4 ms·
Why not just put up "No Through Traffic" or "Local Traffic Only" signs as many other cities do?
by eli 12y ago
Why not just put up "No Through Traffic" or "Local Traffic Only" signs as many other cities do?
- fiatmoney 12y agoThey're just about unenforceable.
- eli 12y agoWell, I got a ticket for it once -- only traffic ticket I've ever received. So not entirely unenforceable. I think most people at least make an effort to not break clearly marked traffic laws. And anyway, it seems tough to complain about people taking a driving shortcut that's perfectly legal.
- dragonwriter 12y agoOr, adopt the more common (and also pre-GPS) solution of just designing residential neighborhoods (or refitting existing roads with strategically placed auto-traffic barriers) so that they aren't usable for cut-through auto traffic, but still perfectly usable for ingress/egress and for through traffic by pedestrians/bicycles. Complaining that people are using public roads that connect their origin with their destination to travel from that origin to that destination is, well, bizarre.
- eli 12y agoProbably the right answer, but that sounds like multiple orders of magnitude more difficult than putting up some signs and/or posting a cop to write some tickets. Also, I assume the people who live in those neighborhoods would want still want their houses easily reachable by car.
- bryanlarsen 12y agoMy preferred solution would be 15 mph speed limits, strictly enforced. A car-pedestrian collision is highly unlikely to be fatal below 15-20mph, so it achieves the purpose of making the streets "safe for children". Some people would still cut through at 15 mph, but it would limit that traffic to the really bad times. And it would slow down local traffic, who are much more likely to be using the streets at the time children are playing.