Erica Barnett introduces me to the concept of “traffic calming”, in a post about negative side-effects of I-985:

Traffic light synchronization seems like a good idea, and in many cases, it is—for example, on busy, congested downtown streets in big cities like Seattle. But in other cases, it makes no sense whatsoever. Many small towns, for example, deliberately de-synchronize their lights (a strategy also known as “traffic calming”) to discourage drivers from using their main drag as a highway.

That’s pretty interesting. I do look forward to the “smarter synchronization” that will be part of Rapid Ride: synchronization for buses only. Looks like one more aspect of BRT that Eyman is trying to kill. I-985 is definitely the enemy of public transit.

12 Replies to ““Traffic Calming””

  1. I don’t know.

    The last Eyman initiative that was ruled unconstitutional had it’s laws passed by the state legistlature anyway.

    1. Yeah, but I think this is different. The legislature wouldn’t craft an unfunded plan, wouldn’t take money from cities, and wouldn’t close the HOV lane on SR-520.

  2. I was listening to Dave Ross have his on-air debate, and after that, he took calls on it, and someone from Napavine said they had 1 traffic light, and already synchronized. It goes from Green, to Yellow, to Red!

Comments are closed.