Tag Archives: driving

Why so little resistance to license plate cameras across suburbia? Two possible theories

Posted on by

In the last few years, license plate cameras have popped up across suburbs near where I live. It took me a while to recognize what they were, but now that I know what they look like, I see they are in many locations. Why has there been little resistance to the presence of these cameras? I find it hard to imagine suburbanites would have liked this happening several decades ago. Why so little discussion or opposition today?

Photo by Andreas Ebner on Pexels.com

Two conjectures (with no evidence for either outside of my own knowledge of suburbs):

  1. Fear of crime. They see and hear many stories about crime and the role of cars in those crimes. If license plate cameras can track people who commit crimes and do so quickly, that may be a small price to pay to keep their suburban community safe. (See also use of doorbell cameras in efforts to combat suburban crime.)
  2. The surveillance state is already here, whether there are license plate cameras or not. People can be tracked by their phones, their credit card activity, their social media use, through cameras mounted inside and outside buildings. Why fight a system that is already in place and to which we already assented (by using smartphones, social media, etc.)? (See the term “surveillance capitalism” first used in 2014.)

There could be other factors at play. Companies and organizations have pushed these cameras as opportunities and solutions? People haven’t noticed them or don’t know what they are? This is just part of technological and social change?

I will be looking to see if there is more public discussion of their presence and how much information is available about how often they are used.

Once again, my pathway was blocked by a flock of turkeys

Posted on by

On a recent trip to a nearby state, I was driving on a country two lane road near dusk. The road had some small hills and I was going about 55 mph. In the distance I could see something in the roadway. It looked short. It did not cast much of a shadow. What was it? I slowed down as I neared and then I recognized the unmistakable shape: turkeys!

Photo by Mark John Hilario on Pexels.com

This is not my first encounter with turkeys while moving a wheeled vehicle. The first time occurred years ago while bicycling through a local forest preserve in the late afternoon.

The turkeys acted similarly in both situations: they stood there, not making much noise, blocking the way forward. On this road, I honked several times as I neared a stop. The turkeys finally looked up and then scampered off the asphalt and into the tall grass next to the road.

I do not know how much experience wild turkeys have with cars. They did not seem particularly interested in the presence of a vehicle. They were doing their thing and I until I was very near and made some noise, they did not look like they wanted to move.

I am now curious when I will again encounter turkeys in my way. I do not have many vehicle options left; I rarely, if ever, use a scooter or skateboard. I do not skate. Where will I next nearly run into a flock of turkeys?

Does that autonomous semi also make stops at Buc-ee’s?

Posted on by

Drivers traveling at night between certain American cities have some new company on the roads:

Photo by cottonbro studio on Pexels.com

Autonomous trucks are now driving highways at night, hauling food and dairy between Dallas and Houston…

Aurora’s trucks do have a human behind the wheel, just in case. So do autonomous Kodiak trucks operating on highways from Dallas to Atlanta, Houston and Oklahoma City—some of which drive at night…

Aurora is now testing the system between Phoenix and Fort Worth. The journey takes around 16 hours and typically requires two drivers to complete, with a stop for a handover. Federal law allows long-haul truckers to drive a maximum of 11 hours in a 14-hour period, followed by a mandatory 10-hour break.

There are a lot of potential consequences of this. One I have not seen discussed is what happens to the road trip establishments and culture in the United States. Drive any highway in the United States and they tend to be lined with certain establishments: gas, food, and lodging options, plus tourist sites. Drivers count on these and communities, businesses, and employees benefit from the revenue.

If more vehicles are autonomous, do these roadside features disappear? Or do the people still riding in the vehicles – they may or may not be in trucks, would likely still be in passenger vehicles – still need or want to stop? What if being in a vehicle becomes even more about only what is inside the vehicle; a person enters at the start of the journey, does what they want in the moving room, and only exits at the end? Or perhaps the autonomous vehicle will have to stop to recharge batteries?

Chicago has at least 250 traffic circles

Posted on by

Chicago’s road grid is interrupted at least 250 times for traffic circles:

Photo by Tuesday Temptation on Pexels.com

The Chicago Department of Transportation reports it’s aware of 250 that appear on landscaping lists. The department is currently not clear on the likely sizable number of circles that require no landscaping.

One of the best features of traffic circles is that they force drivers to slow down and pay attention. They cannot blow through a stop sign or traffic light or unmarked intersection. If they can successfully yield and do not need to stop, they can keep their momentum going at a more reasonable speed.

This is an interesting way to count road features: those that need landscaping need to be on some list so that maintenance can be done. Those without the landscaping need would have to be on some other list to be counted. Is this the sort of task AI could do in the future with access to websites with satellite imagery?

Is mass transit best pitched to Americans through comparisons to places where it is plentiful and works well?

Posted on by

Many Americans and American communities have resisted using mass transit or devoting more money to mass transit. In reading a recent pitch for Americans to prioritize it more, I was struck by one line of argument: describing places where it worked well. Might this help convince people?

