signs. To you, a new stop sign may be just a few seconds a day. But as I previously mentioned, the cumulative effect of a single stop sign is thousands of dollars in wasted time, fuel, and vehicular wear-and-tear. Furthermore, a new stop sign rarely stands alone. More often than not, nearby intersections suffer the bane of the four-way stop as well.
There are a number of members of Young Israel of West Rogers Park who love the new stop sign on Touhy at Washtenaw, right next to the shul. I asked one of them, "J.D.," "What if there were stop signs on Touhy at Campbell, Francisco and Albany?" That would mean Touhy Avenue would have traffic controls--either a stop sign or traffic light--at every intersection from Western to Kedzie, a one-mile stretch:
Campbell: No current stop sign.
Rockwell: traffic light.
Washtenaw: new stop sign (installed at the alderman's direction in November, 2008.)
California: traffic light.
Francisco: residents have begged the alderman for a stop sign here for years. Francisco does not run through here; there is a townhome development entrance on the north side of this intersection. No current stop sign.
Sacramento: traffic light.
Albany: a stop sign was here for about a month, in January, 2008. Bowing to pressure, the alderman ended up removing it either because people were disobeying it, or it was causing accidents. Albany is where eastbound traffic narrows from two lanes to one.
Kedzie: traffic light.
J.D. said he thought stop signs at the three intersections that currently have none would be "overkill," in his words. Well, that's the whole point. Every neighborhood resident has his own "favorite stop sign," whether it exists or not. If it doesn't yet exist, you can be sure there are some busybodies who have plenty of time to start petitions and lobby the alderman to install a stop sign. With the new stop sign at Washtenaw, the residents near Campbell, Francisco and Albany will have fresh ammunition for their arguments for their own stop signs. To you, a new stop sign may be just a few seconds a day. But as I previously mentioned, the cumulative effect of a single stop sign is thousands of dollars in wasted time, fuel, and vehicular wear-and-tear. Furthermore, a new stop sign rarely stands alone. More often than not, nearby intersections suffer the bane of the four-way stop as well.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
The stop sign debate continues
She feels sorry for my future kids?
When someone tells someone, “I feel sorry for your future children,” that’s typically taken as just about the worst thing someone can say to another—-that she thinks the person will be a horrible parent. So it came as a surprise when a close friend not only told me this, but did so in a public forum, in front of my 100+ Facebook friends. That was deeply hurtful. I did not say, “I believe in corporal punishment.” I did not say, “I don’t think children need seatbelts.” I did not even say, “I think tv’s in kids’ bedrooms slow kids’ mental growth.” I stated my opposition to stop signs on major streets, and repeated that opposition even if I were to have children. And for that she feels sorry for my future children?
That’s a serious charge, and I hope she reconsiders her sentiment. There is no evidence whatsoever that stop signs on major streets make the streets safer for children or pedestrians. I have given a number of reasons for my opposition to stop signs on major streets. I’ll reiterate them here:
1. They stop traffic for no good reason, wasting time and fuel and inflicting additional wear and tear on vehicles.
2. Slower traffic and stop signs on major streets encourage drivers to use side streets, where they are more likely to encounter pedestrians and children playing in the streets.
3. Illinois law already requires motorists to stop for pedestrians in crosswalks. If police enforced this law, we wouldn’t need stop signs to help pedestrians cross major streets.
4. Municipalities often install stop signs to “protect” schools, parks and senior citizen homes that produce pedestrians just a few hours a day. For a school, this is just 180 days a year. Park visitors only use a park in good weather. The rest of the time, the sign stops traffic for no reason whatsoever. This sign that started this discussion is for a school, a whole quarter-mile away (5-min. walk, longer for little kids). No one disputes that the kids are out and using the crosswalk at Touhy just two hours a day on school days. The other 22 hours on school days (180 days), and 24 hours on non-school days, the stop sign stops traffic for…..? One friend suggested, Well, it’s easier to walk to Young Israel of West Rogers Park on shabbos. Yes, it is. And anyone who minds waiting a minute for traffic to stop is being very, very selfish.
