Randall Cutting wrote: > The point of traffic calming is not to prevent access, rather it is a > method to encourage appropriate driving behavior. Drivers that respect > the residents and businesses within a neighborhood are very welcome to be > there. Those drivers that would rather drive at highway speed should use > the highways. > > If someone wishes to drive neighborhood streets they need to respect that > community. If it has been determined that traffic calming techniques are > necessary, then the community is trying to tell drivers to... DRIVE > CALMER.
Mark Anderson: You've unintentionally hit the nail on the head here. EVERYONE has determined that traffic calming is necessary. Have you heard of a neighborhood that has decided that calming isn't necessary for their area? Everyone wants traffic to move like snails through their neighborhood, or failing that, drive in somebody else's neighborhood. Contrary to Chris Johnson's comments, this is all about NIMBY. It's not just the small streets that are subject to this craze, it's the thoroughfares also, such as 50th St, Lyndale, and Lake St. that I've heard about. I think maybe the neighborhoods do have too much power, at least in this area. If the city came up with a master plan that actually allowed the cars to drive somewhere, maybe it would make a little more sense. Chris Johnson writes: Transportation infrastructure and traffic patterns need to be as close to stable as we can make them. Then when people invest time or money in living, visiting, patronizing or traveling someplace, their investments won't be often ruined by short-sighted public planning, or self-centered private enterprise. For example, if one decides the most important thing on their list of qualities of where to live is that it be on a quiet, lightly traveled street, then when they buy a home on such a street, who has the right to then ruin that investment for them and their neighbors by abruptly and without good cause, turning that street into a busy, noisy thorough-fare? Likewise the businesswoman who starts a store on a busy street with good access for customers -- who has the right to abruptly and capriciously reroute traffic so that it cannot easily get to her store? Or, on a bigger scale, suppose a large number of stores and businesses and developers invest millions into building up along a major transportation route only to have it evaporate? This last case is a perfect counter-example as to why rail transit is good: one can be fairly sure that the rail line is not going to disappear over night. Bus lines can be moved on a whim. Rail lines tend to endure for generations, and this is a good thing. Citizens across an entire metro area get to know the area along the rail line as the place for "connectivity" to the rail line. They learn and remember and accept that along the rail line there are businesses and people who want to be there to take advantage of the transportation, and who willingly tolerate the noise or other drawbacks. People can then choose throughout their lives to gravitate towards or avoid such "stable" infrastructure. It's cheaper. People are happier. The economics are better. Mark Anderson: Cry me a river, Chris. Things change, that's life. We live in a city, and things don't stay the same. I agree that the city should endeavor not to change neighborhoods with their activities, because people decided to move into their neighborhoods for a reason, and it messes everybody up (although the city shouldn't be paralyzed just because they might change a neighborhood). But it certainly isn't the city's job to offset changes that come naturally to the neighborhood. Because there has been great amount of development in the southwest metro area in the last 30 years, Fulton has been subject to ever increasing traffic of cars going between Mpls and the suburbs. But I don't think the city has the obligation to return Fulton to its bucolic antecedents. Mark V Anderson Bancroft REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
