Ypsilanti considers reducing lanes on city streets to keep speed limits lower
Ypsilanti officials are considering a "road diet" that would decrease the number of lanes on some city streets - including Washtenaw and North Huron - in a move to allow more residential and on-street parking and bicycle lanes.
The effort also should let the city avoid planned increases in speed limits on those streets, Ypsilanti City Planner Teresa Gillotti told City Council on Tuesday.
Ypsilanti Mayor Paul Schreiber expressed concern regarding the potential costs of the proposed lane conversions.
Jeffrey Smith | AnnArbor.com
Gillotti said city staff considered many options regarding how to reduce speed limits, but felt a change in road design was the most viable option.
Gillotti consulted with the Michigan Department of Transportation and The Washtenaw Area Transportation Study on reviewing whether state "trunklines" in the city would qualify for this change.
The city reviewed the best practices to use above treatments to achieve the goal of reduced speeds, the goal being 30 mph, while providing related benefits including additional links for on-street bike lane networks, on-street parking for residential, downtown parking meters and free parking near some local churches.
The following street lanes would be converted:
- Washtenaw: From three to two lanes slightly before Ballard Street to Normal Street
- North Hamilton: From four to three lanes on Michigan Avenue to Pearl Street
- South Hamilton: From four to three lanes on West Michigan Avenue to Ferris Street
- South Hamilton: From three to two lanes on Ferris Street to slightly after Buffalo Street
- South Hamilton: From four to three lanes slightly after Buffalo Street to Harriet Street
- South Huron: From three to two lanes on Ferris Street to Harriet Street
- North Huron: From four to three lanes on Cross to Emmet Street
- North Huron: From three to two lanes on Emmet Street to Pearl Street
Gillotti said the changes would be achieved by street “striping” and some signs but not by moving curbs. The initial cost estimates range from $60,000 to $70,000.
If implemented, the city would gain an additional 200 parking spaces and a mile of bike lanes.
"Right now we have five miles of bike lanes," Gillotti said. "This would be good for the city."
Mayor Paul Schreiber expressed concern over the costs but Gillotti said the city would seek additional funding partners such as the Ypsilanti Downtown Development Authority and MDOT.
In June, Michigan State Police First Lt. Thad Peterson presented a MDOT study that proposed speed limit increases of as much as 10 miles per hour.
Speed limits are determined jointly by MDOT and the MSP through speed studies that analyze data using a measurement called the “85th percentile” speed, which is the speed at or below 85 percent of vehicles are traveling.
Gillotti believes there could be an issue of safety if the speed limits are increased and decreasing the number of lanes would require MDOT and the MSP to conduct another speed study to analyze and suggest new and potentially lower speed limits.
“Staff went to a MDOT presentation in April and we threw as many questions as possible as we could at them,” she said. “We said there are issues of safety so why are we increasing speed limits. Other communities have been trying to fight this through court.”
Council Member Mike Bodary questioned whether the city has power to implement changes of this nature and Gillotti said the city must make a formal request to MDOT for the change, and if it meets their standards, they could potentially approve it if the proposed daily traffic count falls under 15,000.
“If it’s under that, you can go down to two lanes,” she said. “If traffic counts range between 15,000 and 20,000, it’s up for debate but in those cases we’re still going to try to do that.”
Council Member Pete Murdock, referencing the controversial four to three lane conversion of Jackson Avenue in Ann Arbor, said the city was able to move forward with the conversion plan despite traffic counts being more than 15,000.
Gillotti said when she presents the plan to MDOT, she plans to use that as part of the argument to move forward with the diet.
If council deems the lane conversions "viable," it will submit a formal request to MDOT to implement the changes.
Before the project moves forward, Schreiber suggested a public forum take place to receive feedback from residents.
Read the "Road Diet" presentation to council here.
Katrease Stafford covers the city of Ypsilanti for AnnArbor.com. Reach her at 734-623-2548 or KatreaseStafford@annarbor.com. You can also follow her on Twitter.
Comments
Jim Walker
Sat, Jul 21, 2012 : 5:01 p.m.
Two main points. 1) When new and higher numbers are painted on the speed limit signs, the ACTUAL travel speeds do not tend to change by more than 1 mph on average, and 3 mph in rare cases as the outside limit of the actual travel speed change. In most cases the accident rates will stay the same or GO DOWN. Mr. Gillotti's objections about higher travel speeds and reduced safety are myths which falsely alarm the public about what will happen. Download the booklet "Establishing Realistic Speed Limits" from the state website at www.michigan.gov/speedlimits to read the science of 85th percentile limits and why they are almost always safer and better. The Ann Arbor City Council fought the changed speed limits on Washtenaw in 2008 when two segments went from limits of 30 and 35 to 40 and 45. The 85th percentile speeds went up by 0 mph, NO change at all. The three year before/after accident study showed accidents went down. People should stop falling for the red-herring myths many politicians use about posted speed limits to frighten their constituents. 2) MDOT commissioned a study #RC-1555 by MSU about the Road Diet results they have experienced so far. It recommends the methods be used with caution whenever the daily traffic count, ADT, goes over 10,000 (NOT the federal guideline of 20,000) because significant travel delays may result. The study recommended that Michigan forward the results of the study to the FHWA to try to reduce the federal guidelines for road diets from 20,000 ADT to 10,000. The study also cautions that significant traffic delays can result when the peak hourly counts go over 1,000. The study can be downloaded here: http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0,4616,7-151-9622_11045_24249-270908--,00.html Many people think Ann Arbor is likely to create a gridlock disaster on Jackson Avenue in 2014 when they reduce the through lanes from 4 to 2 for 0.6 miles. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, Ann Arbor, MI
Lisa Bashert
Thu, Jul 19, 2012 : 8:17 p.m.
