At the request of Alderman Mary Ann Smith, the Chicago Department of Transportation (CDOT) did a traffic study, looking at volume, speed and safety along Ridge Avenue from Broadway to Clark and Hollywood from Broadway to Ridge.
The goals of looking at Ridge Avenue parking and traffic issues:
- Increase the safety and quality of life along Ridge Avenue
- Provide better connections between neighbors and community resources
- Assist the emerging arts corridor along Ridge Avenue.
Observations on traffic:
The study concluded that Ridge has both a speeding and congestion problem. During peak times, there is too much traffic. Adding parking at these times would be inappropriate.
During non-peak times, the study concluded that the traffic speeds and is unsafe. During these times, replacing the parking that was stripped would both protect walkers, aid the neighborhood and present a visual signal for drivers to behave better.
The study also offered a series of other suggestions for consideration:
- Add international crosswalks, LED lights, countdown signals.
- Modernize pedestrian signals.
- Curb extensions at Glenwood/Ridge will make pedestrian crossing safer.
- Consider a gateway treatment at Hollywood viaduct to alert drivers they are entering a neighborhood.
- Add bus shelters and benches where possible.
- Add trees where possible for shade and greening.
- Redesign Hollywood/Wayne/Ridge intersection to make it more predictable, pleasant and safer.
- Between Hollywood and Magnolia, southbound, where there is only one lane of traffic feeding off of Ridge, restore parking to the south side of the street.
- During periods when the traffic volume can be handled by fewer lanes, which are the times people speed most, add parking at select locations.
- Addition of parking would require removal or redesign of the existing planters.
For a full copy of study: Livable Streets – Ridge Ave
If you wish to comment, please do so below.
I can not believe that anyone would think that parking on Ridge (IN OFF HOURS ) is a bad idea. They must not live around here. When walking the street is nearly impossible to get across. The light is just long to cross if you walk very fast. When you miss it you have to wait a long time to cross. The traffic on this street is not just neighborhood people either. The number of cars show that. If you work and listen to traffic reports when ever traffic is bad on the Edens there is a considerable more amount of cars on this street. Parking on Ridge is just the thing to stop a lot of the congestion. Plus with the school kids. It would be just a good idea all around.
I have been in the neighborhood for more than 20 years. The first change to Ridge to improve traffic was to discontinue reversable lane traffic. Just as now, there were many concerns about accidents and safety, but those concerned proved to be minimal. Peterson to Ridge traffic has allowed for non Chicago residents to bypass the busy expressways. I do not wish to accomodate such traffic. Many years ago the stopping of the reverse traffic on Ridge (3 lanes East in the am and 3 lanes west in the pm) forced nothern suburbanites back on the Kennedy. We then added traffic circles and speed bumps to keep traffic out of the neighborhood. Parking on Ridge would increase getting our neighborhood back and eliminating traffic that is not intended for Barge and Edgewater. It will also allow business on that short stretch to survive. Now, people cannot stop and pedestrians cannot cross to patonize anything on Ridge. Also, because of the gentrification of the neighborhood, we have more cars but no more garages. Folks on Ridge must park in the neighborhood leaving less space for others on their own block.
This is a great proposal and has been brought up many times over the past 20 years. I look forward to the day when there is parking all day and night on Ridge. It will look more like Fullerton Ave which also used to be a “cut off” for the expressway.
I continue to disagree with parking on Ridge. I’ve lived in Chicago for over 40 years and disagree with anyone that believes Ridge is used only by suburbanites. I don’t think we need to take a poll, but in fact many Chicagoans use Ridge.
The city streets over the past 20 years have gradually become more and more of a quagmire and nightmare to navigate when trying to reach different neighborhoods (most are NOT connected by light rail, etc) . It has become almost impossible to travel east-west, north-south or northeast-southwest on the North Side of Chicago. 30 years ago, you could travel nearly anywhere on the North Side within 20 minutes. Now it is impossible to run any errands on the North Side without consuming your entire day. With the overkill of stop signs, speed bumps, lane constrictions, etc. etc. the result is increased pollution due to the constant stop/go of vehicles, higher congestion, loss of revenue due to consumers no longer visiting out of neighborhood businesses and a huge waste of time and opportunity, etc. etc. Traffic calming on small residential streets might be helpful, but major arteries are meant and designed for traffic. This city has enough gridlock – we do NOT need more. I do not want to wake up one day to find out I can’t even travel more than a block from my home because every street in the city has been turned into a parking lot.
