Charlotte Center City Streetcar Network

[SgtCampsalot]

14 minutes ago, UPNoDa said:

LOVE the rainbow cross-walk. What city is that?

I don't know, but you know the reason I heard from a CDOT employee for why we shouldn't have colorful/artistic sidewalks?

Because the design would have given pedestrians an unrealistic sense of safety.

 

Edited April 12, 2016 by SgtCampsalot

[alb1no panther]

2 minutes ago, SgtCampsalot said:

I don't know, but you know the reason I heard from a CDOT employee for why we shouldn't have colorful/artistic sidewalks?

Because the design would have given pedestrians an unrealistic sense of safety.

 

i guess it depends on the intersection.  NASCAR intersection? probably not.  NoDa and 35th, probably OK.

[UPNoDa]

8 minutes ago, SgtCampsalot said:

I don't know, but you know the reason I heard from a CDOT employee for why we shouldn't have colorful/artistic sidewalks?

Because the design would have given pedestrians an unrealistic sense of safety.

 

You might be right, take a look a the girl with earbuds in walking right thru the intersection looking down at her phone...too funny!

[Spartan]

2 hours ago, SgtCampsalot said:

I don't know, but you know the reason I heard from a CDOT employee for why we shouldn't have colorful/artistic sidewalks?

Because the design would have given pedestrians an unrealistic sense of safety.

 

That's not what I've heard. Colored crosswalks are simply less visible to drivers than white ones. The city obviously doesn't mind different designs though - just look at Plaza-Midwood, South/Woodlawn, or Beatties Ford around LaSalle. The problem in this city is that drivers by and large consider pedestrians an afterthought, so it's key to make the crosswalks as highly visible as possible that's why we saw the city switch to the high visibility 'piano key' crosswalks a few years back.

Crosswalks can give pedestrians an unrealistic expectation of safety if located improperly. NC is a 'yield to pedestrians' state, meaning that drivers aren't obligated to stop for them without some sort of signal or other device instructing that behavior. 

[SgtCampsalot]

2 minutes ago, Spartan said:

NC is a 'yield to pedestrians' state, meaning that drivers aren't obligated to stop for them without some sort of signal or other device instructing that behavior. 

Right, I learned that in driver's ed. But doesn't that mean that motorists always have to stop for pedestrians no matter what? That's what I grew up thinking...

[alb1no panther]

yield to pedestrians means the car has to stop.

[Spartan]

It means they should yield if a pedestrian is in the street in front of them, but result is that it puts the onus on the pedestrian to wait for gaps in traffic. The problem is that pedestrians don't think about the law when crossing the street, and many of them incorrectly assume that cars are obligated to stop for them when that isn't the case. 

IMO that is a law that we, as a state, should be lobbying to change. It probably wouldn't even be that controversial - but ore importantly it would help improve the culture towards pedestrians over time. 

[ajfunder]

2 hours ago, UPNoDa said:

LOVE the rainbow cross-walk. What city is that?

It's Seattle's First Hill Streetcar. The project included removing lanes to build a cycle track and a wider sidewalk along the route as well. Awesome project.

[alb1no panther]

7 minutes ago, Spartan said:

It means they should yield if a pedestrian is in the street in front of them, but result is that it puts the onus on the pedestrian to wait for gaps in traffic. The problem is that pedestrians don't think about the law when crossing the street, and many of them incorrectly assume that cars are obligated to stop for them when that isn't the case. 

IMO that is a law that we, as a state, should be lobbying to change. It probably wouldn't even be that controversial - but ore importantly it would help improve the culture towards pedestrians over time. 

I hate them people with a passion.  They walk about with no regard for anyone's safety and expect you to slam the brakes.  You want to change the law to allow this behavior?

[kermit]

6 minutes ago, alb1no panther said:

I hate them people with a passion.  They walk about with no regard for anyone's safety and expect you to slam the brakes.  You want to change the law to allow this behavior?

Yes.

Why should one segment of the public get special privileges just because they are in an expensive metal box? All taxpayers pay for for city streets, not just drivers.

[alb1no panther]

2 minutes ago, kermit said:

Yes.

Why should one segment of the public get special privileges just because they are in an expensive metal box? All taxpayers pay for for city streets, not just drivers.

Then close off cars from the roads in center city altogether then.  Other than that, wait on the damn cross walk. 

[kermit]

 

6 minutes ago, alb1no panther said:

Then close off cars from the roads in center city altogether then.  Other than that, wait on the damn cross walk. 

There you go again, arbitrarily privileging one group over another.

Drivers and peds (and bikes) need to coexist and share space (we all pay for it). In order to do that drivers need to travel at safe speeds. Slamming on breaks should never be necessary.

[alb1no panther]

^I think we're talking about two different things.

[11 HouseBZ]

I think he/she (sorry, I haven't met you yet to know) was referring to when a pedestrian crosses when they aren't suppose to. For example, when the light is red/ big orange hand is up for them. I agree with both of you, the road is for everyone. But don't jump out in front of me, regardless of my speed, and expect a miracle. When it isn't your turn to use said shared space, stay ON the sidewalk (for pedestrians) or BEHIND the white line before the crosswalk (for vehicles). 

Spartan, just for my understanding, what law change is needed? How does it need to be changed? And how would this help? Thanks

 

P.S. A question for the runners out there. What is with people running on the pavement/roadway beside the sidewalk? Wasn't the sidewalk built for that? I swear some people have a death wish sometimes.

[southslider]

^I think Spartan was suggesting that NC change from a yield to peds state to a stop for peds state.  But given a state legislature thinking of outlawing bike lanes, I doubt they'd change the current laws in favor of pedestrians.