I'm thrilled that the city is considering road dieting and narrowing some of the major roads to slow down traffic and allow more bike lanes. I walk, bike, and drive in the city so I'm pretty familiar with the hazards of each. The roads were created to allow PEOPLE to get from place to place, by whatever means they have, not to allow CARS to get from place to place -- a subtle, yet important difference. Many PEOPLE (such as myself) regularly attempt to walk or bike across Washtenaw Avenue or Huron or Hamilton and to do so is to take your life into your hands. In fact, traffic is already too fast on these arteries and when I heard the plan was to INCREASE speeds, I could hardly believe it -- I contacted my city council representative to protest. Making our town more walkable and more bikeable will make it safer for all and more attractive to new residents. I can't get over the extreme complaints that always accompany policy suggestions to improve bikeability. It is inconvenient that a driver may have to pay more attention or slow down when bikes are present, but doing so doesn't actually endanger their lives. More speed and bad roads actually can kill people on bikes or injure them severely. Many people MUST walk or bike because of age or income: the roads must serve them as well as drivers of automobiles.
r756
Fri, Jul 20, 2012 : 2:39 p.m.
Increasing the speed limit will change nothing. People are already going that fast. It is easy to cross Huron or Hamilton since the lights send traffic through in one lump followed by a period of time where there are usually no vehicles then another lump of cars. There is also a crosswalk light near the retirement home on S. Huron.
r756
Fri, Jul 20, 2012 : 2:36 p.m.
I'm pretty sure the roads were made for people in cars and the sidewalks were made for people not in cars.
Ben Petiprin
Fri, Jul 20, 2012 : 6:06 a.m.
Choosing to bike on the road when there is a perfectly good sidewalk next to you makes no sense to me. It always seems like it's some weird kind of protest or even a "screw you" to people in a car. If you're that concerned with your safety, please swallow your pride and use the sidewalks. It has gotta make for a more pleasant trip, getting away from all those multi-ton automobiles. But if you'd feel put out being out of the street, here's a compromise: Take the bus. These bike lanes are essentially just another sidewalk, which the cyclist will eventually neglect as they go further into the street.
Karen Hart
Thu, Jul 19, 2012 : 1:47 p.m.
Excellent idea. The width of many Ypsilanti streets is way out of whack with the level of traffic and definitely discourages pedestrians and bicyclists. A college town -- really, any town -- needs to be more walkable. Road dieting has worked well in Ann Arbor (not, of course, a reason for Ypsilanti to follow suit, but just to share that it can be successful).
r756
Thu, Jul 19, 2012 : 1:58 p.m.
Karen, you really think that driving in Ann Arbor is pleasant?
r756
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 11:17 p.m.
Most churches meet on weekends when parking is free. The one on S. Hamilton currently block off parts of the street with cones and allow congregants to park in a lane. There are church goer's vehicles parked on both sides of Buffalo on the weekends making the street virtually impassable. What will happen on two lane S. Hamilton when the church has one blocked for parking? Why can churches block the streets apparently without repercussions?
Murf
Thu, Jul 19, 2012 : 1:20 p.m.
My thoughts exactly. For a big chunk of Sunday morning through mid-afternoon, a stretch of S. Hamilton IS a 2 lane road due to the church blocking off one lane.
Dutchy734
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 10:24 p.m.
"The city reviewed the best practices to use above treatments to achieve the goal of reduced speeds, the goal being 30 mph, while providing related benefits including additional links for on-street bike lane networks, on-street parking for residential, downtown parking meters and free parking near some local churches." Why free parking near churches? Why not free parking near downtown businesses? Most all Ypsi churches have parking lots and on Sunday when most people attend church parking is already free.
Rita Book
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 9:30 p.m.
So are these the same geniuses who put the bike lanes on Forest Ave between Prospect and Osband streets? Nothing like a bike lane on both sides of the street for 3 blocks that no one uses that reduces parking options for the residents there.
Stephen
Thu, Jul 19, 2012 : 3:32 a.m.
Yeah because there's such a shortage of parking there... seriously?
Linda Peck
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 8:52 p.m.
I would like to see this happen on Michigan Avenue, where you take your life in your hands crossing the street. That is the reason I don't like to shop there, that and the gigantic trucks whizzing by me a foot away - unnerving.
Tom Todd
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 9:36 p.m.
how come the light at the 94 by-pass towards west willow is green for traffic flow into the neighborhood for like 5 minutes and those getting off the freeway are stuck waiting for just a few cars driving into west willow seems like a good spot for a traffic light pad that gets activated when someone arrives at the intersection,this would help keep traffic flowing instead of waiting for no one or one car to pass thru?
Cash
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 8:44 p.m.
Insanity.....thy name is Ypsi City government.
JRW
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 8:17 p.m.
Spend the money on FIXING the potholes! More bike lanes? You must be kidding. Lately, I've seen motorcycles using bike lanes to pass cars on the right, roaring past cars driving the speed limit, weaving in and out of traffic lanes. Great use for the bike lanes. Bicyclists also need to obey the traffic rules, just like drivers. I'm tired of bicyclists riding full speed crossing in front of me as I'm approaching a green light, or worse yet, crossing in front of me as I am starting to drive through the intersection on a green light. I guess they resent having to slow down at intersections. Sorry, but road rules apply to everyone. Anyone riding a bicycle on Washtenaw or Michigan Ave or Ellsworth or any other major road is crazy.
Stephen
Thu, Jul 19, 2012 : 4:40 p.m.
If drivers obeyed the traffic laws we wouldn't have this problem in the first place.
Woman in Ypsilanti
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 8:07 p.m.
