Home » Featured » Recent Articles:

Option: Minority Of Drivers Put Others At Risk By Not Using Headlights When Visibility Is Reduced.

June 7, 2017 Featured, Transportation Comments Off on Option: Minority Of Drivers Put Others At Risk By Not Using Headlights When Visibility Is Reduced.
The latest Volvo’s have distinctive “Thor’s Hammer” daytime running lights.

I got pulled over once for not having my headlights on when I should have. Years ago I bought a used Audi A4 where the dash lights were on if the car was on. Leaving a restaurant on South Grand my first night with the car I could see fine due to all the urban light pollution, but others couldn’t see me. A few cars before the Audi was a used Volvo that allowed me to leave the switch in the on position — the lights went on and off with the car.

Anyway, a longtime pet peeve of mine is people who don’t have their lights on when they should. I rarely drive now, just once or twice each weekend. Maybe a weeknight dinner out (will be on South Grand again tomorrow night for our 3rd wedding anniversary). Most drivers are good about using their lights, but 5-10% are not.

The non-scientific results of Sunday’s poll:

Q: Agree or disagree: Drivers should turn on their headlights only when they have trouble seeing the road.

  • Strongly agree 0 [0%]
  • Agree 3 [7.89%]
  • Somewhat agree 0 [0%]
  • Neither agree or disagree 0 [0%]
  • Somewhat disagree 0 [0%]
  • Disagree 12 [31.58%]
  • Strongly disagree 23 [60.53%]
  • Unsure/No Answer 0 [0%]

All but 3 answered correctly. The 3 who agreed with the statement are wrong — they’re likely among those putting at risk by not turning on their lights when they should.

Most polls don’t get many comments on social media, but this one did. These comments on the Facebook post explain what I planned to explain today:

From Beverly B:

Headlights aren’t just for the driver to see the road, they’re for others to see you. I (barely) see untold numbers of headlight-less drivers at dusk, on cloudy days, and in other low light situations and to me, it’s dangerous. I habitually turn my headlights on when I start my car and I wish all cars were made so that they were always on when the engine is running.

Jacob S replied to the above comment:

Seconded! I was just about to comment along these same lines. I’m glad someone else already did! Headlights are extremely important for pedestrians to see cars! The fact that this topic is even up for debate (amongst society, not necessarily this page lol) is infuriating. As long as there are humans walking on this planet motor vehicles should always have to have headlights on at night and daytime running lights on during the day. It’s a safety issue. I wish Missouri police would step up their ticketing of people who aren’t using their lights during the night and when it’s raining (which is actually required by state law and is posted on every roadway upon entering the state).

Joe B wrote:

Back around 2002, Regina Walsh came knocking on my door asking for votes to become a Missouri Representative. She also asked if there was anything I’d like to see passed. With a resounding YES, I said a law to turn on all vehicle lights in rain, fog or snow. Imagine a tractor-trailer going down the middle lane of I-270. Now imagine that truck needs to get into the right hand lane for an upcoming exit ramp. Now imagine a GRAY CAR sitting next to that truck’s right side in the rain with NO LIGHTS ON. You want me to send you a private message with the original letter I typed up to be read in front of the Missouri Legislators? I will. I’m the one that started the ball rolling! Wake up people… Inclement weather hinders others vision from SEEING YOU unless you turn on your damn lights. Twenty years I drove without a single wreck or ticket. – end of rant.

David B quoted Missouri’s law:

RSMO 307.020:

(9) “When lighted lamps are required” means at any time from a half-hour after sunset to a half-hour before sunrise and at any other time when there is not sufficient light to render clearly discernible persons and vehicles on the highway at a distance of five hundred feet ahead. Lighted lamps shall also be required any time the weather conditions require usage of the motor vehicle’s windshield wipers to operate the vehicle in a careful and prudent manner as defined in section 304.012. The provisions of this section shall be interpreted to require lighted lamps during periods of fog even if usage of the windshield wipers is not necessary to operate the vehicle in a careful and prudent manner.

The laws in all 50 states are similar, though they do vary. A total of 20 states, including Missouri, require headlights when wipers are in use. .

As usual. one missed the mark. Jim Z commented :

Daytime running lights (DRL’s) serve essentially the same purpose and are required in Canada, so GM chose to make them standard on their vehicles 20-some years ago. The upside is that they do make vehicles more visible from the front, but the downside is that they do nothing to make vehicles more visible from the rear. Given the spread of automatic headlamps, it’s amazing the number of vehicles I see driving around at night with just their DRL’s on and no tail lights. But the biggest offenders seem to be some bicyclists (and yes, they are vehicles) who ride at night, many times against traffic, with no lights, at all! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daytime_running_lamp

DRLs make cars more visible during the daytime when visibility isn’t reduced by clouds, rain, snow, etc. Automatic headlights? The used Corolla I nought in 2008 had them — they’d come on when I pulled into our parking garage or if it was very late out. I had to manually switch then on many times.