I cannot support parking on Ridge, beyond allowing parking eastbound inbetween Hollywood and Magnolia, and parking westbound inbetween Broadway and Magnolia. (per the study’s proposal of that, but NOT inbetween Hollywood and Clark at any time) Also looked at the study’s proposed redesign of the Hollywood/Wayne/Ridge intersection, and I think that would be a good idea, as long as access to Wayne going southbound from Ridge is preserved. The park idea around the old fire station would be nice, if it ever could be implemented. I also don’t think curb-outs would be a good idea, since it would make turns harder from side streets onto Ridge. It’s challenging enough to make right turns southbound from Glenwood to Ridge, especially when there are one or more drivers waiting to turn left going south due to traffic continuing north on Glenwood.
As for the speeding and reckless driving problem that others have posted(and I agree), why can’t Chicago Police do some stings that would successfully discourage them from continuing to drive that way along Ridge? It’s a shame I often see cops on other streets waiting to catch drivers blowing stop signs or speeding(i.e. Bryn Mawr or Bowmanville), but I’ve never seen them do any such stings whatsoever on Ridge. And has the city looked into the idea of installing rumble strips at the Ridge/Hollywood traffic light, to discourage people from driving fast on that turn?
And as for designating Ridge Ave. inbetween Clark and Broadway as an art district? Such a designation would be better suited for Clark Street, especially with all the vacant storefronts inbetween Granville and Ridge. Why can’t more of an effort be put into attracting groups beyond Joel Hall Dance Center onto that stretch of Clark?
Boy, I’d sure like a traffic light or a 4 way stop at Broadway and Balmoral. It’s almost impossible to cross Broadway at that intersection if you’re on foot.
Ridge won’t have parking at night in winter anyway. Its a major arterial street and the Dec to April parking ban will be enforced. So why all the fuss.
Like many others I think something needs to be done about the traffic on Ridge. There seem to be three major problems with the existing situation: parking for residents, traffic congestion, and speeders. Restoring parking east of Hollywood on Ridge is a good idea. Adding more planters and shelters at bus stops have merit. I would suggest facing shelters away from street to further protect riders. Provide for curb cutouts for parking in front of buildings to pick up / let off passengers. No matter how you face it – Ridge/Peterson is a dangerous bottle neck and something needs to be done to accommodate or eliminate traffic.
I live on Ridge and support parking . This is a residential street . It makes me sad to read that people are more concerned with traffic congestion than the welfare of adults and children in our community.
I understand all of the arguments on both sides but for me, it all boils down to the fact that human beings walking/biking on that street are far more important then cars. Perhaps, if its not as easy to speed up and down on Ridge then people will find alternate routes or (dare I wish) methods of transportation.
Stop for a minute and think about how often you take an alternate route to avoid congestion or longer travel times….
Leslie B wrote:
“The pedestrian crossing at Ridge and Hollywood is impossible & was clearly never tested by a pedestrian when it was installed. You have to run across Hollywood in order to press the button for the Ridge crossing in time which is impossible when you have 3 kids in tow. Then if/when the crossing light comes on for the Ridge pedestrian crossing it lasts about 3 seconds! Not only that but the cars often don’t seem to notice that they even have a red light (as the middle lane is still moving because they have a green turn arrow) so you can’t be sure that you will be safe to cross even if you do manage to run fast enough to get over before the light changes.”
I wanted to second this and to point out that, if the cars in the eastbound lane don’t notice their red light and go straight through it while the middle lane is turning onto Hollywood, the angles are such that it’s almost impossible to see them coming when you’re crossing the street until you’re nearly in that eastbound lane. I cross at Hollywood and Ridge almost daily and the city could not have designed a more pedestrian-hostile intersection if it tried.
I cannot support the addition of parking on Ridge between Hollywood and Clark at any time of the day (or night). For those residents of Ridge Ave., I don’t envy your experience, but much like neighbors of O’Hare, this situation was likely in place well before your arrival. I have little sympathy for someone who moves onto a major thoroughfare (regardless of its residential nature) and complains about the traffic.
I’ve owned in the area since 1999 and people seem to forget that before Ridge was repaved and made smooth, there was a lot less speeding. 40mph on a rough street feels a lot faster than that same speed on smooth pavement.