I love the idea of reducing lanes and adding bike lanes. Ypsilanti isn't that big. Even if you could double your speed going down Michigan Ave, you would only get through town a couple of minutes faster. I'll also note that every single place where I have seen a reduction of lanes, the traffic has actually in reality flowed better than it did before
Joe
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 8:39 p.m.
"I'll also note that every single place where I have seen a reduction of lanes, the traffic has actually in reality flowed better than it did before" care to cite some examples?
JRW
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 8:06 p.m.
"Washtenaw: From three to two lanes slightly before Ballard Street to Normal Street" You must be joking. "If traffic counts range between 15,000 and 20,000, it's up for debate but in those cases we're still going to try to do that." I read earlier in an article related to this issue in A2 out on Jackson Rd that if traffic counts are over 15,000, it was NOT recommended to decrease lanes from 4 or 3 to 2. So, here we have "experts" overriding this recommendation? How is increasing congestion and creating traffic back-ups by a lane reduction in a very high traffic area a good thing? If anything, planners should be looking at ways to INCREASE traffic flows, not create bottlenecks.
foobar417
Thu, Jul 19, 2012 : 4:40 a.m.
You misread the article about Jackson Road. If traffic counts are less than 15k, it's such a slam dunk that MDOT doesn't even ask. If the traffic counts are 15k to 20k, they think it is worthwhile, but they consult with the city. (Ann Arbor's city council has requested they do so for Jackson, as the traffic count is 15.5k on the stretch in question.) If the traffic counts are more than 20k, then it doesn't work and MDOT won't do it. MDOT *supports* the conversion of 4-to-3 on Jackson.
Stephen
Thu, Jul 19, 2012 : 3:37 a.m.
MDOT is in full support of the conversion on Jackson and will probably support all of these as well. These conversions have been shown to *not* create bottlenecks.
Billy Bob Schwartz
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 11:53 p.m.
Actually, A2 is talking about dropping from four lanes to two (with a left turn lane).
Ross
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 11:18 p.m.
You have your lane count entirely wrong. The Ypsi section of Washtenaw is talking about a reduction of three lanes to two ON A ONE WAY STREET ONLY, essentially only half the traffic since the other direction is on Cross st. The comparison to Ann Arbor's Jackson rd is unfair - that was a discussion about reduction from 4 lanes to 3 on a TWO-DIRECTIONAL road.
reddog801
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 7:50 p.m.
First, this is the most asinine proposal that I have ever heard in my life. Secondly, this is from all these bleeding heart liberals that want to "take care of America". Regarding the the speed limits, LEAVE THEM ALONE! We don't need more bikes on the streets where motor vehicles only are allowed. With some many ignorant people driving and talking on their cell phones, and text messaging really is this a good idea? NO Ypsilanti cannot even afford to keep their police officers paid, nor their firefighters. Now they want to spend $70,000 to reduce the roads? I have a better idea. How about repave grove road near Emerick? How about pave the road next to the Ypsilanti City DPW yard? How about allow some additional businesses to come into downtown and get this river street project moving along! Tell Washtenaw County that we don't want a recreation building built on that property, we want businesses that will generate income for the city. Furthermore should a project like the mayor is proposing be allowed to go through, the people of Ypsilanti should ask for his immediate resignation. There are far more issues to deal with rather than lowering the speed limits and reducing traffic lanes. Contrary to all beliefs roads were created for MOTOR VEHICLES not for bicycles. Bicycles are for sidewalks and for parks. If you must be a bleeding heart liberal and ride one to work then get up on the sidewalk. It's already bad enough that we have to watch out for motorcycles not obeying the rules of the road let alone people on bicycles! Ypsilanti needs new people running the show. They are proving everyday that they are incapable of running the city. In fact I call for the Mayor to resign now because this only get's worse. Are they trying to get people to move out? It's already bad enough that there is NOTHING left in the city of Ypsilanti sustaining it! Get the mayor and his crew out of there and get someone in there that will actually help the City!
Stephen
Thu, Jul 19, 2012 : 4:42 p.m.
removing the comment I posted before is BS. Way to waste your effort on censoring well thought out statements a2com staff. You would be much better off spending that brain power on some editing. Either way the statement about only cars being allowed on roads is so wrong it's laughable.
Joe
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 7:37 p.m.
This is clearly pandering to the street walkers union.
Billy Bob Schwartz
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 11:51 p.m.
Streetwalkers? Do you mean pedestrians or something else?
Joe
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 7:26 p.m.
Been spending most their lives, living in the hipster's paradise
Ben Petiprin
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 7:15 p.m.
Out of all the aspects of Ann Arbor you could copy, why would you try to recreate the driving situation? That place is a madhouse at any time of day. No parking, lanes disappearing unexpectedly, entitled bikers and pedestrians jumping out in front of you.
Ben Petiprin
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 7:06 p.m.
More bike lanes will only spread the hipster horde to all corners of the city.
Thomas Jones
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 6:56 p.m.
THIS IS A GREAT IDEA.... #TRUTH
akronymn
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 6:01 p.m.
In response to requests for data about road diets fhwa study concluding that capacity change is negligible for roads similar to the ones in question and that crashes are reduced: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/10053/index.cfm Report on the road diet on Nickerson St. in Seattle finding that instances of speeding were greatly reduced, congestion was not increased and accidents were reduced: http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/docs/Nickerson%20before%20and%20after%20study_FINAL.pdf The reason it turns out road diets are better solution than increased speed limits is plain. When there are two travel lanes side by side with the inside lane doubling as a turn lane there are several types of problems that occur. People stopping short to turn cause drivers to swerve into the other lane. Likewise cars will pull into the left lane to get around right turning vehicles. I am not saying the throughput will go up. Most studies point to little or no change in throughput and when it does change it changes slightly - sometimes up sometimes down (yes it does surprisingly go up sometimes because as people discover that a street is no longer crappy to drive they will use it more often). I am saying that there will be less instances of fast-stops, swerving cars and most importantly less accidents and less severe accidents. Add to all this the fact that these streets will be more friendly to bicyclists and pedestrians and it's a win-win-win situation.