Back to comments on Facebook, Brian W used his wife’s vehicle as an example:

A lot of cars (like Diane’s new RAV4) that have automatic headlights are not calibrated low enough to activate when there’s rain or overcast conditions during the day. I still find myself having to manually activate the headlights.
I suspect many people don’t even know *how* to manually turn theirs on!

And DRL’s (and the always-illuminated dash) Are pox on humanity!!
I can’t even count the # of people I see driving with lights out at night because of these things!

If it were up to me all lights (front, rear, dash) would be on at all times. Short of that it wouldn’t be difficult for new cars to have lights come on when wipers are used. Once we all stop driving and use autonomous vehicles the issue of lighting will become moot. Until that time, it is relevant.

Automotive lighting is one of my favorite topics so future posts will address design and regulation.

— Steve Patterson

 

Crossing Hampton At Elizabeth

June 5, 2017 Featured, Planning & Design, Walkability Comments Off on Crossing Hampton At Elizabeth

Four times per year I visit my doctor on South Hampton, 45-minutes each way via public transit to/from downtown. As a regular transit user and pedestrian I actually enjoy the time. What I don’t enjoy is crossing Hampton upon arrival.

The last five years I’ve taken MetroBus to my doctor — except maybe 2-3 times when my husband wasn’t using our car. So at least 15 times I’ve crossed Hampton at Elizabeth — West to East. The bus stop is in the 24th Ward, my doctor is in the 10th Ward.

Aerial image of intersection with bus stop in lower left corner — I cross SB lanes and then NB lanes to reach the lower right corner, click to view in Google Maps

Looking at older versions of Google’s Street View I know the pedestrian & traffic signals were added sometime between September 2007 and October 2009. The bus stop and curb ramps were all existing in September 2007.

View looking East across Hampton, the bus stop is to my right.
View looking back West across Hampton

Crosswalk and pedestrian signals, so what is there to complain about? Plenty.

The issue is the timing of pedestrian signals. First I need to cross the SB lanes of Hampton to the center median — not s problem — a walk is given when Elizabeth Ave traffic gets a green light. The walk signal might require pressing the activation button — I don’t remember. I reach the NB lanes og Hampton just as the pedestrian signal switches to don’t walk. While it would be nice to cross without having to wait I do realize the median is wide.

NB traffic gets a green light soon. After a while they get a red light. I should get a walk signal now that NB traffic has com to a stop, right?  No, that’s too logical. The NB traffic has been stopped because SB Hampton traffic has a left turn arrow. No traffic is crossing the crosswalk but the pedestrian signal on both directions of the NB Hampton lanes says “don’t walk.”No conflict at all — the city just didn’t think about the user or thought about it and didn’t care.

Weeks ago I mentioned the city’s bike/ped Twitter account while venting about this issue. The reply was

E-W peds conflict w N-S traffic…no time to cross if wired for xtra xing during SBL, safest to run w E-W traffic. Plenty of time to cross. 

Again, not enough time to cross all of Hampton at once. There must be a better solution, but I know the traffic engineer in charge of pedestrian infrastructure isn’t the person to figure it out.

It might take some new wires, but the pedestrian signals for NB should act independent of those for the SB lanes. If so, pedestrians wouldn’t get stuck in the median for a complete cycle of the traffic signals. This should have been the case when these were installed.

— Steve Patterson

 

Sunday Poll: When Should Drivers Turn On Their Headlights?

June 4, 2017 Featured, Sunday Poll, Transportation Comments Off on Sunday Poll: When Should Drivers Turn On Their Headlights?
Please vote below

For more than a dozen years now this blog has been about issues that interest me, the things I experience as an urban dweller. Automotive lighting is one such area of interest — been thinking about future posts on headlight & taillight design.

Driving at night without headlights might sound extremely undesirable at the moment, but in the future, it might be the norm.

Luc Donckerwolke, head of design for Hyundai luxury offshoot Genesis, believes that headlights will soon be unnecessary. Talking to a group of Australian journalists, Donckerwolke said autonomy might negate the need for headlights in the future, since the cars won’t need to “see” the road ahead.

In fact, that reasoning is why the latest Genesis concept, the GV80 fuel-cell crossover, only has tiny little peepers up front. “All Genesis [cars] will have those quad lights eventually, but as you see we are reducing the size because we are anticipating the fact that, slowly, cars won’t need lights anymore,” Donckerwolke told Motoring.com.au. (CNET)

Future autonomous cars might not need headlights, but those driven by humans do. Today’s poll is related.

This poll will close at 8pm. On Wednesday I’ll discuss the issues surrounding headlight use and share the results.

— Steve Patterson

 

 

St. Louis Board of Aldermen: Board Bills 42 (43-48 not introduced)

June 2, 2017 Board of Aldermen, Featured Comments Off on St. Louis Board of Aldermen: Board Bills 42 (43-48 not introduced)
St. Louis City Hall

The past few meetings of the St. Louis Board of Aldermen they’ve voted to suspend the rules to introduce other bill not on the published agenda.Happened again last week.