I oppose parking on Ridge. Although the intentions are valid, the measure will not meet the goal. However, other traffic calming measures and pedestrian aids seem appropriate.
Where in the study is information regarding the impact in the surrounding neighborhood steets. This idea is great as long as you don’t take into consideration any areas surrounding the studied area. Traffic is high on this strech all day long. This proposed changes will create longer drive times on Ridge and all surrounding areas. Idling cars will make air quality less healthy. Emergency vehicles will have a tougher time gettng through. People will forget about parked cars during the rush hours and cause additonal traffic problems. Except for the new crosswalk lights and beautification along ridge, all else will cause havoc in the entire area. If this idea is so great, why don’t we just turn Sheridan Road north of Hollywood into a one lane street as well.
I live one block from Ridge and although I am a strong proponent of safe and beautiful neighborhoods, the proposed improvements seem to be the equivalent of putting a band aid on when the entire dam around you is bursting.
The problem is that 4 lanes of Lake Shore Drive (LSD) which was originally designed to continue north, is split very quickly into either Hollywood/Ridge or Sheridan Road. To keep traffic from a standstill on LSD and forcing traffic into smaller neighborhood streets, I don’t see how there can be any reduction in lanes or to allow for parking any time of day. They result would be utter chaos. An example is Bryn Mawr between Broadway and Clark. Currently traffic uses Bryn Mawr as a short cut (at over 40 mph regardless of traffic calming efforts). On nearly a daily basis, parked cars are sideswiped by the rushing traffic on Bryn Mawr. This would be multiplied by two if there was parking on Ridge.
The only thing that may make sense on Ridge is either a pedestrian foot-bridge over Ridge or a tunnel under. Causing more gridlock on Ridge is not going to help an already poorly planned LSD transition into very busy streets. I feel bad for residents that live next to Ridge, but my guess is that the street and traffic were there long before you ever were and it will continue to be a very, very, very busy street unless LSD is completely reconfigured to allow 3-4 lanes of traffic continue further north.
The proposal thoroughly considers the existing conditions and I support the recommendations. As a resident of Edgewater, I am a frequent user of Ridge Avenue as a motorist, pedestrian, bicyclist, and as a transit customer. These recommendations have proven benefits here in Chicago as well as across the country in improving safety for all roadway users. Ridge Avenue is a good example of an urban street that could benefit greatly from engineering improvements like these to improve safety.
Parking lanes on Ridge Avenue would be a hugh mistake. One parked car left on the street would cause traffic to be backed up for miles. You think it’s dangerous to cross Ridge now, wait and see how bad it will be if parking is allowed. The side streets, north and south of Ridge, would have overflow traffic all hours of the day and night.
I think some of the options mentioned in the study should be tried. Add more stop lights, add more time for walkers to cross safely, change the speed limit to 20 mph, etc. If I remember correctly at the first meeting I attended, the presenter stated that 43,000 cars daily drive through the area. This person went on to say that even with the parking lanes added, the volume of traffic would not be affected. So, please tell me, “What is the real reason for parking lanes on Ridge”?
P.S. The north corner of Glenwood at Ridge is already VERY narrow for a two way street that has parking on both sides, so I am strongly opposed to constricting it even further by adding curb extensions there.
Those of us who regularly turn at Glenwood and Ridge had been very relieved to finally see the construction dumpster removed from that corner, after it had been sitting there for about a year. The dumpster had been on just ONE side and it caused problems by further constricting an already narrow street, where cars are primarily turning. Narrowing BOTH sides of the street with curb extensions is likely to make matters even worse!
I am a strong supporter of the Arts and I encourage expansion of the already emerging Arts Corridor on nearby Clark St., where the street is much wider and there are many more options, including vacant buildings and existing parking. I see no reason to support adding an Arts Corridor on Ridge.
I agree that people drive too fast on Ridge, but I believe we should try the less drastic options first, such as longer, better timed lights, and other cues to let drivers know that they are in a neighborhood. Why don’t we install more speed limit signs, and include those l.e.d. signs that tell you how fast you’re driving? Why don’t we have the police enforce the speed limit and issue tickets on Ridge? This would have the added benefit of allowing us to see how traffic was affected while the police were using the right lane to issue their traffic citation.