Julia Herbst
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5:53 p.m.
ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME? Michigan avenue is already a death trap through downtown, due to increased pedestrians, the now allowed left hand turns during certain hours, and those disgusting un-needed center barriers. I get crazy road rage at other drivers through there already, and Ypsilanti is wanting to reduce lanes through there? REALLY PEOPLE? There has been many times Ive waited over 15 minutes to get through the light at S Huron and Mich ave, having to constantly accelerate a little to keep my car from rolling back, because there is already so much traffic. Ypsilanti wants to tick people off, by doing this. I was PRAISING the speed limit increases. The increases would of lowered the amount of people excessivley speeding, because more people would just do the speed limit. Do you know how many times I am forced to speed by the Police station/FireStation/Plasma Center area, because I am the lead car, with a car right next to me, and the people behind me going so fast they'll run me over If I dont speed up? Its ridiculous. BIKE PATHS. Really? They spent how much money doing that to Ford Blvd, and I have NEVER seen anyone on it. Now, Geddes, Superior, and Dixboro area, now THOSE roads NEED bike lanes, There isnt even room to walk on the side of the road, let alone ride a bike like so many people do. WAIST OF MY TAXPAYING MONEY. Way to go Ypsi.
Andrew Jason Clock
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5:17 p.m.
And, does anybody else think the 85% rule is a little crazy? Maybe it works in the suburban wastelands of downriver, where there is no reason/place to walk, but Ypsilanti is a city. Can anyone here really, truly defend the logic of "People are driving too fast and getting tickets, so the best solution is to raise the speed limit"? I thought we believed in driver responsibility?
Macabre Sunset
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5:17 p.m.
You should interview Gillotti. She's fairly passionate about this stuff - she doesn't even own a car.
martini man
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5:04 p.m.
It seems the pathetic condition of the existing streets, with all the bumps and potholes, would accomplish the same thing, and not cost a dime . I have to go slow in order to keep my vehicle from pounding itself to pieces. Go Ypsi !!!
Andrew Jason Clock
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5:01 p.m.
I live in one of the areas in question, and let me tell you, it can be quite dangerous to cross Washtenaw, Hamilton, and Huron at certain times of the day. I live two blocks from the nearest traffic light on one of these racetracks, and you can take your life in your hands crossing at the nearest intersection. (Read: not jaywalking, crossing at an intersection without a light) The idea that we need to raise speeds to limit congestion is just plain dumb. I can count on one hand the number of times a month traffic is even slowed by congestion at the Corner of Hamilton and Washtenaw, and i have never seen congestion on Huron, even during the Beer Festival, with an extra 3,000 people traveling on it. It takes a lot more hands to count the number of near accidents I see from people driving too fast. Actually, just now, there was a near collision right in front of my house. Being surrounded by a 3-lane racetrack makes living downtown much less attractive, and doesn't do anything for the community or local business. And, folks, for real, you are going to suggest that the city planner, who LIVES HERE, and has a degree in urban planning or an equivalent, can't make a suggestion to smooth traffic flow that is as good or better than a traffic engineer who has never been here, only takes car traffic into account, and gets all of that information from statistics, with no real-world input on the matter? Give me a break. Or, better yet, show me your degree in urban planning. The roads in this town were built to handle the traffic of three major auto plants. We now have none. Sorry, but we could use to trim down those racetracks to something you can feel safe walking across. It made a huge difference on Cross Street, and you don't see any traffic jams forming there, do you?
r756
Thu, Jul 19, 2012 : 1:56 p.m.
Because those $70k cans of paint are so easy to obtain.
Billy Bob Schwartz
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 11:46 p.m.
r756...the city will buy another bucket of paint.
r756
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 11:21 p.m.
The plants are still there. The fact that they're currently not operating does not mean they never will. What will happen to the traffic flow if the plants are operational again?
Ross
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5:27 p.m.
Excellent points, sir.
shutthefrtdoor
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 4:20 p.m.
How stupid do they think we are? Uhhhh...yes Mr. John Q...reducing the number of lanes and keeping speed limits artificially low WILL improve traffic flow...*wink* *wink* This is the "dumberest" thing I've ever heard! LOL! It's a money grab pure and simple. Parking meters, increase in accidents, and more revenue from speeding tickets. And as far as the traffic decreasing...I would hope that we aren't expecting THAT to continue. I don't like heavy traffic anymore than the next guy...but it is indicative of a healthy economy with an increase to business and job creation isn't it?
Stephen
Thu, Jul 19, 2012 : 4:46 p.m.
Still wasting your time on censorship instead of editing eh a2com staff? good job. no really don't worry about all the incorrect facts, poor grammar, and misleading headlines - there might be a citizen with a brain making good points in the comments. as for your comment shutthefrtdoor - claiming this is a money grab is completely ridiculous. This couldn't be further from the truth. Unlike all the selfish drivers and other uninformed commenters on this article, our city council is looking out for the benefit of *all* road users as well as making our downtown areas as safe and accessible as possible.
AdmiralMoose
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 4:17 p.m.
OK, so my city administration heard the evidence supporting the 85% rule yet chose not to believe it. Instead, the city administration wants to do an end-around on Michigan law by re-striping the roads in what they're calling a "road diet." Where is the evidence (as in published data) that a road diet will work? Why do they believe that the street speeds will decrease? Or are we all just faith-based now?
amazonwarrior
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 3:59 p.m.
