MDOT will proceed with conversion of Jackson Avenue from 4 to 3 lanes in Ann Arbor
The section of Jackson Avenue that state and local officials are interested in converting from four to three lanes extends from east of Maple Road to Revena Boulevard, where Huron Street splits into Jackson and Dexter avenues.
Ryan J. Stanton | AnnArbor.com
In an email to residents on Monday morning, an official from the Brighton MDOT office said more traffic data will be collected before a portion of the four-lane road switches to one lane in each direction with a center turn lane, but that remains the plan for now.
"MDOT appreciates the numerous e-mails and communications that we have received regarding the proposed changes to this roadways laneage," MDOT's Lynne Kirby wrote.
Over the past month, she said, MDOT has taken into consideration public input, the city of Ann Arbor's resolution in favor of the lane conversion, the city's previous documented plans for the lane conversion, and a letter of support from the Washtenaw Area Transportation Study.
"Based on this input, and after discussing this with the city of Ann Arbor, and in a continual desire to improve the safety of the roadway, MDOT has concluded that we will proceed with the implementation of the 4/3 lane conversion as proposed," she wrote.
That immediately sparked blowback from some residents who previously inundated MDOT officials with negative feedback.
"You are disregarding all the local wisdom and many cogent observations of the residents that use the road each day as to why it's a bad plan," Ann Arbor resident Stephen Ranzini wrote in an email to Kirby and shared with council members.
MDOT is responding to a direct request from the Ann Arbor City Council to reduce the number of lanes to increase lane width, improve safety, and possibly add bicycle lanes. But some residents have been upset and argue it will mess up traffic flow and not improve safety.
The section city officials are interested in converting extends from east of Maple Road to Revena Boulevard, where Huron Street splits into Jackson and Dexter avenues.
MDOT plans to do the lane conversion after it mills and resurfaces a portion of the I-94 business loop, including Jackson Avenue and Huron Street, between I-94 and Main Street.
As to when that will occur, Kirby said MDOT has decided to postpone its I-94 business loop project until 2014 to accommodate the city's reconstruction of Miller Avenue in 2013.
In order to determine the effectiveness of the 4/3 lane conversion, MDOT will collect additional traffic data both before and after its implementation, Kirby said.
"The data will be used to further refine MDOT/s traffic models that are used to predict motorist delay," she wrote.
"By 2015, MDOT should be able to effectively evaluate the results," Council Member Sabra Briere, D-1st Ward, wrote in an email on Monday. "It's only paint. If the lanes need to be altered in any fashion, it's only paint."
AnnArbor.com has obtained traffic crash data from the city showing there were a total of 70 accidents along a three-quarter mile stretch of Jackson Avenue over a three-year period.
Twelve of those were side-swipe accidents where cars were driving too close together between Maple Road and Huron Street.
Only one of the 70 crashes over the three-year period was a head-on collision, while more than half were rear-end accidents. Thirteen of the accidents involved injuries.
The crash data for 2008 to 2010 is part of the city's case for wanting to convert Jackson Avenue to three lanes in hopes that it reduces accidents and injuries.
The report compiled by the city shows the overwhelming majority of the crashes occurred during weekdays, and during the afternoon rush hour between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m.
In addition to its analysis of crashes along Jackson Avenue, the city took a look at the three-quarter mile stretch continuing east along Huron Street to downtown.
That analysis showed there were 128 total crashes in three years there, including 29 side-swipe accidents and 47 rear-end accidents. Twenty-two of those caused injuries.
Just as was the case with Jackson Avenue, accidents were more likely to occur on weekdays along Huron Street, with spikes from 8 a.m. to 9 a.m., noon to 1 p.m., and 3 p.m. to 6 p.m.
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529. You also can follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's email newsletters.
Comments
Peregrine
Thu, May 24, 2012 : 1:48 p.m.
