Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx wants you to go on a diet–a road diet. “A typical road diet takes a segment of four-lane undivided roadway and reconfigures it into three lanes with two through lanes and a center two-way left turn lane,” he says.
The theory behind a road diet is simple. From now on, order all of your clothes at least one full size too small for you. Pretty soon, you’ll be able to fit into those clothes.
Foxx argues that road diets can make roads safer and don’t reduce travel times despite a lower capacity. But do they really do that, or do they just force the traffic to go somewhere else, like the excess flesh that hangs out of someone’s too-tight clothes?
Peanuts- You would not believe, but peanuts or some other dry viagra pharmacy fruits work greatly to transform the phase of your life. Common symptoms cialis 40 mg of this type is similar to acute. One popular medication bulk viagra for this problem is kamagra. These are the places that are usually filled with blood when http://deeprootsmag.org/2013/10/11/aj-being-aj/ levitra properien the size of the blood vessels and arteries within the male reproductive body organ is the only factor that makes the body organ become stiff and difficult.
A true engineering study would ask whether taking a lane away from one road leads to increased traffic on another road. It would also ask whether the reduced accidents that Foxx brags about are made up for by increased accidents somewhere else. Pardon my skepticism, but I’ve rarely seen such studies done for road diets, boulevarding, traffic calming, or any of the other measures advocated by anti-auto groups–and the studies I have seen found that the measures didn’t increase overall safety or reduce overall congestion.
If your city proposes such road diets, be sure to ask if they have done or know anyone who has done such studies. Remember, the studies aren’t valid unless they look at the entire area, not just the road being treated. For example, this study cited by the DOT only looks at the safety effects of road diets on the roads being treated, not on what happens to parallel roads.
At the same time, the anti-road groups in California are thrilled with a new law that says they no longer have to assess the impacts of their proposed projects on congestion. That means they can make congestion worse and worse and no one will have any evidence. Sounds like a good way to increase the migration rate from California to Texas.
http://www.walkable.org/assets/downloads/roaddiets.pdf
AADT doesn’t plummet after a road diet because it’s only performed on roads with low enough AADT that the extra capacity isn’t needed. What diversion to other roads are you talking about?
http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/docs/StoneWaybeforeafterFINAL.pdf
“Stone Way – Before and After Study Page 6
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC
Residents sometimes worry that rechannelization projects will result in traffic diversions onto residential streets. The results on Stone Way N show traffic has not diverted to adjacent streets. In fact, motor vehicle traffic on parallel routes has decreased even more substantially than the slight decline recorded on Stone Way.”
http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/docs/Nickerson%20before%20and%20after%20study_FINAL.pdf
“Alternate Routes:
Geographic conditions (including steep hills to the south and the Lake Washington Ship Canal to the north) and an offset grid pattern limit the number of alternate routes that serve as potential diversion routes for the Nickerson Street corridor. One concern that arose during project planning was that vehicles would be diverted to alternate routes in an attempt to bypass traffic on Nickerson Street.
One such potential route is W Dravus Street. Historical volumes show approximately 8,000 vehicles on Dravus Street, but the most recent counts show volume has
fallen to 7,000 vehicles of which 60 per day, or less than 1 percent, were large freight vehicles. In comparison, Nickerson Street served approximately 400 large freight vehicles during the same time period.
15th Avenue W was also identified as a potential diversion route. Traffic volume declined slightly on this street after the Nickerson rechannelization. ”
AP you mention studies that show that road diets don’t increase overall safety. Do you care to share them?
The road diets back up traffic headed in/out of town and reduce access to residents living on the fringes of town – where they choose to live because that is where they can afford to live. Road diets restrict the access to the central core of Portland, and we get the message….you aren’t welcome go elsewhere.
http://portlandtribune.com/pt/10-opinion/225354-87538-our-opinion-road-diet-shouldnt-starve-neighborhoods
@ Antiplanner:
A four lane road sounds ideal, but since the central lanes are used for through movements and left turns, vehicles turning left switch lanes to make the turns, and vehicles going straight on switch lanes to avoid people turning left.