While I support making Ridge a safer street, I do not believe that the answer lies in adding parking during off-peak hours, since just one car violating the permitted parking hours will cause a bottleneck to occur. Bottlenecks make many drivers angry and impulsive, not more careful, resulting in their darting into the other lane to avoid the congestion, so more accidents may occur.
Although adding parking may be more convenient for residents of Ridge, please remember that those who own or rent on that street move in there knowing full well what the parking situation is and that is their choice.
I have lived in the Edgewater Glen area for over 30 years and recently noticed that there seem to be many vacancies on Ridge now, so I sincerely hope that it is not the landlords and real estate agents who are behind this push to add parking, in order to fill their pockets…
I have to cross over Ridge numerous times each day in order to walk my kids to school and get myself to work and it is extremely difficult & dangerous no matter what mode of transport I use (walking, biking or driving.) The pedestrian crossing at Ridge and Hollywood is impossible & was clearly never tested by a pedestrian when it was installed. You have to run across Hollywood in order to press the button for the Ridge crossing in time which is impossible when you have 3 kids in tow. Then if/when the crossing light comes on for the Ridge pedestrian crossing it lasts about 3 seconds! Not only that but the cars often don’t seem to notice that they even have a red light (as the middle lane is still moving because they have a green turn arrow) so you can’t be sure that you will be safe to cross even if you do manage to run fast enough to get over before the light changes. So we end up going north and crossing at Glenwood which is a detour but at least you have enough time to cross.
Driving to school is even worse because I am constantly in fear of being rear-ended by cars speeding around the corner of Hollywood and Ridge when I’m waiting on Ridge to turn left (south) onto Wayne. Trying to make a left turn North onto Wayne from Ridge is no better. And don’t even get me started on trying to ride along Ridge or get across Ridge on a bike!
I definitely support making Ridge more pedestrian-friendly & finding ways to slow the traffic down. I would love to see a usable pedestrian crossing installed at Wayne and at the corner of Hollywood and Ridge and a solution for bicycles. Its hard to see how adding parking would help but I do think its important to find a way to slow down the traffic, particularly at the Hollywood/Ridge intersection. I also like the idea of adding some more trees to absorb the traffic sounds & smells. I can’t really see how it will ever be nice enough to be an ‘Arts district’ but any improvements you can make will be very welcome indeed.
I too live on Ridge Ave and must walk on it daily to take my young children to school, and cross it to take them to the playground. Yes it is a major thoroughfare, but it is lined with apartment buildings, houses and 2-flats filled with families and children. I strongly support measures to slow down the traffic and alleviate congestions but am opposed to the proposal to allow parking for the main reason that it would mean elimination of the planters. The planters do not just function as a place for greenery, but rather function as an 18 inch tall barrier between the speeding cars and us on the sidewalk. I have seen cars crash into the planters, into lightpoles, and even saw a suv completely flip over in front of my building. Sections without the planters leave nothing between the pedestrian and the traffic. I would like to see the enire street lined with the planters/barriers, enforcement of the speed limit, signs and other visual cues reminding drivers that although it is a major street it is a street where people live not just an expressway for their convenience to get to LSD.
I too am against the parking proposal as it has been presented. Here are my concerns, which I have expressed to Doug Fraser:
1. Currently, you are allowed, during non-peak times, to turn left onto Clark (heading northbound on Ridge), on Ardmore (heading south on Ridge), and on Glenwood (heading south on Ridge). This study does not address this. So, what happens when someone exercises their legal right to turn left, there is parking on Ridge, and, as a result, only one lane operating? Now, let’s add an emergency vehicle into the mix?
2. Peirce is the neighborhood school of much of Edgewater Glen. The proposal indicates that parking will be allowed on Ridge all the way to the northeast and northwest corner of Ridge in the morning. Are families with often small children walking to school going to have enough visability to see around these cars when they are parked there in the morning? What if someone runs the light and the car cannot be seen because the cars are parked there?
3. Glenwood is one way south of Ridge. North of Ridge it is narrow, maybe even too narrow for two way traffic. But, none the less, it is two-way north of Ridge. When traffic gets backed up (which it will) people will be cuttung down a narrow street. I predict you will see more accidents at this tight intersection.
4. Did the study measure traffic on Elmdale, Norwood, Glenlake, Hood or Granville? What happens when the traffic starts cutting through? What about the increased traffic on Broadway and Sheridan that this move will create?
