Columbus City and Suburban Development News (Cincinnati, Worthington: electric, rank, Scottish)

[mattbward]

You are on the wrong forum dude. Seriously. What is the point in constantly, in OCD fashion, pooping all over Columbus every chance you get? Just quit already. It's tired and irritating to people that may not have a choice but to live in Columbus due to work or family. Please I beg you, find a new obsession and go somewhere else. Enough is enough, Mplsite.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by Mplsite

People walk over here, they don't in Columbus. Exponentially fewer pedestrians = less pedestrian injuries and deaths overall. We have at least 3x as many walkable neighborhoods than Columbus and half the population. Maybe in part from all the people ran over.

That wasn't what you said. You said Columbus had the greater problem with people getting hit, yet Minneapolis, according to the CDC, had the bigger issue and you have been unable or unwilling to post any numbers of your own to support your narrative. Minneapolis is the more dangerous city for pedestrians from cars.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by Mplsite

Even the burbs over here look like Portland compared to Columbus. Totally on another level.

But you just said they all drive. How is that any different? Get your story straight.

[Mplsite]

Originally Posted by mattbward

You are on the wrong forum dude. Seriously. What is the point in constantly, in OCD fashion, pooping all over Columbus every chance you get? Just quit already. It's tired and irritating to people that may not have a choice but to live in Columbus due to work or family. Please I beg you, find a new obsession and go somewhere else. Enough is enough, Mplsite.

Says a guy from Knoxville (who moved from Columbus?). How do people not have a choice as to where they live? I thought we lived in the freest nation on Earth? I have to visit Columbus for a week in a few months which for me is like time traveling backwards a couple decades. If you want to spin having none of the urban necessities that other cities have as positives I'm not stopping you.

[Mplsite]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

That wasn't what you said. You said Columbus had the greater problem with people getting hit, yet Minneapolis, according to the CDC, had the bigger issue and you have been unable or unwilling to post any numbers of your own to support your narrative. Minneapolis is the more dangerous city for pedestrians from cars.

Not according to this article on a 2014 report:

Boston was deemed the safest city for walkers followed by Pittsburgh, Seattle, New York, San Francisco and then the Twin Cities.

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but somehow pedestrian safety doesn't get Columbus ranked among likes of San Francisco, New York, and Seattle. That would require actually doing soemthing to earn that recognition, instead of blind boosterism about how Columbus should be above Minneapolis and St Paul in the top 5.

[chet_kinkaid]

I know hipsters and urbanophiles think jaywalking is ok,but I have nearly hit dozens of jaywalkers,especially near broad and high,people just dart out from behind the buses stopped etc..at least look both ways if you jaywalk

[Mplsite]

Originally Posted by chet_kinkaid

I know hipsters and urbanophiles think jaywalking is ok,but I have nearly hit dozens of jaywalkers,especially near broad and high,people just dart out from behind the buses stopped etc..at least look both ways if you jaywalk

Jaywalking mid-block can be much safer than crossing at an official crosswalk on a busy intersection since the chance of a car turning into you on green when you have the right of way is zero. It can also be much less safer if you're not looking before you cross like these people do: not sure what make up of COTA riders are urbanohphiles and hipsters. Whenever I grab my bike off the front bus rack and need to walk across the bus I look to see if 1, the light has turned red yet and I have my walk signal. If yes,then 2, is there oncoming traffic in the next travel lane where they can't see I'm in front of the bus? If clear and I go I also check behind me approaching midway to see if there's turning traffic that looks like it's going too fast and possibly not yielding to my right of way. If not I keep an eye on possible right-turning traffic in front of me.

I don't understand people who do it any other way. Walk defensively: look all ways. I do have to give kudos to Columbus for their campaign years to encourage defensive walking when using a crosswalk and check for turning vehicles, I just think their wording could've been chosen better since it put the onus more on the pedestrian; I think they installed signs which read, "Watch for turning traffic when crossing". Are they still doing that? I think they should start a campaign for pedestrians which says to look out for bad or law-breaking drivers and walk defensively, since that gets the message across to pedestrians to take extra care while admonishing drivers for not following the law while incorrectly operating heavy dangerous machinery in public.

[Mplsite]

Even in NYC which ranks among the safest for pedestrians there were 144 pedestrian deaths in 2014 and 20 cyclists killed by cars which combined accounted for 61% of all total traffic related deaths. We have to keep in mind that these are American city rankings and when compared to other 1st world cities we don't perform nearly as well. Even so, these top ranking American cities are also the most aggressive in changing the status quo.

There's no good reason for why Columbus isn't improving at a similar pace at the very least, let alone adopting measures to streamline pedestrian improvements and surpass other cities to join the top ten in just a handful of years. The problem with Columbus is that once they do something right they call it a night: the Cap, quality traffic calming like on Gay St, and even bike boulevards which include traffic calming elements that helps pedestrian safey. None of these have been repeated elsewhere in the city for nearly a decade and although I may wrong about the bike boulevards I think Milton Ave is still the only one ever completed from what I can find and that was years ago: I remember riding that right after it debuted just down from my Clintonville apartment on Como Ave. If there are tons of pedestrian safety improvements going on this year, then I'd like to see them all posted here. Otherwise my posts just rightly highlight the glaring lack thereof and is no reason to pat oneself on the back for standing around and accepting the status quo.

[Mplsite]

Just thought it fair to evaluate some completed projects: maybe I've been giving Columbus too much flac while pursuing its status as a "world class cycling community": that's from an article back in 2012.

http://columbus.gov/bikeprojects/

Potential Bikeways to include with 2013 Resurfacing

(In Progress)
The City is considering the addition of bikeway markings with the following 2013 roadway resurfacing projects. These could include bike lanes, shared-lane markings (sharrows), or bicycle boulevard markings:
Champion Ave - Cole St to Leonard Ave
Ohio Ave - Cole St to Mt Vernon Ave
Oak St - Grant Ave to Lester Dr
West Fifth Ave - Glenn Ave to Kenny Rd

It's telling that 2013 projects are still listed as "In Progress".


Champion Ave - Cole St to Leonard Ave: Bike lanes downgraded to sharrows, because clearly so many cars are parked in the two parking lanes that not one could be sacrificed for a protected or buffered bike lane.
Ohio Ave - Cole St to Mt Vernon Ave: Same deal as Champion. You can see on a local site how they switched from 100% going forward with bike lanes to not: Columbus Rides Bikes!: City of Columbus - Current Bike Projects
Oak - Grant Ave to Lester Dr: no bike lanes or even sharrows as seen in the 8/2014 streetview.
West Fifth Ave - Glenn Ave to Kenny Rd: Not seeing any bike lanes or sharrows here.

So, is it just me or do the words "world class" seem way out of place with respect to these projects?

[ohioaninsc]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

To be fair, widening roads is proven to do the very opposite... it actually makes traffic worse, not better, because it encourages more people to drive.

As to Mplsite's ridiculous point... the only way to get rid of car accidents altogether is to get rid of cars. That's not likely in our lifetimes, although we can build with multi-modal infrastructure so that it reduces auto-traffic.

Proof?

When I lived in Cincinnati, I lived off a narrow 2 lane busy road...they widened it to 4 lanes...and what took me 15 min or more to reach 275 was cut in half. Widening roads does work...
Do you actually think 270 would be better if it was 2 lanes instead of 4 lanes up north?