Photo by Alec Adriano on Pexels.com

The discussions of the possibilities and perils of mass transit in the Chicago region included these comparisons. First, a contrast to another American city:

One of my stepdaughters recently relocated to Atlanta and returns home with a greater appreciation of our transit system.

A sprawling region like Atlanta can highlight how places with more transit in place – like Chicago – are appealing.

Second, comparisons to other major cities shows how far Chicago and other American cities can go:

“My wife had to go to Japan for work earlier this year. She was blown away that the train was 20 seconds behind schedule and how effusively the people apologized for it. I’m like 20 seconds?” Buckner said.

On vacations, Buckner subjects family to his transit nerdiness. Istanbul’s train terminal has a library inside. London has one of the best in the world. Beijing’s rapid transit is top-tier. Paris’ is fantastic. Seamless, quick and clean.

There are all world-class cities, like Chicago. If have efficient and elegant mass transit, why shouldn’t Chicago?

One issue might be whether a sufficient number of Chicagoans have been to these places. How many have gone to Atlanta, driven around the metro area, and found the traffic and experience worse than getting around Chicago? Or gone to Beijing or Paris and used the mass transit.

Another issue is that these comparisons may resonate and still pale to the issues of mass transit in Chicagoland or the liking people have for driving.

Overall, it appears to be hard to convince Americans to move away from driving. Whether they deeply like it or not, it is often the default after decades of policy decisions, cultural narratives, and choices made by numerous actors,

Illinois considering testing “road usage charge”

Posted on by

If more vehicles now require less gas, Illinois is considering making up the funding lost through the gas tax through another means:

Photo by Cu00e9sar Baciero on Pexels.com

Legislation proposed by state Sen. Ram Villivalam, D-Chicago, takes aim at that problem by creating a pilot program to explore the viability of establishing a “road usage charge,” essentially a tax on miles driven…

Under the current tax structure, vehicles that don’t rely on gasoline, such as electric vehicles, do not pay the gas tax that helps maintain state infrastructure, said Marc Poulos, executive director of Operating Engineers Local 150, which strongly supports the proposed legislation…

On Illinois toll roads , drivers pay approximately seven cents per mile, according to Poulos. With a mileage-based system, drivers could expect to pay three to four cents per mile. That would come on top of any tolls already being paid, similar to the gas tax.

Participants in the pilot would report their car’s fuel efficiency and mileage to the Illinois Department of Transportation. Roughly 1,000 motorists could sign up for the program with the Illinois Secretary of State’s office, Poulos said.

As the article goes on to note, more states and municipalities are looking for ways to recover revenues that come through the gas tax.

Given the current economic situation – many Americans feeling anxious about higher prices and less certain about their economic future – how might people in Illinois and elsewhere respond to these proposals? Americans generally like to drive and generally do not like the idea of new taxes. But if they are paying less at the pump, would they be willing to pay for driving through a different method?

More broadly, how much would Americans be willing to pay for driving? At what point do the costs of energy to drive (gas or electric) or the price of vehicles or tolls and congestion taxes push them too far? Or at what price do they switch to alternative forms of transportation or no transportation (making fewer trips)?

Orlando planning to add flying car vertiport by 2028

Posted on by

Flying cars could soon come to Orlando:

Photo by Guilherme Rossi on Pexels.com

The Greater Orlando Aviation Authority on Wednesday took steps toward that future by seeking partners to develop and operate a flying car landing pad — called a vertiport — at the airport. The invitation is expected to publish in March with a 2028 target for a finished product.

The airport expects to put the vertiport on land in the East Airfield region on the northeast side or land on the south side near the train station, according to a news release…

Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer, a member of the aviation authority, said the city is a global leader in Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) — the technology behind flying cars — and having the hub at the airport makes sense…

He said vertiports may help manage the city’s growth, but that’s much farther off. He envisions starting with a four- to six-passenger vehicle operating out of the airport and eventually corridors for flying cars will follow. The small aircraft are expected to use electric power, and take off and land vertically.

Three thoughts on these plans:

  1. It sounds like Orlando wants to pursue this to contribute to its economic growth. It could become a leader in flying cars. How big of an industry could this be? Americans like cars, Americans dislike traffic…could this be a big growth industry in the coming decades?
  2. The connections between this and the numerous theme parks in the area are intriguing. Would visitors be willing to try these because this is an exciting place to visit? Could the flying cars be linked to Disney or Universal or other partners?
  3. Flying car corridors will be interesting to see. How will they work and where will they be? How visible will they be from the ground? Will they also have gridlock?

Flying cars could be cool but if they lead to similar problems plaguing cars at the moment – traffic, expensive to buy a vehicle and maintain it, etc. – it may not get off the ground.