I thought our city planner's first responsibility was to develop or sell the Water Street property. Yet, it sits idle while Ms. Gillotti stays awake nights thinking up these silly ideas that will cost the taxpayers more money, unless she wastes more of her time trying to convince the Downtown Development Authority to cough up the cash. By the way, has any one noticed the "bicyclists" sign that was stenciled on the street on west bound Michigan Avenue at Hamilton in front of Abe's? You know, right next to where there is street parking and some one can throw open their car door and knock a person off their bike. Another brilliant idea.
Stephen
Thu, Jul 19, 2012 : 3:27 a.m.
Ms. Gillotti is indeed an impressive multi-tasker. Attending planning commission and city council meetings is a great way to learn about how she spends her time. Heck even reading the minutes from those meetings would help get your head out of the sand.
amazonwarrior
Thu, Jul 19, 2012 : midnight
Peter, is Ms. Gillotti a personal friend of yours? Glad to hear she is capable of handling multiple projects at the same time - I'd just like to see some RESULTS from this multi-tasking.
Peter
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 6:40 p.m.
This may be a shock, but Ms. Gillotti quite capable of managing multiple projects at once!
dading dont delete me bro
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 3:54 p.m.
"Gillotti said when she presents the plant to MDOT" is this a five leafed plant?
shutthefrtdoor
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 4:30 p.m.
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha! =D
Katrease Stafford
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 4 p.m.
Dading, Thanks for pointing that out! I corrected the typo.
slave2work
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 3:14 p.m.
Some of these changes do not make much sense. North hamilton?. thats 1 block right in front of the college . You have two streets merging, no parking on that street, only the precious bike lane?. For 1 block?.. really!! I'm so sick of Ypsilanti trying to be Ann Arbor. As for the " beautiful median on Michigan Ave. have you ever been on that when the firetrucks need to get thru?. or at the intersection of Hamilton and Michigan . Road diet ,,, hahahaha.. They just want to look like they are doing something, instead of sitting on their thumbs about the water's acreage. This goes along with the need to stop traffic on the hill from huron to waters street so the " border to border" can cross.
Billy Bob Schwartz
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 11:40 p.m.
Ouch. Please excuse that last sentence. But you can guess what I'm getting at.
Billy Bob Schwartz
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 11:39 p.m.
Wow. The other day, someone was sick of Ann Arbor trying to be New York City. Now you are sick of Ypsi trying to be Ann Arbor. What town has a citizen who is sick of their town trying to be Ypsilanti? Why not have your own town trying to be the best your town that it can be? Does borrowing ideas (sometimes crummy ones) the same as trying to be who you borrowed it from?
Billy Bob Schwartz
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:48 p.m.
This is a great idea. It reminds me of the organization of the QWERTY keyboard for typewriters. As I uderstand it, that keyboard was designed to be as inefficient as possible so that the printing levers (did they have a name?) wouldn't get all jammed up. In other words, they made the keyboard intentionally inefficient in order to slow down the typing. How does it make sense to have people scrambling trying to invent ways to slow down the traffic? Surely, speed limits can be set intelligently. Well, strike that....
SEC Fan
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 3:01 p.m.
Billy. Actually you're a little off. The QWERTY keyboard wasn't designed to slow down typers. It was designed to eliminate jams caused by fast typers. Typing speeds did not slow down, they actually increased.
Ron Granger
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:27 p.m.
Ypsi is a town trying to be a town, not a race track. The people who actually live in ypsi, especially those with kids, support lowering speed limits and slowing down cars. The people who feel they are entitled to drive fast everywhere, at any cost to safety, will whine as usual. Most of the people complaining about this do not live in Ypsi.
Brad
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 3:17 p.m.
And you live where?
Goober
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 3:13 p.m.
I wonder if the same holds true for commenters who do not live in Ann Arbor, but comment on AA issues. Interesting!
Ignatz
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:18 p.m.
Asinine idea. It's already a pain to get through the streets in Ypsilanti. Many roads are in bad shape, there are traffic lights cycling with just a few vehicles on the road. Many people need to use their personal vehicles. Buses and bicycles are not the answer. Buses run too infrequently and don't reach far enough to be efficient. Bicycles are fine for those physically able and have destinations within a reasonable distance. The road network is meant to get traffic from one point to another in an efficient manner. One of the aspects of efficiency is time. Slowing down folks it the antithesis to that.
Ross
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5:25 p.m.
No one is saying that the traffic lights couldn't be better timed, or traffic patterns revised. But Ypsilanti is not a major metropolitan area... on the worst of days it still only takes 5 minutes to drive through.
Goober
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:11 p.m.
This will definitely fuel the YPSI turnaround. Evidentially, they have spent too much time drinking the Kool-Aid in Ann Arbor. Increasing bike traffic will add to their local revenue stream and prosperity.
Ross
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 1:59 p.m.
As a new resident of Depot Town, I support the city's ideas here. Ypsilanti does not have traffic issues. I have never, EVER, seen a traffic "jam" anywhere in Ypsi. It has bumpy, broken down streets with too many lanes - raising the speed limits is only going to exacerbate this problem. Ypsilanti is also not in the way of any major commuting or long-distance travel routes. The low (normal) speed limits are not an impediment to people's travel. Just because the state regulations would allow the limits to be higher shouldn't mean that we have to raise them. Adding bike lanes and more parking is a great idea anyway - if it keeps the cars from driving ever faster, that's also great. One final word - many pedestrians in Ypsilanti are drinking alcohol throughout the day. Faster vehicular traffic will only further endanger their lives as they attempt to stumble around town.