Streetcars are vehicles that can have difficulty stopping suddenly for pedestrians.  If the section of Gold Line through CPCC were ever converted to Silver Line, the design would need to favor transit more. In addition to limiting motor vehicles on Elizabeth inside of Charlottetowne, fewer crosswalks and protected sidewalks (concrete planters between trees?) would likely be needed.

Edited April 13, 2016 by southslider

[R.Talbott]

7 hours ago, 11 HouseBZ said:

I think he/she (sorry, I haven't met you yet to know) was referring to when a pedestrian crosses when they aren't suppose to. For example, when the light is red/ big orange hand is up for them. I agree with both of you, the road is for everyone. But don't jump out in front of me, regardless of my speed, and expect a miracle. When it isn't your turn to use said shared space, stay ON the sidewalk (for pedestrians) or BEHIND the white line before the crosswalk (for vehicles). 

Spartan, just for my understanding, what law change is needed? How does it need to be changed? And how would this help? Thanks

 

P.S. A question for the runners out there. What is with people running on the pavement/roadway beside the sidewalk? Wasn't the sidewalk built for that? I swear some people have a death wish sometimes.

Pavement is softer than concrete, and jogging/running can be terrible for your knees, ankles, shins, etc. They're trying to cushion the damage done.  It's such a small difference I don't really understand it myself.  Alternative forms of cardio would be better (biking, swimming, elliptical).

[11 HouseBZ]

^ Thanks both of you. I'll still take my chances against that hard concrete. The worst it's ever given me was a skinned elbow. If you look at pedestrian vs vehicle accidents right now in Charlotte,  pedestrians aren't exactly winning. Ever. 

[alb1no panther]

Roads also tend to be more level than sidewalks.  And, well, they tend to be long, too.  Runners love both of those things.  I think road running should be illegal [while we're on the subject].

[kermit]

To be clear I am advocating for total pedestrian right of way everywhere in the city (not just crosswalks).  Jaywalking is a total BS law that was manufactured by the auto industry. There is no commandment or admendment to the constitution that allows cars to go fast. Since autos are the only mode that can really do harm the onus should be on drivers to not kill or injure, any 'incidents' between cars and peds and bikes should -automatically- be the fault of the driver (this is the law throughout the Netherlands so it is a reasonable expectation).

I know this will never happen, but THE reason why nearly every US city sucks is because we surrendered most of our built environment to shiny metal boxes. The only way to fix that is ending the artificial privledge we have given to drivers.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/04/absurd-primacy-of-the-car-in-american-life/476346/

I say all this as someone who has a 20mile auto commute each day and I mostly enjoy driving.

(aparently I am in a confrontational mood today, my apologies).

Edited April 13, 2016 by kermit

[alb1no panther]

3 minutes ago, kermit said:

To be clear I am advocating for total pedestrian right of way everywhere in the city (not just crosswalks).  Jaywalking is a total BS law that was manufactured by the auto industry. There is no commandment or admendment to the constitution that allows cars to go fast. Since autos are the only mode that can really do harm the onus should be on drivers to not kill or injure, any 'incidents' between cars and peds and bikes should -automatically- be the fault of the driver (this is the law throughout the Netherlands so it is a reasonable expectation).

I know this will never happen, but THE reason why nearly every US city sucks is because we surrendered most of our built environment to shiny metal boxes. The only way to fix that is ending the artificial privledge we have given to drivers.

I say all this as someone who has a 20mile auto commute each day and I mostly enjoy driving.

(aparently I am in a confrontational mood today, my apologies).

This makes absolutely no sense.  So, because cars CAN cause more damage, it should put the driver in perpetual liability versus a pedestrian?  And how is jaywalking a BS law?  Society recognizes the value of cars, so we paved streets for them, and we paved "streets" for pedestrians.  Should there be less cars [and more bike lanes in center city]?  Yes.  Should pedestrians be allowed to halt traffic and endanger everyone else simply because they don't want to wait for the cross walk?  No.  I'm all for even shutting down the streets in Uptown during the work week.  That's not going to happen.  But that doesn't mean I'm going to flip 180º to allowing people to dart out in front of cars.

[kermit]

What is hard to understand? We decided to privledge cars with the right of way over pedestrians back in the 1920s. That was a mistake, its time to go back to the pedestrian has the right of way system that we have had since the dawn of time (execpt for the past 100 year blip)

Darting infront of cars and flipping 180s is never an issue if cars drive at reasonable speeds.

Most of the most affluent and productive nations on earth have no fault pedestrian policies. Economic well being is not a reason to avoid subjugating cars. 

Edited April 13, 2016 by kermit

[alb1no panther]

Again, this comes back to us being on different levels right now.  I think we're concerned about two different issues that involve the same facts and situations.  You're just talking about it on a larger scale maybe.  I'm essentially concerned solely with places like Center City, parts of South End, and NoDa.

[kermit]

7 minutes ago, alb1no panther said:

Again, this comes back to us being on different levels right now.  I think we're concerned about two different issues that involve the same facts and situations.  You're just talking about it on a larger scale maybe.  I'm essentially concerned solely with places like Center City, parts of South End, and NoDa.

All perfect locations to allow pedestrians to free range.

[Deleted.]

Can we please get this topic back to the Streetcar? Thats all I'm interested in.

[videtur quam contuor]

Re: streetcar and pedestrians, I operated the car 85 and learned that at 20 mph the car covers 30 feet/second. This does not include the time to come to a stop, only the distance before the brakes take effect. Same for any vehicle, of course.