5. There is simply no justification for a solitary stop sign within a nine-mile stretch (probably longer—I’ll need to check) of stop sign-free roadway. I’m sure angry residents in Lincolnwood and Morton Grove can come up with a long list of more deserving intersections. But I think there’s an understanding, which alderman have no compunction about violating, that major streets are not to be tampered with.
6. A single stop sign on a major street always draws demands from residents for additional stop signs on “their” intersections. I could give so many examples just off the top of my head of former fast thoroughfares now stop-and-go due to stop signs, just on the North Side alone: California Avenue, Halsted Street, Sheffield Avenue, Clark Street, Sheridan Road, Lawrence Avenue, Randolph Street and Broadway.
7. My friend who fears for my future children mentioned a fatality and “what-iffed” that a stop sign may have saved his life. This is one of those cause-effect relationships that seems logical but doesn’t really exist. Case study: Maya Hirsh obm. Maya was a little girl visiting Lincoln Park Zoo with her family a couple of years ago. As she crossed Cannon Drive, a crazed motorist ran a stop sign, killing her instantly. Authorities determined the driver to be mentally unsound and without a drivers license. (He was also Ald. Stone’s neighbor in Winston Towers.) The stop sign near the Lincoln Park Zoo entrance, which I think should only be in force during zoo hours, didn’t prevent the driver from killing Maya. Funny how drivers prone to vehicular homicide don’t pay too much attention to stop signs.
8. More stop signs reduce compliance among drivers. My friend who fears for my future children may not have visited West Rogers Park lately. The situation is out of control. Almost every intersection has a four-way stop sign. California, once free of stop signs, now has four in 12 blocks in addition to the three traffic lights in that stretch. A T-intersection has a stop sign despite the fact that the cross street that terminates at the intersection is one way “in,” meaning cross-traffic is impossible. (The stop sign “protects” a park.) Of the four high-rise towers on Kedzie Avenue, one inexplicably has a stop sign—the one the alderman lives in. Motorists give up and simply ignore them, making our streets less safe.
Authorities and communities can take sensible steps to make streets and intersections safer without inconveniencing all motorists and their passengers. Enforce crosswalks. Fence off or ban pedestrians from unsafe crossing areas—force them to walk to the nearest controlled intersection. (At Washtenaw, where the new stop sign is, stoplights are one block away in each direction.) Use new technology to highlight pedestrians in crosswalks so vehicles stop for them without forcing vehicles to stop 24-7. More 24-hr. traffic controls (stop signs and lights) are not the answer.
When someone tells someone, “I feel sorry for your future children,” that’s typically taken as just about the worst thing someone can say to another—-that she thinks the person will be a horrible parent. So it came as a surprise when a close friend not only told me this, but did so in a public forum, in front of my 100+ Facebook friends. That was deeply hurtful. I did not say, “I believe in corporal punishment.” I did not say, “I don’t think children need seatbelts.” I did not even say, “I think tv’s in kids’ bedrooms slow kids’ mental growth.” I stated my opposition to stop signs on major streets, and repeated that opposition even if I were to have children. And for that she feels sorry for my future children?
That’s a serious charge, and I hope she reconsiders her sentiment. There is no evidence whatsoever that stop signs on major streets make the streets safer for children or pedestrians. I have given a number of reasons for my opposition to stop signs on major streets. I’ll reiterate them here:
1. They stop traffic for no good reason, wasting time and fuel and inflicting additional wear and tear on vehicles.
2. Slower traffic and stop signs on major streets encourage drivers to use side streets, where they are more likely to encounter pedestrians and children playing in the streets.
3. Illinois law already requires motorists to stop for pedestrians in crosswalks. If police enforced this law, we wouldn’t need stop signs to help pedestrians cross major streets.