Ross
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5:24 p.m.
Haha, nice replies. Yes, people stumble into the road in front of me in Ypsilanti all the time. This has never happened to me in Ann Arbor. There is a very distinct and real difference in the demographics and income level between these towns. I don't think I need to find citations to back up the fact that this is correlated to substance abuse. I'm just stating my personal experiences anyway. SECfan, you are right. Studies do show that people drive the speed they want to drive, and that lower speed limits only lead to accidents as people change lanes and try to go around each other. Uniform vehicle speeds are safest.... for vehicles. Pedestrians are still more at risk with higher vehicle speeds. Reducing lanes and narrowing streets will, however, bring down vehicle speeds, which will undoubtedly be safer.
Andrew Jason Clock
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5:13 p.m.
Wow, where to start on the thread. From "one final word" to Murf's laughable suggestion that traffic backs up from Michigan to Washington every Monday and Friday, this is a great one. Dude, Ross, really? You really think there are more people drinking here during the day than in say, Ann Arbor? Murf, give me a break. I watch traffic on Hamilton pretty much every day. It's once pretty rare for it to back up to Pearl Street, let alone Washtenaw. I've only seen that a couple of times in several years, and it usually involved an accident.
Hmm
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 4:24 p.m.
"One final word - many pedestrians in Ypsilanti are drinking alcohol throughout the day...." Wow
EyeHeartA2
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 3:05 p.m.
Save the drunks!! Slow down!! Is that your logic? Great.
Murf
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:56 p.m.
Sure, Sunday morning there aren't any problems but you should hang out at Abe's during the after work rush Monday - Friday to see the back up which usually extends around the corner and up Washtenaw as people who are leaving from what I am assuming is work and/or classes at EMU. Throw in a AATA bus stop as well to really get things nice and congested.
SEC Fan
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:56 p.m.
actually it won't increase people's speeds. THAT is exactly what the studies and science are trying to tell you. the vast majority of people are already driving at those speeds!!!!
a2cents
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:20 p.m.
darwinian
coach mike
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 1:55 p.m.
In 2006 Michigan passed Public Act 85 a law requiring local governmental agencies to study their speed limits on roads. One of the purposes is to ensure that local governmental agencies do not create revenue producing speed traps that do not make sense for the location, road size and traffic density. When a ticket is issued, the ticket issuing agency gets all but $40 of each ticket issued by it's police force (the $40 goes to the State Police Training Fund). So this attempt to reduce speed limits is an attempt to enable more speeding tickets to be written and for the City of Ypsilanti to gain revenue! see link http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20100427/METRO05/4270380
akronymn
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5:39 p.m.
What a clueless statement. Anyone who knows anything about YPD knows that they're not trying to get tickets through this. Hell they're not even behind any of this. You're just being plain inflammatory and uninformed coach mike.
shutthefrtdoor
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 4:17 p.m.
BINGO! I was waiting for someone to pull the blankets off the rat I smell! And...did you see how they slid in the "parking meters"? Yet another money grab!
SEC Fan
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:55 p.m.
It's also meant to bring - dare I say it - SCIENCE to the setting of speed limits as opposed to someone's "feelings".
Ross
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:01 p.m.
Booo! No it is not! How often do you see Ypsilanti police writing speeding tickets?!? Almost never. They have much better things to do, like chasing burglars, murderers, etc. We already have the low(er) speed limits in place. This is not an attempt to lower them further - just to prevent the state from forcing us to take them higher, which is NOT needed.
JMA2Y
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 1:54 p.m.
I wish they would reduce the size of Summit and therefore reduce the speed that people feel they can drive. It's posted at 25 mph but people drive well over that. While the city has posted monitors, those monitors have artificially slowed traffic because they tell people what speed they should be driving and what speed they are driving-but people always slowed down while approaching the monitors. Cars go about 40-50 on Summit and it's reckless. Accidents have occurred.
SEC Fan
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 1:49 p.m.
Thank you Mayor Schreiber and city officials for protecting us from those heathen scientists and engineers. We all know it's just black magic trying to turn us to Satan. I liked the world much more when it was flat.
akronymn
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 1:48 p.m.
I'm very happy to hear that we have a City Council that is knowledgeable enough to realize that blindly following MDOT's speed studies is a bad idea. These speed studies are an incomplete view of the street. It takes a progressive and knowledgeable city to understand the great benefit that comes from an unintuitive decision such as a road diet. The fact of the matter is road diets bring great improvements not just to the traffic flow but to the safety of drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Add to that the established benefits of making our city easy to get around without a car and we're looking at some serious improvements to transportation.
YpsiVeteran
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 8:13 p.m.
Way to twist the data, akronymn. From the website of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA): "The management of speed through appropriate speed limits is an essential element of highway safety. Appropriate speed limits are a prerequisite for effective and sustainable speed management. In terms of traffic law, speed limits should reflect the maximum reasonable and safe speed for normal conditions. That is speed limits should be acceptable as reasonable by most drivers and separate high and low risk speed behavior. They go on to say: "If lower speed limits are desired, then engineering and other measures should be implemented that reduce speeds to a level that would support a lower limit." The problem here is not that "lower speed limits are desired." The problem is that the city wants to spend money it doesn't have to lower speed limits because they are claiming higher speed limits "could" pose safety issues, an idea that's been proven false.
akronymn
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5:56 p.m.
