Crossroads

Quite some time ago, I posted a brief piece about an intersection in the area of South Pasadena which is notable for being a point at which three incorporated cities converge. A fourth lies maybe a mile to the north. This remains no more than an amusing 'factoid' if one does not actually have to pass through that intersection. Be it because of the competing political jurisdictions or other reasons, it's a very unpleasant intersection to pass through. Actually it's more like three intersections crammed into a tiny area with an island in the middle. The island has a pizza place. The LA area is rife with complicated and downright dangerous intersections like this.

My hometown of Phoenix really did not get built up in advance of the automobile, and perhaps because of that the streets are laid out in a sensible way (excepting where roads must go around mountains). Chicago, where I went to school, was a bustling city before the car but was basically wiped clean in the big fire, so maybe that accounts for why I don't recall it being so bad either. It might have been a hair worse. So much for those idyllic feats of city planning. In my present neighborhood, I come into regular contact with one monster of a confluence. It's a six way intersection- can you beat that? If you don't by the grace of God get the green light as you approach, you can put the car in park and finish your coffee leisurely, because you're going to be there for a few minutes.

It's an expansive crossroads. As you sit back on one side, you strain to identify where you're directed to on the other side. It's most bewildering. Things are at least as bad for the pedestrian if not worse. Depending on which corner you're on, you may or may not be able to cross directly to the corner of your choice. I wouldn't bet on it. There's either no crossing the street in question at all or it's judged to be too far to cross in one fell swoop, and so one must get the signal twice.  At the most pernicious corner, there are no crosswalks leading anywhere. If one is to cross legally from there, it means walking down to the next street, which is a mercifully simple four way intersection.

They ought to do something about it. What makes the job of city planner so difficult is probably that one cannot start with a clean slate (except in case of natural disasters such as befell Chicago). How order is made from such chaos as I describe without starting over entirely I don't know, so I propose they do just that. I'll vouch for the fact that the intersection harbors nothing terribly historical or beloved anyone would make a fuss over. It seems to me that the diagonally intersecting street is not essential, and so removing it from between the two major arteries running east and west which bracket the problem might well clear things up adequately. The city can thank me with a modest cash award sufficient to relieve me of money worries for a few years.