What really irritates me in this scenario is that the driver didn't just switch to another parallel street given the traditional street grid in this area. It most likely would not have cost her even a few seconds. This entitled behavior - I do think you are right on about the comfort and "video screen" nature of modern cars - in this case is really the problem. Pleasant street does not suffer from typical over design, it's basically right sized for this neighborhood especially with street parking. While I am very much on board with the Strong Towns message about overdesign and innate driver behavior on them (I have read all the books Chuck has recommended on the psychology of this), my observation is that even on streets that telegraph "this is a slow speed street" we have a lot of drivers that are behaving inappropriately. This is truly "deviant behavior", not a result of a design issue and I believe it is a function of many things, including this entitlement, a discussion of which probably warrants an entire post. I'll give you an example in Annapolis: https://goo.gl/maps/F1fG4jF7PV8HbnrS9 one travel lane, a 3' bike lane, parking both sides and multiple bumpouts; this design telegraphs to me a 15 mph speed (25 is posted but that feels way too fast). On those bumpouts there is significant evidence of damage (pieces of concrete curb missing!) so people are hitting it. To make matters worse, in the last year two people were hit on this stretch, one killed in a hit and run. In addition to my anecdotal observations, all of this tells me people are just driving like a**holes. I believe the public attitudes in this country are too lenient on deviant driving (you know, an "accident"); there may be an economic cost to that behavior via a direct fine, insurance or civil lawsuits, but until we change our laws to remove the entitlement, we won't have any significant change in carnage. Yes, design will facilitate in the places that Strong Towns illustrates but it's not the full story. Probably the best example is the Netherlands where the assumed liability is opposite. After a crash, a driver must prove they were not at fault. That is ahuge incentive to behave. In this county, you pay a fine and go on your way. You know what they say? If you want to commit the perfect murder in this county, run someone over in a car and drag a bike under them. Sorry if this is a little ranty, but it is one of my hot buttons.
Great to hear about the livable streets committee! I’ve been pondering the same type of change here, since the Provincetown bike committee is involved in lots of street design review and it seems silly to focus exclusively on bikes. I’d love to hear more about the scope and mission changes. (Found you via the StrongTowns article yesterday.)
What really irritates me in this scenario is that the driver didn't just switch to another parallel street given the traditional street grid in this area. It most likely would not have cost her even a few seconds. This entitled behavior - I do think you are right on about the comfort and "video screen" nature of modern cars - in this case is really the problem. Pleasant street does not suffer from typical over design, it's basically right sized for this neighborhood especially with street parking. While I am very much on board with the Strong Towns message about overdesign and innate driver behavior on them (I have read all the books Chuck has recommended on the psychology of this), my observation is that even on streets that telegraph "this is a slow speed street" we have a lot of drivers that are behaving inappropriately. This is truly "deviant behavior", not a result of a design issue and I believe it is a function of many things, including this entitlement, a discussion of which probably warrants an entire post. I'll give you an example in Annapolis: https://goo.gl/maps/F1fG4jF7PV8HbnrS9 one travel lane, a 3' bike lane, parking both sides and multiple bumpouts; this design telegraphs to me a 15 mph speed (25 is posted but that feels way too fast). On those bumpouts there is significant evidence of damage (pieces of concrete curb missing!) so people are hitting it. To make matters worse, in the last year two people were hit on this stretch, one killed in a hit and run. In addition to my anecdotal observations, all of this tells me people are just driving like a**holes. I believe the public attitudes in this country are too lenient on deviant driving (you know, an "accident"); there may be an economic cost to that behavior via a direct fine, insurance or civil lawsuits, but until we change our laws to remove the entitlement, we won't have any significant change in carnage. Yes, design will facilitate in the places that Strong Towns illustrates but it's not the full story. Probably the best example is the Netherlands where the assumed liability is opposite. After a crash, a driver must prove they were not at fault. That is ahuge incentive to behave. In this county, you pay a fine and go on your way. You know what they say? If you want to commit the perfect murder in this county, run someone over in a car and drag a bike under them. Sorry if this is a little ranty, but it is one of my hot buttons.
Great to hear about the livable streets committee! I’ve been pondering the same type of change here, since the Provincetown bike committee is involved in lots of street design review and it seems silly to focus exclusively on bikes. I’d love to hear more about the scope and mission changes. (Found you via the StrongTowns article yesterday.)