@YpsiVeteran fhwa study concluding that capacity change is negligible for roads similar to the ones in question and that crashes are reduced: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/10053/index.cfm Report on the road diet on Nickerson St. in Seattle finding that instances of speeding were greatly reduced, congestion was not increased and accidents were reduced: http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/docs/Nickerson%20before%20and%20after%20study_FINAL.pdf Where is the data to support your claims YpsiVeteran? @Brad When there are two travel lanes side by side with the inside lane doubling as a turn lane there are several types of problems that occur. People stopping short to turn cause drivers to swerve into the other lane. Likewise cars will pull into the left lane to get around right turning vehicles. I am not saying the throughput will go up. Most studies point to little or no change in throughput and when it does change it changes slightly - sometimes up sometimes down. I am saying that there will be less instances of fast-stops, swerving cars and most importantly less accidents. Add to all this the fact that these streets will be more friendly to bicyclists and pedestrians and it's a win-win-win situation.
Brad
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 3:16 p.m.
Now exactly what do you mean by "improvements" to the traffic flow? Why is it that every time a road diet proponent discusses their impact on traffic flow they never use objective measures? See, I would think "improved" traffic flow would move faster, but road diets do exactly the opposite of that. If you want to cite safety, fine.
YpsiVeteran
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:48 p.m.
Where is the data to back up your claim that "road diets" bring great improvement to traffic flow? Where is the data that supports any of your other claims?
Ross
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:02 p.m.
Yes! Thank you for injecting some logic into this discussion.
YpsiVeteran
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 1:27 p.m.
"Mayor Paul Schreiber expressed concern over the costs but Gillotti said the city would seek additional funding partners such as the Ypsilanti Downtown Development Authority and MDOT." Oh yes! Please do. It's always easier to swallow spending money you don't have when you can get other groups to waste their own money at the same time. Maybe, just maybe, there should be less time spent on defying science and research and more on figuring out a way to keep firefighters, sell the Water Street Property, and hire back some of our cops. I bet $70,000 could put Water Street spec sheets in front of quite a few investors, developers, etc.
Murf
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 1:28 p.m.
Unfortunately, I think this is called 'job security'. :-)
YpsiVeteran
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 1:20 p.m.
"Gillotti believes there could be an issue of safety if the speed limits are increased ...." Well then! That settles it. Somebody who knows absolutely nothing about the topic "believes" there "could" be an issue if speed limits are increased. Apparently, all the studies and the research on traffic safety that MSP and MDOT rely upon when making these determinations, and all the information they provided to council proving that increases in speed limits on certain roads and in certain situations actually reduce traffic crashes, means nothing. And since we have so much extra money in Ypsi, why not throw some more of it away? What an embarrassment. I guess, if you don't have what it takes to solve the real problems, you make up problems that you can then feel good spinning your wheels, and wasting money, to "solve."
YpsiVeteran
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 8:06 p.m.
There's plenty of science on which I based my opinion, an example of which is below. The question, which you are still evading, is what data supports your declarations? From this article, quoting a LT with the MSP: http://www.annarbor.com/news/ypsilanti/michigan-state-police-and-mdot-proposes-more-speed-limit-increases-in-ypsilanti/ "Studies performed across the state in other college towns such as East Lansing and Mount Pleasant and even those that are dissimilar, such as Saline, show that increasing the speed limit does reduce crashes, according to Peterson."'
akronymn
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 5:58 p.m.
What science YpsiVeteran? You're opinion is just that - an opinion. And in this case an ill-formed and uninformed opinion. There is no science to back you up here.
YpsiVeteran
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:44 p.m.
Ross, yes, I really think it's a stretch. I also think it's a stretch to call either Huron or Hamilton a "high pedestrian" route, and I invite you to compare the numbers of car/pedestrian accidents with the number of car/car incidents. There are very few car/pedestrian crashes, and lots of car/car. The figures MSP and MDOT supplied are pretty self-explanatory.
YpsiVeteran
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:41 p.m.
Akronymn, from your post above: "Blindly following these speed studies consistently create problems throughout the state." Where is your proof? My opinion is based on science. You made unsubstantiated claims then accuse me of insulting people. Pointing out that an urban planner is not a traffic expert is hardly an insult.
Ross
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:03 p.m.
Do you really think it is a stretch to say that increasing speed limits along streets with high-pedestrian traffic could lead to more safety issues? c'mon, man.
akronymn
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 1:40 p.m.
That settles it - YpsiVeteran is insulting people again so we'd better listen.
murph
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 1:16 p.m.
Thank you, City Council, for working to make the streets work for everybody! Many of Ypsilanti's streets were built for an earlier time, when the city had 10,000 more residents and several large industrial facilities--the old Ford/Visteon plan on Spring Street once had 4,000 employees on a shift. These days, there's not nearly so much traffic, especially truck traffic, and so we have a lot more pavement out there than we need to move cars. (Over most of the '90s and '00s, traffic counts on these major roads have been dropping by 1-2% annually.) The proposed change is a great way to maintain traffic flow at a good level of service while also making the roads better serve the businesses and residents adjacent to them and making the streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists.
Ross
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:08 p.m.
Murph, I agree fully. These facts that you describe seem completely obvious, but I guess a lot of people desire the freedom to blast down a middle lane at 45 mph right through the middle of town....?!? Ypsilanti does not have a traffic issue. There is no logical reason to raise speed limits.
Murf
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 1:22 p.m.
Going along with that theory, Prospect should be widened since the R&L Carrier semis use it daily to get from M14 to their office on Ecorse and are probably the direct contributor to how bad Prospect is from Holmes down to Michigan Ave.
Murf
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 1:13 p.m.
As always, as soon as Ypsi looks like its making a turnaround when it comes to idiotic ideas, another one pops its ugly head. I'm sure this will work just as well as when they removed the right turn lane on North Huron at Michigan Ave. after they put in those 'lovely' medians to make Michigan Ave. look better. The irony is that the back up that creates is right by City Hall. I guess they never look out of their windows...or they are one of the people that ignore the striped lines on the pavement and turn right from there anyway.