4. Municipalities often install stop signs to “protect” schools, parks and senior citizen homes that produce pedestrians just a few hours a day. For a school, this is just 180 days a year. Park visitors only use a park in good weather. The rest of the time, the sign stops traffic for no reason whatsoever. This sign that started this discussion is for a school, a whole quarter-mile away (5-min. walk, longer for little kids). No one disputes that the kids are out and using the crosswalk at Touhy just two hours a day on school days. The other 22 hours on school days (180 days), and 24 hours on non-school days, the stop sign stops traffic for…..? One friend suggested, Well, it’s easier to walk to Young Israel of West Rogers Park on shabbos. Yes, it is. And anyone who minds waiting a minute for traffic to stop is being very, very selfish.
5. There is simply no justification for a solitary stop sign within a nine-mile stretch (probably longer—I’ll need to check) of stop sign-free roadway. I’m sure angry residents in Lincolnwood and Morton Grove can come up with a long list of more deserving intersections. But I think there’s an understanding, which alderman have no compunction about violating, that major streets are not to be tampered with.
6. A single stop sign on a major street always draws demands from residents for additional stop signs on “their” intersections. I could give so many examples just off the top of my head of former fast thoroughfares now stop-and-go due to stop signs, just on the North Side alone: California Avenue, Halsted Street, Sheffield Avenue, Clark Street, Sheridan Road, Lawrence Avenue, Randolph Street and Broadway.
7. My friend who fears for my future children mentioned a fatality and “what-iffed” that a stop sign may have saved his life. This is one of those cause-effect relationships that seems logical but doesn’t really exist. Case study: Maya Hirsh obm. Maya was a little girl visiting Lincoln Park Zoo with her family a couple of years ago. As she crossed Cannon Drive, a crazed motorist ran a stop sign, killing her instantly. Authorities determined the driver to be mentally unsound and without a drivers license. (He was also Ald. Stone’s neighbor in Winston Towers.) The stop sign near the Lincoln Park Zoo entrance, which I think should only be in force during zoo hours, didn’t prevent the driver from killing Maya. Funny how drivers prone to vehicular homicide don’t pay too much attention to stop signs.
8. More stop signs reduce compliance among drivers. My friend who fears for my future children may not have visited West Rogers Park lately. The situation is out of control. Almost every intersection has a four-way stop sign. California, once free of stop signs, now has four in 12 blocks in addition to the three traffic lights in that stretch. A T-intersection has a stop sign despite the fact that the cross street that terminates at the intersection is one way “in,” meaning cross-traffic is impossible. (The stop sign “protects” a park.) Of the four high-rise towers on Kedzie Avenue, one inexplicably has a stop sign—the one the alderman lives in. Motorists give up and simply ignore them, making our streets less safe.
Authorities and communities can take sensible steps to make streets and intersections safer without inconveniencing all motorists and their passengers. Enforce crosswalks. Fence off or ban pedestrians from unsafe crossing areas—force them to walk to the nearest controlled intersection. (At Washtenaw, where the new stop sign is, stoplights are one block away in each direction.) Use new technology to highlight pedestrians in crosswalks so vehicles stop for them without forcing vehicles to stop 24-7. More 24-hr. traffic controls (stop signs and lights) are not the answer.
Reply Letter #2: Touhy/Wash stop sign
Look, Alderman-for-Life, why don’t we just install four-way stop signs at every intersection in the ward? Oh, wait, that’s your evil plan, right?
I do believe you are “indulging the wishes of the school.” After all, you are caving in to the school’s request to the detriment of the rest of us.
>>> Thank you for your input, but I have no intentions to remove the sign.
And I have no intention of stopping for it.
I do believe you are “indulging the wishes of the school.” After all, you are caving in to the school’s request to the detriment of the rest of us.
>>> Thank you for your input, but I have no intentions to remove the sign.
And I have no intention of stopping for it.
My response to the alderman's terse reply
Dear Alderman:
Thank you very much for your kind note. I very much appreciate you taking the time from your busy schedule during this holiday season to respond to my inquiry.
I would hope the Alderman wouldn’t consider my sign removal request out of line in light of the fact he removed the Touhy stop sign at Albany shortly after its installation a year ago.
