Recent comments in /f/baltimore

essmithsd t1_j0hg1hf wrote

Please just don't go with the DC route, where you have to lock them up to specified areas, it's incredibly dumb.

Also, if you're going to require them to be parked in corrals, ensure that the corrals are actually SET UP and good to go. San Diego required scooters to be parked in corrals, and didn't even have corrals setup in the busiest neighborhoods. It effectively killed scooters in SD.

11

needledicklarry t1_j0hfh4n wrote

It’s not cool that people do that but cameras are just money machines for the gov that punish the average citizen

Look at 83, the people who used to drive crazy on it still do, while the rest of us are slowed to an agonizing crawl. It takes almost twice as long to get anywhere off 83 now. Those people who drive like maniacs don’t care about being ticketed. Also, people drive more erratically because of the cameras, speeding up then pumping their brakes when they know they’re coming up on one. It makes the roads far more dangerous than before.

By the same token, people who regularly run red lights do not care if they are ticketed. The people who get punished are the average citizens who are put into a situation where the light turns yellow and it is too late to stop safely, so they risk a ticket instead of slamming on the brakes and causing an accident. This happens even more regularly when the road is wet, and it rains a lot here.

−2

YorickTheCat t1_j0hf957 wrote

I'm all for limiting how fast cars can go, I think that's a public safety issue.

Candy bars... not so much, that comes down to personal responsibility and self harm; until people start swerving in and out of the candy aisle causing bodily harm to others, that is.

As for the constant monitoring? What happens when someone gets mugged? There is a huge push to ferret out every doorbell cam and security system camera that might have video of what happened. So, people don't want monitoring until they want monitoring. Cell phones seem to be the exception.

I'll add that I'm typing off the top of my head and have not put much real thought into the topics.

−3

Dr_Midnight t1_j0hf2if wrote

>Proper timing does not require synchronization. The situation could be drastically improved by a citywide overhaul to add sensors to non-priority streets. In the short-term, simply adjust timers to give those streets ten seconds every minute (or something along those lines).

Absolutely.

Hell, in the intermediary, a significant improvement would be to also shift some intersections from controlled signals to flashing red and yellow lights in the late night hours (2:30 - 5 AM).

Also, we need some traffic circles (roundabouts) in this region -- but done properly, unlike that dangerous joke of one in Charles Village.

>The problem isn't bad synchronization, it's that you have to sit at a red light for 30 or more seconds with no opposing traffic.

"30 Seconds"

* Laughs in Sinclair Lane *

There's that and taking literally 10 minutes to take Lombard from President to MLK at 3AM without a single other car on the road if you catch so much as one red light because you'll be sitting at a red light in - without exaggeration - every signal thereafter.

We've likewise all seen the hell scape that Downtown becomes during the day - though nothing is fixing that short of reducing demand -- aka: rail. If only there was a fully studied, fully funded rail line that ran East / West and could reduce demand by providing an incentive for others to park in the I-70 park and ride, and commute in from there. Perhaps we could even color it red.

I hate to say it because I've talked about the lack of enforcement of traffic laws and vehicle codes here for years (and I maintain that photo enforcement is not a solution), but this city's infrastructure passively encourages bad behavior.

1

Cunninghams_right t1_j0he89g wrote

you're assuming the goal of traffic timing is to maximize the speed of the people on the street. that isn't necessarily the case. you're also assuming that you don't have to design for the 1% case where there is some traffic diversion or something. without sensors, timing has to be done in a way that isn't optimal for normal conditions so that it's not a total shit-show in the rare case. sensors are great but very expensive to build and maintain.

the reality is that car-centric city design is just stupid and a waste of time. more cars and faster cars never made any location better. culs de sac exist specifically because people like cars for themselves but hate everyone elses' cars. if we're contemplating spending a fortune adding and maintaining sensors, we should first just build bike lanes everywhere and officially allow the Idaho stop. everyone will get to where they are going faster, greener, and with less expense. cars should take a back seat.

−1

lexabear t1_j0hattm wrote

I like these articles, but I think they did Hmart a disservice. Hmart looks expensive if you buy standard European-cuisine staples there (milk, butter, eggs, etc). If I took a shopping list that included "one whole fresh fish, 52 oz soy sauce, 2lb jackfruit, oyster sauce, 10 lbs jasmine rice" to any standard grocery store, then that store would look really expensive. Hmart (and other ethnic stores) are great at what they do (items from their cuisine). I don't buy 1 lb of cumin at Giant, and I don't buy milk from Hmart.

I understand that for these "how do stores compare" lists you have to have a standard list, and that the standard list is going to contain items that most people buy. I'm just arguing it's not a fair comparison to any ethnic store.

44

saltyjohnson t1_j0h8xul wrote

Proper timing does not require synchronization. The situation could be drastically improved by a citywide overhaul to add sensors to non-priority streets. In the short-term, simply adjust timers to give those streets ten seconds every minute (or something along those lines).

The problem isn't bad synchronization, it's that you have to sit at a red light for 30 or more seconds with no opposing traffic.

16

maiios t1_j0h7rbr wrote

I worked with the head of the ATVES program and tried to setup even a process where we used safety or crash data to identify places that should have a speed or red light camera. But he is very invested in the 311 request -> test camera -> see if it's profitable enough. Let's just say that there is no issue with profitability, and if the program really is about safety, then we really should roll them out much more widely.

It was mind boggling to be in our Toward Zero meetings talking about people dying in crashes, and how little appetite there was from the ATVES head and DOT director to go that direction. Never made sense to me.

3

Agile_Disk_5059 t1_j0h7lni wrote

Why aren't cars speed limited to 80 mph? There is no road in the US where cars can go faster than that.

Why does the government allow for unhealthy food like candy bars and McDonald's to be sold when almost 50% of adults are obese?

Why not have cameras covering every single square inch of public street and sidewalks so the police could watch any crime that takes place in public?

Because people don't want to live in some sort of scifi dystopian hell hole where they're monitored and controlled 24/7?

−1