Opinions The armed robbery last week of a Chestnut Hill business was a scary incident that we hope will not be repeated. While this kind of crime has happened in Chestnut Hill in the past — indeed to this store — it is not the type of crime that turns up week in and week out on the police reports prepared for publication in the Local by Chestnut Hill Town Watch volunteers. Many of the crimes in these
reports, gleaned from the police department’s Part I sheets
for the 14th police district, could be considered “crimes
of opportunity” … a crime asking to happen. Dick Martin, the long-time chairman of Chestnut Hill Town Watch, points out that the crime rate in Chestnut Hill for 2004 is ahead of 2003 — 206 this year versus 197 last year— largely due to thefts from auto. “Citizens need to wake up and keep their doors locked. Week after week it’s the same thing. People have a sense of false security because of car alarms, but that doesn’t mean someone can’t jump start the car and drive away,” Martin said. Be a good citizen. Watch
for suspicious people, do not leave anything in the car and lock
your doors. Opinion: 4-way stop signs a cause of Ardleigh
St. traffic problem The article in the August 26 Local invites comment on the current traffic conditions on Ardleigh Street. Bob Previdi, who lives close by, is quoted as saying that “too many cars are simply moving too fast.” Considering that this is a residential street and that there is an arterial street immediately to the west (Germantown Avenue) that is better suited to through traffic, he is absolutely correct. However, it is important to recognize that he has identified two separate problems: volume and speed. The root causes and potential solutions of these problems are different. Much of the volume is caused by motorists who are using Ardleigh Street to bypass Germantown Avenue. For many years there was a deterrent to this practice in the form of standard stop-sign control at the Willow Grove intersection. Where this traditional type of stop-sign control is used, vehicles on one street are required to stop, wait for traffic on the other street to clear in both directions and then proceed into the intersection. At this intersection, the stopping requirement was imposed on Ardleigh Street. Southbound motorists arriving at the intersection (there are no northbound arrivals because of the one-way regulation) often had to wait for a measurable period of time for “gaps” in both directions of traffic flow on Willow Grove Avenue to occur simultaneously. That delay for southbound motorists, as compared with what they would experience at Germantown Avenue, where traffic signals create dependable gaps in the Willow Grove Avenue flow, made the Ardleigh Street route unattractive. Consequently, many motorists eschewed it. Then a high-ranking city official, who shall remain nameless, and is no longer in office, ordered a change of the stop-sign control at Ardleigh and Willow Grove from standard to 4-way. This was contrary to the findings of the professionals in the Streets Department who had studied the intersection and determined that the prevailing conditions did not satisfy, or even come close to satisfying, the established national warrants for 4-way stop sign control. The reason for ordering the change was not given. Although 4-way stop signs are often (actually too often) used to deter speeding, that did not apply in this case. The added stop signs had no meaningful speed reduction effect on Willow Grove Avenue traffic because it was already slowed in this area by the stop signs at Winston Road, a quarter-block away. Of relevance to the current concerns is that the change of intersection control made it easier for southbound drivers to cross, or turn onto Willow Grove Avenue at Ardleigh Street than it had been with the standard stop-sign control. Hence, the incentive for through traffic to use Germantown Avenue in order to take advantage of the traffic signals at Willow Grove Avenue was diminished and the result was a significant increase in total traffic volume on Ardleigh Street as more and more motorists discovered it. If the unwarranted 4-way stop on Ardleigh Street were to be discontinued, it is likely that at least some of the through traffic might be diverted back to Germantown Avenue. This is something that Mr. Previdi’s group may want to consider. The speed problem is a different issue and it is far from unique to Ardleigh Street. Actually, it is statewide. The Pennsylvania statutory speed limit (i.e. the limit that applies when none is posted) is 55 mph. The establishment of any other limit requires signing, but that is only part of the problem. Whatever limit might be established on a particular street, it must be coupled with police enforcement if it is to be effective. Considering the many responsibilities of a big city police department, it is important to maximize the efficiency of that enforcement by providing them with the best tools available. The most effective speed limit enforcement tool, by far, is radar. However, for Ardleigh Street that tool is missing from the toolbox. Speed enforcement must be conducted in compliance with the Pennsylvania Vehicle Code. Unfortunately, Pennsylvania law is seemingly archaic when it comes to speed limit enforcement. Apparently we live in the only state in the country where the statutes allow only the state police to use radar for citing speeding motorists and even they can use it only on state highways. The largest police force in Pennsylvania (the Philadelphia Police Department) cannot use it in any circumstance. Furthermore, Ardleigh Street is not a state highway. There is nothing that the Police Department, the Streets Department, City Council or the Mayor can do to get around this. Mr. Previdi’s group might want to enlist the aid of some state legislators as part of their very worthy effort.Mr. Boorse is a former traffic engineer for the City of Philadelphia. He served on the CHCA Traffic, Transportation and Safety Committee. |
Letters | Opinion | News | LocalLife | This Week | Sports | News Makers | About Us