Students at Rogers School already enjoy the benefit of a crossing guard at the Touhy/Washtenaw intersection during their commutes. Given the guard’s presence there, isn’t the stop sign redundant? And given the sign’s reason for being is just two hours a day, school days only—when a crossing guard is there anyway—isn’t its 24-hr. presence also excessive?
I would support an electric or temporary stop sign that functions only when schoolchildren are present. But a full-time, permanent stop sign isn’t fair to motorists. I disagree that the school’s presence a quarter-mile away justifies installing Touhy’s only stop sign over nine miles of thoroughfare.
Best wishes for Chanukah and 2009.
Sincerely,
Kenneth Salkover
Thank you very much for your kind note. I very much appreciate you taking the time from your busy schedule during this holiday season to respond to my inquiry.
I would hope the Alderman wouldn’t consider my sign removal request out of line in light of the fact he removed the Touhy stop sign at Albany shortly after its installation a year ago.
Students at Rogers School already enjoy the benefit of a crossing guard at the Touhy/Washtenaw intersection during their commutes. Given the guard’s presence there, isn’t the stop sign redundant? And given the sign’s reason for being is just two hours a day, school days only—when a crossing guard is there anyway—isn’t its 24-hr. presence also excessive?
I would support an electric or temporary stop sign that functions only when schoolchildren are present. But a full-time, permanent stop sign isn’t fair to motorists. I disagree that the school’s presence a quarter-mile away justifies installing Touhy’s only stop sign over nine miles of thoroughfare.
Best wishes for Chanukah and 2009.
Sincerely,
Kenneth Salkover
Alderman Stone b-----slaps me on the new stop sign
Mr. Salkover,
Thank you for your recent e-mail. I must tell you that you are indeed correct, the sign was requested by the Local School Council for the safety of the students. I would imagine that you can understand my position in putting the sign up for safety purposes. Furthermore, I don't believe my action could be deemed as "indulging the wishes of the school". The safety of the children is the primary reason for the installation of the sign.
Thank you for your input, but I have no intentions to remove the sign.
Please accept my best wishes for a happy and healthy holiday season.
Alderman Bernard L. Stone
Thank you for your recent e-mail. I must tell you that you are indeed correct, the sign was requested by the Local School Council for the safety of the students. I would imagine that you can understand my position in putting the sign up for safety purposes. Furthermore, I don't believe my action could be deemed as "indulging the wishes of the school". The safety of the children is the primary reason for the installation of the sign.
Thank you for your input, but I have no intentions to remove the sign.
Please accept my best wishes for a happy and healthy holiday season.
Alderman Bernard L. Stone
Monday, December 15, 2008
My letter to the alderman re: Touhy/Wash stop sign
Kenneth Salkover
Day phone: 847-
Dear Alderman:
The new stop sign on Touhy at Washtenaw backs up already slow Touhy traffic. It sets a terrible precedent for Touhy Avenue, as there will be renewed demands for stop signs at Francisco and Albany. Rogers School is not on Touhy. It is a quarter-mile away, at Jarvis, and already has a crossing guard to help students cross Touhy. It is grossly unfair to force motorists to stop at all times--24-7--when the stop sign protects students for just two hours on school days.
This is the only stop sign on Touhy between Western Avenue and River Road--a nine-mile stretch of stop sign-free thoroughfare. Please consider removing the stop sign. Indulging the wishes of the school isn't fair to other Rogers Park residents.
Sincerely,
Kenneth Salkover
Day phone: 847-
Dear Alderman:
The new stop sign on Touhy at Washtenaw backs up already slow Touhy traffic. It sets a terrible precedent for Touhy Avenue, as there will be renewed demands for stop signs at Francisco and Albany. Rogers School is not on Touhy. It is a quarter-mile away, at Jarvis, and already has a crossing guard to help students cross Touhy. It is grossly unfair to force motorists to stop at all times--24-7--when the stop sign protects students for just two hours on school days.
This is the only stop sign on Touhy between Western Avenue and River Road--a nine-mile stretch of stop sign-free thoroughfare. Please consider removing the stop sign. Indulging the wishes of the school isn't fair to other Rogers Park residents.