The limits in Chicago on a lower city speed limit

Posted on by

Chicago’s City Council disagreed on whether to lower the city’s default speed limit and ultimately voted against it:

Photo by Airam Dato-on on Pexels.com

The 28-21 vote against lowering the speed limit followed a spirited and emotional debate that pitted traffic safety advocates, many of them on the North Side, against African-American alderpersons concerned about uneven enforcement and a surge in pretextual traffic stops targeting Black drivers.

West Side Ald. Jason Ervin (28th), Mayor Brandon Johnson’s handpicked Budget Committee chair, led the charge against the lower speed limit.

Ervin said he “understands the logic that, if you go slow,” there will be fewer traffic fatalities and serious injuries. But when Johnson’s 2025 budget is balanced, in part, by installing more speed cameras, he is concerned about an avalanche of speeding tickets that struggling Chicagoans cannot afford to pay…

Wednesday’s vote was a bitter and emotional disappointment to Ald. Daniel La Spata (1st), an avid cyclist who represents Bucktown, Wicker Park, West Town and Logan Square, where several fatal accidents have occurred…

La Spata has estimated the lower speed limit could save the lives of more than 300 Chicagoans over the next decade.

The summary of the discussion hints at the meaning of speed limits. Are they about safety and discouraging higher speeds? A good number of American roads are built to be wide and straight such that the design itself can help drivers feel comfortable in going faster. And since many drivers go above whatever speed limit is posted, is a lower limit necessary to reign in the higher speeds?

Or are they about police enforcement? Are they about collecting revenue? Whether administered via law enforcement personnel or a speed camera, there is a legal process at work. In a society where driving is often required, the enforcement element matters.

Trying to think outside the box a bit, couldn’t the Council meet in the middle and settle for a 28 mph speed limit? Do all speed limits need to be in 5 or 10 mph increments?

This likely will be an ongoing discussion given the amount of driving in Chicago, interest in biking and pedestrian options in the city, and concerns about police activity.

One thousand trains in and out of Chicago each day at the peak of train travel

Posted on by

The book Forgotten Chicago includes the claim that at Chicago’s railroad peak, 1,000 trains daily moved in or out of the city. One chapter of the book details the numerous train stations that are no longer standing that serviced these trains.

Photo by Josh Sorenson on Pexels.com

Chicago continues to be a railroad center in the United States even if the volume of trains is not close to the peak numbers.

And as train travel declined, the Chicago region became home to other transportation options. Two of these are worth considering after the golden age of railroads passed (and Chicago’s port activity also declined). As people used trains less to travel between cities and used trains less within the region as commuting between suburbs picked up,

First, O’Hare Airport is one of the world’s busiest. Today it has over 900 daily flights (mostly domestic, some international). By number of passengers, it is in the top ten among global airports. I do not know how many people moved through Chicago via train at the peak but the flight numbers are large.

Second, many people travel throughout the region and to other regions via highways. For example, one interchange of two interstates roughly 20 miles west of the city has about 300,000 vehicles daily. Numerous highways throughout the metropolitan area have daily traffic counts of over 100,000 vehicles. That is a lot of cars and trucks moving people and goods around.

Increasing pedestrian deaths in Chicagoland area

Posted on by

What helps explain a rise in pedestrians deaths in the Chicago region from 2023 to 2024?

Photo by Vladimir Kudinov on Pexels.com

In Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry and Will counties, pedestrian crash fatalities totaled 144 last year, a 6.7% rise from 135 in 2023…

Asked to explain the trend, CMAP Senior Transportation Planner Barrett cited Insurance Institute for Highway Safety research that found SUVs, pickups and vans with hood heights greater than 40 inches are about 45% more likely to cause pedestrian deaths in crashes than vehicles with shorter hood heights. Blunt, vertical front ends also increase risks…

Barrett and Active Transportation Alliance Advocacy Manager Alex Perez also listed distracted driving, COVID-19-era bad habits such as speeding, and traffic enforcement drop-off as contributors to collisions…

Street design also plays a role with busy suburban corridors such as North Avenue — multilane, fast-flowing intersections that are problematic at best for pedestrians and cyclists, he added.

There are lots of factors at play that make walking and biking dangerous in metropolitan areas. Each of the factors listed above – size of vehicles, safer driving practices, and street design – could each be addressed.

But the goal of reducing pedestrians deaths or having safer streets might be best served by reducing driving and encouraging other forms of transportation. Driving is deadly across the board for drivers and pedestrians. Americans accept the risks of driving because they tend to live driving, or at least like driving compared to other options.

Or rather than prioritize safety efforts that try to play around the edges of the dominant system of driving that seems required in almost all American communities, could communities that from the beginning that serve a variety of mobility options do better? Retrofitting existing communities is hard. Adding bike lanes, establishing good mass transit, and prioritizing other uses of streets takes time and money.

Of course, reducing driving might be unpopular. Wildly unpopular. It is often associated (positively) with the American way of life. So if public officials or residents or others want safer roads, they might have to address individual factors that each have limited impact.