INTRODUCED LAST WEEK 5/25/17:

BOARD BILL NO. 42 INTRODUCED BY ALDERMAN JOE VACCARO An ordinance authorizing and directing the Director of Streets to permanently close, barricade, or otherwise impede the flow of traffic on Mardel Ave by blocking said traffic flow 250 feet west of Hampton Avenue, and containing an emergency clause.

ON AGENDA FOR INTRODUCTION TODAY 6/2/17:

Note: as of 9pm last night these 6 were not yet listed in Board Bills. I’ll check this morning and update with links when available.

Nothing at 8am today…and nothing at 10:15am…

On Sunday I watched the video of the meeting, the took role and made announcements — then adjourned.

Though not introduced on 6/2/17, the links are online. Added to this post on 6/8/17.

  • B.B.#43 – Davis –An Ordinance approving the petition for the addition of certain real property to the Forsyth Associates Community Improvement District; establishing the expanded Forsyth Associates Community Improvement District; and containing a severability clause.
  • B.B.#44 – Coatar –An Ordinance Approving the Petition To Amend the Petition for the Creation of the 14th and Market Community Improvement District; Finding a Public Purpose for the Petition to Amend the Petition for the Creation of the 14th and Market Community Improvement District; and Containing an Emergency Clause and Containing a Severability Clause.
  • B.B.#45 – Roddy –An Ordinance approving the petition to establish the City Foundry Community Improvement District, establishing the City Foundry Community Improvement District, reaffirming certain findings of blight and finding a public purpose for the establishment of the City Foundry Community Improvement District.
  • B.B.#46 – Kennedy – An ordinance approving a blighting study and redevelopment plan for Taylor/Delmar/Page/Kingshighway Redevelopment area; containing a severability clause.
  • B.B.#47 – Coatar – An ordinance amending Ord. 69416, by modifying the terms of the real estate tax abatement in the 2325 Ann Redevelopment area.
  • B.B.#48 – Cohn – An ordinance adding language to Ord. 68536 that gives the Excise Commissioner the discretion in the Twenty? Fifty Ward to begin the administrative process set forth in Ord. 68536 to fine, suspend or revoke a liquor license held by a business that fails to abate a nuisance issue within 30 days of receiving a nuisance notice, as established in Ord. 69730.

The meeting begins at 10am, it can be watched online here. See list of all board bills for the 2017-2018 session.

— Steve Patterson

 

Readers: Money Spent Improving Arch Grounds Not A Waste

May 31, 2017 Downtown, Featured, Parks Comments Off on Readers: Money Spent Improving Arch Grounds Not A Waste

Over half those who voted in Sunday’s non-scientific poll don’t think it’s a waste to invest in the Arch ground improvements.

ver Q:  Agree or disagree: the millions being spent on changes in & around the Gateway Arch are a waste of taxpayer dollars.

  • Strongly agree 2 [6.06%]
  • Agree 2 [6.06%]
  • Somewhat agree 3 [9.09%]
  • Neither agree or disagree 3 [9.09%]
  • Somewhat disagree 6 [18.18%]
  • Disagree 6 [18.18%]
  • Strongly disagree 11 [33.33%]
  • Unsure/No Answer 0 [0%]

I tend to agree with the majority despite many other pressing needs in the region.More than a century ago local leaders got the idea to erase the original 1764 street grid and raze all buildings. Demolition began in 1939. When the Arch opened for visitors in 1968 the surroundings had been decimated by urban renewal, highways. surface parking, etc. In the 1980s (70s?) a parking garage was built at the North end of the grounds so visitors wouldn’t have to experience the awful surroundings.

So we’re spending more money to correct psst mistakes. Why bother? Tourism.

From 2015:

A new National Park Service (NPS) report shows that 2 million visitors to Jefferson National Expansion Memorial in 2014 spent $173 million in communities near the park. That spending supported 3000 jobs in the local area, and had a cumulative benefit to the local economy of $270 million. (NPS)

More visitors from outside the region means more money is injected into the local economy. Getting them to enter the museum from the new West-facing entrance means they may stay longer, spend more money. Locals will also enjoy the experience more.

One of the new ramps connecting the top of the Arch grounds to the riverfront
Looking forward the Old Courthouse
The mew Kiener Plaza

Will all this make a difference? That’s the hope.

In a 2012  CBS News/Vanity Fair poll the Arch was voted the least impressive of five national landmarks listed (see slide).   A significantly better experience may change perceptions.

So no, I don’t think the investment is a waste. I do think about all the other mistakes in the region and the billions (trillions?) it will take to fix them.

— Steve Patterson

 

 

Advertisement



[custom-facebook-feed]

Archives

Categories

Advertisement


Subscribe