Murf
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:27 p.m.
10-12 cars cannot make it through a green light there. Also, I believe the right turn lane was eliminated due to the installation of the medians because it would make the right turns harder for the semis without the use of what use to be an empty middle lane on Michigan Ave to swing out into to complete the turn. Time for you to learn the history of your new city before leaving comments. :-)
Ross
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 2:10 p.m.
What backup? What the heck are you talking about? You mean the 10-12 cars that arrive to intersections when the light is red? And then take off normally when it turns green again? What do the medians in Mich Ave have to do with the lack of a right-turn lane on Huron, anyway? You are just grumbling for the same of being grumpy. Pretty pointless and detrimental to our conversation here, Murf.
xmo
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 12:46 p.m.
I like the idea of reducing speeds, a little is good but lets go all the way! Block Washtenaw, North Hamilton and South Hamilton completely! This will be safer This will save the planet and increase foot traffic in the area!
Brad
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 12:41 p.m.
Looks like the "road diet virus" has made its way to Ypsi. One of the symptoms is that it makes people think that reducing the number of lanes and slowing speeds actually *improves* the flow of traffic. Delirium, pure and simple.
akronymn
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 1:39 p.m.
It's about improving safety and usability. Insulting people doesn't help anything.
Dog Guy
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 12:35 p.m.
What hourly rates are planned for next year when they install the 200 parking meters?
Mike
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 12:34 p.m.
Looks like the less lanes, more bike paths agenda is catching on everywhere. Now all they have to do is pass the egregious idling law they were considering and we can stop all automobiles in their tracks.
aabikes
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 12:31 p.m.
YAY!
Cory
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 12:21 p.m.
So here's an entity who's whole job is to make traffic flow better. They go out and do thousands of dollars worth of research and figure out that there's a better way to do what the city is doing, that will Increase Safety and Decrease accidents, in spite of what the "conventional wisdom" is. And here we have another entity that's full of stick-in-the-mud people following the conventional wisdom. Not really worried about safety or increasing traffic flow or anything reasonable like that, but instead are concerned with the elderly vote in the next election. Guess who's setting policy. :( Honestly, grow up. Realize that increased speed limits will not mean gloom and doom, but will increase safety and improve traffic flow. Just because you sat up all night and figured out a way around the mandate (at the low low cost of a years salary for an extra police officer) doesn't mean that your right.
Stephen
Thu, Jul 19, 2012 : 3:19 a.m.
Honestly - grow up and realize that you don't have to race everywhere. There are other people to think about than yourself and saving those precious few seconds.
mgoscottie
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 4:51 p.m.
Your right to what?
akronymn
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 1:38 p.m.
This is an entity that who has many responsibilities and is overworked. They use one study to determine what they think speed limits should be without regard to many factors. This is a serious problem and Ypsi is doing the right thing by redesigning their roads. Blindly following these speed studies consistently create problems throughout the state.
aabikes
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 12:35 p.m.
http://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0001457597000365-gr2.gif
pseudo
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 11:37 a.m.
Please don't do that. Leave it alone. Issue of safety my eye! (we're already going that fast). If you are going to solve a 'problem', try solving the mess made by the lack of a turn land on Michigan Ave. Try making it easy to get to parking in downtown from north of Michigan Ave to South of Michigan ave without having to negotiate one-way streets and no turn here issue. Our city is already painful to negotiate through, why make it harder or slower? All of this with the idea of more parking (we don't exactly have a parking problem) and another mile of orphan bike lane?
dading dont delete me bro
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 11:17 a.m.
stripping and not moving curbs will effectively reduce speeds? hmmmm....
SEC Fan
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 11:58 a.m.
no. the speeds will remain the same. Only difference is Ypsi won't have to change the speed limit signs.
RUKiddingMe
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 11:15 a.m.
Am I reading this right, that a large organization (MDOT) that is considred to have traffic expertise and authority suggests raising speed limits; a smaller entity (city of Ypsilanti), with no traffic expertise but (I'm assuming) a more intimate familiarity with local flows and safety, doesn't want to do it, so they spend money to paint lines that change the shape/lane count, as some kind of loophole that negates the information used for the MDOT study. Is that what's happening? The wording makes it seem as though the speed limit increase was a suggestion, not an imperative. Is that wrong? Can MDOT just come in and tell cities what to make all their speed limits? If so, are these Ypsi officials more knowledgable than MDOT people about speed limits, and should they put work and money into changing the game like this just to avoid raising speed limits? If NOT, why all the hubbub? Just ignore the suggestion. This seems weird. Was there some public outcry about raising the speed limits?
Mike
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 12:38 p.m.
Creating traffic jams will definitely lower speed limits. You could put up signs allowing 100mph if you can congest the roads enough it won't really matter.......We don't need traffic engineers to do this kind of work just some mass transit advocates and environmentalists getting together. More traffic equlas more disgruntled drivers riding buses to work or bikes or walking. Come on greenies let me know if I'm onto something here........
SEC Fan
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 11:57 a.m.
state law dictates how speed limits are set. (technically, if you get a speeding ticket on a road with a speed limit not in accordance to the state law, you can get the ticket thrown out). MDOT did a study and showed that - per state law - the speed limits on the subject streets are currently not in accordance. Instead of bringing the speeds in line with state law, Ypsi wants to spend $70K plus to repaint the roads. maybe that's cheaper than changing the speed limit signs??? glad we have that huge budget surplus...
king
Wed, Jul 18, 2012 : 11:05 a.m.
Fantastic alternative to previous suggestion of raising speed limits in those areas.