Sincerely,
Kenneth Salkover
What is the purpose of a stop sign?
I think my disagreement with a couple of friends—okay, more than a couple—stems from a disagreement about the purpose of a stop sign. For me, a stop sign is to prevent side street traffic from interfering with traffic on major thoroughfares. It could also be used to prevent accidents at intersections of two side streets, but a four-way stop sign should only be used in extreme circumstances—certainly not at nearly every intersection in a neighborhood, as is found in, say, West Rogers Park. A stop sign should not be used:
To protect a park, which has pedestrian traffic a few hours a day in warm-weather months
To protect a school, which has pedestrian traffic two hours a day, 180 days a year
To help people cross a major street. Illinois law already requires motorists to stop for pedestrians in crosswalks, so a stop sign is redundant.
As I’ve previously noted in this blog, Chicago residents whine to their aldermen about allegedly dangerous intersections. The alderman quickly install stop signs to placate the masses. Former Ald. Burt Natarus (42nd), whom I couldn’t stand, loved doing this. So did former Ald. Bernie Hansen (44th) and his successor, Ald. Tom Tunney. So does Ald. Bernie Stone (50th). Main thoroughfares that motorists once navigated rather quickly are now stop-and-go ordeals that are no better than side streets and often worse. I would support electric or temporary stop signs that were operational only when pedestrians were actually using the crosswalk. But a 24-7 stop sign is terribly unfair to motorists forced to stop and check for pedestrian traffic all hours of the day and night when there are precious few pedestrians to begin with. Why do commuters on their way to catch a train at 7:15am in the dead of winter need to stop for a playground stop sign? It’s ludicrous and a terrible imposition of government—the tyranny of a few determining the laws for the rest of us.
A few final notes:
Streets with bus routes should never have stop signs. That includes Touhy and California Avenues.
Aldermen should not have the right to install stop signs without expensive traffic studies that their budgets cannot afford.
Major streets with traffic lights should not have stop signs.
Streets with long stop sign-free stretches, like Touhy Avenue between Western Avenue and I-294 (9 mi.), should never have stop signs.
Stop signs waste motorists’ fuel and time and inflict more wear and tear on their vehicles. Government and neighborhood groups should be working together to remove stop signs, not install more. Fewer stop signs would mean the remaining stop signs receive more motorist compliance. As it stands, motorists pay less and less attention to stop signs as they continue to sprout like weeds around town. This makes our streets less safe for pedestrians—the opposite of the stated goal of the fanatical stop sign activists.
To protect a park, which has pedestrian traffic a few hours a day in warm-weather months
To protect a school, which has pedestrian traffic two hours a day, 180 days a year
To help people cross a major street. Illinois law already requires motorists to stop for pedestrians in crosswalks, so a stop sign is redundant.
As I’ve previously noted in this blog, Chicago residents whine to their aldermen about allegedly dangerous intersections. The alderman quickly install stop signs to placate the masses. Former Ald. Burt Natarus (42nd), whom I couldn’t stand, loved doing this. So did former Ald. Bernie Hansen (44th) and his successor, Ald. Tom Tunney. So does Ald. Bernie Stone (50th). Main thoroughfares that motorists once navigated rather quickly are now stop-and-go ordeals that are no better than side streets and often worse. I would support electric or temporary stop signs that were operational only when pedestrians were actually using the crosswalk. But a 24-7 stop sign is terribly unfair to motorists forced to stop and check for pedestrian traffic all hours of the day and night when there are precious few pedestrians to begin with. Why do commuters on their way to catch a train at 7:15am in the dead of winter need to stop for a playground stop sign? It’s ludicrous and a terrible imposition of government—the tyranny of a few determining the laws for the rest of us.
A few final notes:
Streets with bus routes should never have stop signs. That includes Touhy and California Avenues.
Aldermen should not have the right to install stop signs without expensive traffic studies that their budgets cannot afford.
Major streets with traffic lights should not have stop signs.
Streets with long stop sign-free stretches, like Touhy Avenue between Western Avenue and I-294 (9 mi.), should never have stop signs.