5. What about the fire department’s FREQUENT use of Ridge? I was always told that the proximity to Ridge was one of the reason’s the fire station was placed at that corner. Has Alderman O’Connor been informed of this?
I think this was not thought through. As a result, I cannot get behind this plan. Like Heather, I might be able to support parking on Ridge Monday though Sunday between 8PM and 6AM. Otherwise, this move is dangerous and helps only the theater owners and the residents of a singular street. What about the other 5-10 streets this negatively affects?
I won’t speculate on this post what I think is really behind this move. I just don’t think it is public safety. I really wish that those who propose these things actually frequently these streets. I drive down Clark, Ridge, Broadway and Glenwood several times EVERY day! Help those poor people in Lakewood Balmoral and give them a light at Balmoral if you really care about safety!
Thank you so much for your leadership in improving Ridge Avenue. It is not pedestrian or community friendly – it is a dangerous highway with all of the speeding and none of the safety protections. It divides our community and these proposals would be first important steps in improving a difficult problem.
I live on Ridge Avenue and I must cross it to take my son to the playground. Drivers speed, block the crosswalks, and clog the intersections because they are not respecting speed limits or traffic lights.
I would respectfully ask my neighbors who oppose these proposals to consider not how something “might” impact a side street but rather how these proposals “will” improve the quality of life for your neighbors who struggle with Ridge Avenue every day.
The city proposes to roadblock what the state designates as a Strategic Regional Arterial. This is the worst sort of folly, to blithely ignore that the corridor for all of North and Northwest Chicago-land happens to be pointed directly onto Ridge Avenue proceeding to Lake Shore Drive. I am opposed to any parking on Ridge Avenue.
For reference:
http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/template.aspx?id=17205
#308 (This is a .pdf file)
Excerpted at the beginning:
“The US Route 14 corridor is designated as a Strategic Regional Arterial (SRA) from Illinois Route 43 to the intersection of Peterson and Ridge Avenues…
The US Route 14 SRA is intended to function as part of a regional arterial system. It, along with other SRA routes and the regional expressway and transit systems, will provide a network to carry high volumes of long-distance traffic…”
I fully support the idea of making Ridge look less like a highway…the “visual cues” will encourage drivers to slow down. Upgrading crosswalks, adding additional time for crossings…these are also worthy. However, allowing additional parking is a TERRIBLE idea. We all know that scofflaws will ignore the time guidelines, which will require enforcement by towtruck.
I am totally against this idea. The fact that some of the neighboring alderman and the fire department had no clue about this proposal is odd. I wonder how much was promised to the arts venue on Glenwood/Ridge in terms of parking to get the business to move in, all without consulting any of the block clubs who will be affected negatively by this parking proposal. All this will do is push traffic from Ridge, a known thoroughfare, to the neighborhood streets. And the alderman won’t be affected on her street by the increased traffic because she’s putting a cul de sac on her street to block through traffic. Convenient.
I agree that the Ridge/Clark intersection is dangerous, in fact, I avoid crossing it by foot whenever possible – it can be done, it just takes longer. While improvements to add countdown signals would be helpful and planters and other aesthetics would be nice for the Ridge street residents and businesses, I am concerned about what will happen if parking is allowed (the discussed 9 pm-6am m-f, 9 pm-8 am s-s) and people do not move their cars (this happens all the time on other parts of ridge further north). Grid lock down ridge while tow trucks hopefully move cars, will make both clark and ridge a nightmare to travel on. Per the study above, southbound volume surpasses single lane capacity at 6:15 am.
I thought the input by the Fire Department at the EGA meeting was extremely important. Ridge is a major thoroughfare for emergency vehicles all day and night. While part-time parking may be nice for Ridge street residents, I find it hard to justify a part-time convenience when it means a potential reduction in emergency vehicle response time for the rest of the Edgewater area.
