John the Monkey
Frivolous Cyclist
- Location
- Crewe
This is the piece I was thinking of earlier;
http://www.howwedrive.com/2008/10/21/getting-it-wrong-in-montogomery-county/
And some other trees;
http://www.howwedrive.com/2008/12/05/spare-the-tree-cut-down-the-litigation/
http://www.howwedrive.com/2008/08/17/natural-traffic-calming/
http://www.howwedrive.com/2008/10/21/getting-it-wrong-in-montogomery-county/
But then, of course, if someone crashes and kills a pedestrian or another driver, it’s an “accident,” it’s down to driver behavior; if they smash into a tree, it’s deemed poor traffic safety engineering.
And some other trees;
http://www.howwedrive.com/2008/12/05/spare-the-tree-cut-down-the-litigation/
the tree, which had lasted virtually the entire history of automobile-dom, was viewed as a traffic hazard. Being generally of the mind that traffic is the hazard, I always view these claims with suspicion. This was a street marked for 25 mph. Assuming you were driving the proper speed and paying attention, how do you a.) strike something as large and obvious as a tree and b.) roll over your vehicle?
http://www.howwedrive.com/2008/08/17/natural-traffic-calming/
There’s absolutely no reason residential streets, like the one pictured above, shouldn’t have trees in the middle of the road. Apart from the aesthetic contribution, they’re great natural traffic calming devices. Yes, you have to slow down to navigate around them, yes they reduce the “sight distance” of whatever lays beyond (hence you have to slow down), and yes they are a crash “hazard” — if you act in a hazardous way.