Stop signs waste motorists’ fuel and time and inflict more wear and tear on their vehicles. Government and neighborhood groups should be working together to remove stop signs, not install more. Fewer stop signs would mean the remaining stop signs receive more motorist compliance. As it stands, motorists pay less and less attention to stop signs as they continue to sprout like weeds around town. This makes our streets less safe for pedestrians—the opposite of the stated goal of the fanatical stop sign activists.
Monday, November 10, 2008
New stoplight at 2300 W Irving Park Rd
Driving to Lakeview on the 30th, I noticed a new stoplight ready to go online at Irving Park Road and Oakley Avenue, halfway between Western Avenue and Leavitt Street.
Sitting and sputtering along at about 6 mph on eastbound Irving Park that night, I can say with absolute confidence the last thing Irving Park needs is yet another stoplight. Irving Park tends to be heavily congested between its Kennedy Expressway ramps (at Pulaski) and Lake Shore Drive, and often for several miles west of the Kennedy as well. It’s bad for everyone except residents of Oakley Avenue who want to turn left. So thousands of motorists, truckers and bus riders are stopped daily for the convenience of a few.
This is so Chicago. I haven’t been able to track down online the approximate cost of a stoplight installation, but my guess is it is around $100,000 or more. In Chicago, this usually involves three or four posts into the ground, plus the overhead arms.
Having lived in Chicago for more than a decade, I have long decried the explosion of stop-sign installations as they sprout like weeds. Every excuse—a school (kids), a park (kids), a condo complex (old people)—is used, regardless of the actual number of pedestrians. The alderman signs off on the petition, and there’s another 24-hour traffic stop. There are several intersections in Chicago—either T-intersections or bizarre one-way configurations—in which cross-traffic is impossible. So the stop sign is there just for fun or just for the convenience of the occasional pedestrian. If you don’t believe me, I can show you in Rogers Park and the Gold Coast, respectively, these intersections.
2
w
STOP a
(A park is here.) y>>>>One way east>>>>>>>>
t STOP
r
a Fig. 1. A T-intersection with a worthless stop sign.
f
f
i
c
2
w
STOP a
<<<< 1-way west < >>>>One way east>>>>>>>>
y STOP
t
r
a Fig. 2. An intersection with no cross-flow traffic
f and a stop sign.
f
i
c
With the massive increase in vehicles and miles driven in Chicago over the past several years, we need fewer traffic controls, not more. I’m not suggesting uncontrolled intersections, like in Lincolnwood. I’m suggesting far fewer four-way stop signs. Let drivers drive! If an intersection doesn’t warrant a traffic signal, remove it and post stop signs at the minor street so the major-street traffic can continue in peace. If kids are crossing the street for a park or a school, then install an electric stop sign activated either by a timer or a janitor. There’s no reason hundreds of Metra commuters driving eastbound on Lunt to the Rogers Park train station at 6:30am in December need to screech to a complete stop for a playground used after school and on weekends when it’s nice out. (There are two of those on Lunt: near Western and near Ridge.) For one driver on one day, it’s no big deal. But the cumulative effect is thousands of dollars lost in time, gasoline and brake decay over the course of a year.
Part of the problem in Chicago is that no one pays attention to crosswalks. If police aggressively ticketed crosswalk violators—and CPD has tried enforcement zones recently—there would be no need for the flurry of stop signs, and “No Turn on Red 7am-7pm” could change to “Turning vehicles yield to pedestrians.” So much friendlier, so much time and gas saved.
Two other complaints about commuting in Chicago:
1. Chicago has no “Yield” signs. They would make slowing for an intersection legal; that’s what most people do at stop signs anyway. There are so many stop signs now they are no longer taken seriously.
2. At intersections with sparse late-night cross traffic, let the signals flash yellow on the major street and red on the minor street 11pm-6am. How much gasoline is wasted sitting at lights with no traffic? It’s outrageous.