I think putting parking along both sides of Ridge is a terrible idea. First of all, the CDOT study did not even consider the main Fire Station near Ridge on Clark. We went and asked fire fighters there about the proposal. They had not heard about it because they were not considered in the traffic study! They said a one-lane Ridge blocked by parked cars on both sides would definitely slow their response time. Cars would have no where to pull over to let them through. This proposal could literally cost lives, not save them. Rush hour will become a nightmare – and far more dangerous – when parked cars are not moved by 6 am. Tow trucks trying to remove the cars would make matters worse. Every parallel parker and CTA bus will bring traffic to a standstill. People who live on Ridge are in for a future of horns beeping, exhaust flowing as traffic is gridlocked. I strongly agree that we need to slow down speeding cars to make Ridge safer. But this doesn’t require closing lanes. Instead, this could be as simple as changing the timing on the traffic lights, so cars cannot build up speed! Countdown walk signals that give pedestrians a longer time to cross would also make pedestrians safer and slow down speeding cars. I am very concerned that all the cars that cannot use Ridge will now cut down our residential streets which also have lots of speeding cut through traffic. My block in Edgewater Glen has 10 children who play out in front of our homes. Are we really going to take the streets off a major artery and have them instead speeding down residential streets? The CDOT traffic study is based on 45,000 cars daily on Ridge but that figure is from 2006 figure. The volume of traffic using this vital artery is much more now. of 45,000 cars daily referenced by the CDOT traffic study is from 2006! The volume must be much higher now. Does the rest of Chicago, especially the north west side and suburbs know that one of the few commuter routes available is going away?
Why doesn’t Alderman Smith turn Clark into the Arts District? There’s plenty of parking. There’s already a theater and a dance studio. She could turn her attention to the many abandoned buildings on Clark that have been a blight on our community for years.
I was impressed by all of the “other suggestions” that the study produced. I would prefer to try all of these options before doing something as extreme as closing lanes for parking.
I have heard a lot of concerns about the proposed changes to Ridge and was pleased to read the full report as posted here. I support the addition of pedestrian safeguards and greenery throughout the area, as well as the measures to decrease speed of drivers. My only concern would be the reduction of driving lanes in regards to emergency vehicles and during peak hours; however, from what I read, it appears that these are considerations of the planners as well. Thank you for the consideration of community comments and the attention to this area of our neighborhood.
I am not for putting parking on Ridge at anytime during the day. How about only at night, say from 8:00 pm to 6:00 am?
There are several suggestions listed that can be done quickly and at minimum expense; trees, better timing of lights, better crosswalks, and bus shelters and benches to name a few. Since there have been no studies done to assess the impact of how this plan could affect surrounding streets and neighborhoods, I would think that the other suggestions would be done first before anything else was done. Further, the capacity study was done in 2006 – yup, four years ago. I would tend to think that things have changed since then.
I’m not sure if other Edgewater residents have noticed the SUV that is currently holding up a front porch on Ridge after it ran through a neighboring front yard before ramming into the house-Or the planters that have been crashed into in the past. This really brings home the dangerous nature of the speeding issue on Ridge. There are lot of young children and high school students from Senn that use these crosswalks and sidewalks to get to and from school and or daycare–students and children who are put at risk by drivers who travel at well over the posted speed limit. Other major thoroughfares have undergone street scape work to improve both the safety and beauty of the surrounding neighborhood. I am in full support of following the study’s recmmendations. What is the next step?
Please make every effort to retain the planters along Ridge in any redesign efforts. They are a refreshing bit of beauty and color in an otherwise dull, unattractive passageway to Sheridan Rd. and Lakeshore Dr. We need more of this kind of thing, not less. Thanks
As a resident of ridge avenue, i fully agree with all of the ideas that have been presented and would be happy to show my full support of this initiative.
My only concern is traffic cutting through my neighborhood of Edgewater Glen in order to avoid congestion. I heard Doug’s presentation to our block club and I feel that that and the pdf of this proposal here have addressed my concerns.
That said, I was not already opposed to the idea beforehand. I was also not pushing for the idea so I considered myself neutral on the topic. Some of my neighbors have been opposed so I will be paying careful attention to their feelings after they review the proposal.
I like many of the planned street and curb changes and would hope they could go through even if the parking proposal does not.
Slightly off topic, but I would like to see count down pedestrian counters at Clark and Ridge because that corner has the Red-Light Ticket issuing cameras and I regularly find myself hesitating before going through that intersection. It can be especially frustrating when my spouse is riding with me as my uncertain driving drives her to aggravation. Perhaps countdown walk lights were in the proposal already. I did see some mention of them.
When was the study done? Did the study include the effect parking on Ridge will have on the emergency vehicles that use Ridge? For how many days was the study done? My interpretation is that the study shows Ridge is NOT appropriate for cutting lanes down to one lane going west or east, peak hours or nonpeak hours. What is more important to Smith…parking spots of keeping the neighborhood safe?