By moving to two lanes plus a central turning lane, there are the same number of turning lanes, and the same number of through lanes, PLUS space for parking or cycle lanes.
The big unknown is buses. If a bus stops, some vehicles will try to overtake in the central left-turn lane, instead of waiting behind the buses. This is something to watch out for.
Only a non-Seattleite or a state apologist would tout the government-created morass that is Nickerson Street.
Of course the study didn’t find more cars diverting to Dravus—during the recession and times of high unemployment.
And funny that they found a bike rider to photograph on Nickerson going up the slope when the vast majority of bicyclists use the Ship Canal Trail, making the bicycle lanes on Nickerson completely superfluous; in nearly five years of driving Nickerson, I have never seen a bike in the lanes between SPU and 15th. Why tackle a hill with traffic when you can use a flat bicycle trail???
But please applaud this f’d up city for
confiscatingrepurposing lanes for unneeded turning and bicycle lanes. Please applaud this f’d up city for increasing traffic congestion and reducing drive time. Fourth worst traffic and 12th worst roads and Seattle gov’t states they have no money to pave non-arterial roads, but they sure have money for laneconfiscationrepurposing.Come to Seattle. Drive Nickerson during peak hours. And then we can talk again.
The arrogance of city planners, who brazenly confiscate public property for use by the public, is on display in Seattle, and in many other cities around the world. Next they’ll be telling us which side of the street we are allowed to drive on.
the arrogance of city planners who believe that doing something for the small minority that makes everything more difficult for the majority is actually a good thing. privately owned roads would actually be far more democratic. planners don’t serve the people. they serve themselves and they do what they think is best for the majority even though that’s not what the majority actually wants.
Yet another example of how useless the Secretary of Transportation Position has become, and why the federal government’s role in transportation needs to be reduced, perhaps drastically so.
I support and federal department of transportation diet, along with the city of Portland and Metro smart growth planners!
Small minority Frank? So the people who live and work along Nickerson, or bike along any length of it, or walk across or along any length of it are a small minority? Care to support your assertion?
“So the people who live and work along Nickerson, or bike along any length of it, or walk across or along any length of it are a small minority?”
Yes. They are a small minority of total traffic on Nickerson, which is a major arterial used by thousands to get to Fremont, the Aurora Bridge and points north and south, West Lake, South Lake Union, East Lake, Interbay, Magnolia, Ballard, Wallingford, etc, etc.
I will look for evidence when I’m not using my phone. But my assertion is based on common sense and personal experience.
Speaking of which, please experience Nickerson for yourself during peak hours and then tell me how the people who drive or even bus to work on Nickerson benefit from lower capacity and slower travel times.
The Mayor of Gainesvilel Florida says that a road diet didn’t work there, see:
http://www.gainesville.com/article/20141101/OPINION03/141039953
Frank find any ped/bike counts, number of residents/workers etc…for the nickerson corridor ? What effect did the rechanilization have on retail sales/property values?
Was on Nickerson last time I was in Seattle. There was a backup by the fremont bridge. Nickerson widened to two lanes before then, getting cars to the junction wasn’t the bottleneck. The complicated light that gave much less than half the green cycle to cars turning from nickerson onto the bridge was the bottleneck.
What does capacity matter if it isn’t utilized? Traffic volumes were flat after the change.
Drivers enjoy from safety benefits too Frank.
Frank – to add, drivers turning left onto nickerson from a stop sign face a smaller delay on a three lane road than a four lane road.
raskrask – some of the major dangers of four lane roads – the conflict generated by shared through/left turn lanes, pedestrians crossing the street that get hit when one car stops but the one behind swerves around and illegally overtakes a stopped vehicle at a crosswalk, extra lane changes from passing bikes/double parked cars etc… This section of 8th avenue in gainsville doesn’t have these conflicts, it runs through a park. It isn’t the sort of road diet being talked about here, I’m not sure why you brought it up?