Major Chicago streets that were once pleasant thoroughfares with lights every half-mile or so have become stop-sign minefields:
1. Sheffield Avenue
2. Halsted Street
3. Clark Street (the Grace and School signs back up traffic for blocks)
4. Sheridan Road
5. Inner Lake Shore Drive between West Sheridan Road and Belmont Avenue
6. California Avenue
7. Diversey Avenue
8. Randolph Street
9. Lake Street
10. Broadway (that Melrose stop sign is a killer)
Sitting and sputtering along at about 6 mph on eastbound Irving Park that night, I can say with absolute confidence the last thing Irving Park needs is yet another stoplight. Irving Park tends to be heavily congested between its Kennedy Expressway ramps (at Pulaski) and Lake Shore Drive, and often for several miles west of the Kennedy as well. It’s bad for everyone except residents of Oakley Avenue who want to turn left. So thousands of motorists, truckers and bus riders are stopped daily for the convenience of a few.
This is so Chicago. I haven’t been able to track down online the approximate cost of a stoplight installation, but my guess is it is around $100,000 or more. In Chicago, this usually involves three or four posts into the ground, plus the overhead arms.
Having lived in Chicago for more than a decade, I have long decried the explosion of stop-sign installations as they sprout like weeds. Every excuse—a school (kids), a park (kids), a condo complex (old people)—is used, regardless of the actual number of pedestrians. The alderman signs off on the petition, and there’s another 24-hour traffic stop. There are several intersections in Chicago—either T-intersections or bizarre one-way configurations—in which cross-traffic is impossible. So the stop sign is there just for fun or just for the convenience of the occasional pedestrian. If you don’t believe me, I can show you in Rogers Park and the Gold Coast, respectively, these intersections.
2
w
STOP a
(A park is here.) y>>>>One way east>>>>>>>>
t STOP
r
a Fig. 1. A T-intersection with a worthless stop sign.
f
f
i
c
2
w
STOP a
<<<< 1-way west < >>>>One way east>>>>>>>>
y STOP
t
r
a Fig. 2. An intersection with no cross-flow traffic
f and a stop sign.
f
i
c
With the massive increase in vehicles and miles driven in Chicago over the past several years, we need fewer traffic controls, not more. I’m not suggesting uncontrolled intersections, like in Lincolnwood. I’m suggesting far fewer four-way stop signs. Let drivers drive! If an intersection doesn’t warrant a traffic signal, remove it and post stop signs at the minor street so the major-street traffic can continue in peace. If kids are crossing the street for a park or a school, then install an electric stop sign activated either by a timer or a janitor. There’s no reason hundreds of Metra commuters driving eastbound on Lunt to the Rogers Park train station at 6:30am in December need to screech to a complete stop for a playground used after school and on weekends when it’s nice out. (There are two of those on Lunt: near Western and near Ridge.) For one driver on one day, it’s no big deal. But the cumulative effect is thousands of dollars lost in time, gasoline and brake decay over the course of a year.
Part of the problem in Chicago is that no one pays attention to crosswalks. If police aggressively ticketed crosswalk violators—and CPD has tried enforcement zones recently—there would be no need for the flurry of stop signs, and “No Turn on Red 7am-7pm” could change to “Turning vehicles yield to pedestrians.” So much friendlier, so much time and gas saved.
Two other complaints about commuting in Chicago:
1. Chicago has no “Yield” signs. They would make slowing for an intersection legal; that’s what most people do at stop signs anyway. There are so many stop signs now they are no longer taken seriously.
2. At intersections with sparse late-night cross traffic, let the signals flash yellow on the major street and red on the minor street 11pm-6am. How much gasoline is wasted sitting at lights with no traffic? It’s outrageous.
Major Chicago streets that were once pleasant thoroughfares with lights every half-mile or so have become stop-sign minefields:
1. Sheffield Avenue
2. Halsted Street
3. Clark Street (the Grace and School signs back up traffic for blocks)
4. Sheridan Road
5. Inner Lake Shore Drive between West Sheridan Road and Belmont Avenue
6. California Avenue
7. Diversey Avenue
8. Randolph Street
9. Lake Street
10. Broadway (that Melrose stop sign is a killer)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