I findi it amazing that among these 270 comments (so far), a full 16% (44) of the comments are by one user -- @SMC.
dina
Thu, May 24, 2012 : 4:15 a.m.
i live on virginia and travel this route plenty. the jams at maple and jackson going away from town mean you often wait through two or three light changes. as it is, people can't get to the left hand turn lane with back ups in the two lanes headed toward I-94 or westgate. . . same thing turning left onto jackson toward town. reducing the # of lanes would worsen that. coming in toward town there's a lot of traffic, often slow or indecisive folk, and buses, but at least you can get around them -- reducing the number of lanes would make it hard to find a break for entering jackson when turning left (or right, for that matter) from those side streets between virginia and maple. the only advantage would be having a turn lane and having someplace to nest for left hand turns going onto or off from jackson. i think a lot of people would try to avoid jackson and increase traffic on parallel neighborhood streets. i already do that. the best scenario would be four lanes plus a turn lane. probably not going to happen. i see the problems with jackson at present, but i don't see the three lane proposal as an improvement.
Frustrated in A2
Wed, May 23, 2012 : 3:37 a.m.
Just ban vehicles all together and problem solved, Lol!
Brad
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 9:02 p.m.
Hmmm ... the "most commented" story (250+) of the day doesn't appear as any of the "top stories" now? What's up with that? Has it been "disappeared"?
John Q
Wed, May 23, 2012 : 3:01 p.m.
That happens with every story. Stories are never "top stories" for more than 2 days.
Giacomo Senna
Wed, May 23, 2012 : 3:01 a.m.
Yes, you're right - it's a conspiracy. Wow.
Brad
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 9:47 p.m.
Not in the chronological list of "today's stories", either. Seems very odd. Did they get a call from the mayor's office?
annarborfan
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 6:51 p.m.
Back in the 1970's the city spent a lot of money making major roads out of town 4 lanes to get people in and out of town faster. The next generation comes along and thinks 3 lanes are going to work? Does anyone of any importance ever read the cities comments on here for feedback?
Ron Granger
Wed, May 23, 2012 : 12:44 p.m.
"Does anyone of any importance ever read the cities comments on here for feedback?" For some reason they prefer to use engineering based on traffic and accident data.
Hmm
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 5:45 p.m.
I can't believe these idiots are doing this. I am so mad right now!!!
C. S. Gass
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:09 p.m.
This was an ignorant idea when they did it on Packard and it's an ignorant idea on Jackson. Any excuse, it seems, to let one mind numbingly slow driving, moron in a Prius clog traffic for the 15 or so cars behind him. Less lanes=less efficient. How hard is that to understand? You're now using two lanes twice as much and one lane hardly at all. Mathematically it's not efficient. I'd like to know how many advanced degrees the over-educated cretin who came up with this mess has on his 'love me' wall. I'm sure it's too many.
John Q
Wed, May 23, 2012 : 3:02 p.m.
The optimal speed for the Prius and most other vehicles is not by driving as slow as possible.
Brad
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 8:24 p.m.
You're kidding, right? Just like every other automobile on the planet, a Prius would save energy (gas or electric) by driving more slowly. At least as long as there is an atmosphere.
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 6:57 p.m.
For all the Prius bashers, I hardly ever see a Prius creeping along. It's the usual conservative stereotype but it has no basis in fact. It doesn't even make sense. A Prius isn't saving anything by driving slowly.
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:30 p.m.
Reposted from earlier comment: Michigan vehicle code, section 257.642: (b) Upon a roadway which is divided into 3 lanes and provides for 2-way movement of traffic, a vehicle shall not be driven in the center lane except when overtaking and passing another vehicle traveling in the same direction, when the center lane is clear of traffic within a safe distance, or in preparation for a left turn, or where the center lane is at the time allocated exclusively to traffic moving in the same direction the vehicle is proceeding and the allocation is designated by official traffic control devices. In other words, if driver A feels like passing driver B in the center lane, for any reason, and it's safe to do so, it's legal. Which means that, if there are no police officers watching, it will be done at greater-than-legal speeds. In other words, it is legal to pass the self-appointed savior of the polar bears using the center lane. Be sure to downshift 2 gears when doing so, to offset the Prius driver's carbon offset.
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:29 p.m.
The addition of the left-turn lane removes left-turning traffic allowing the single lane to operate more efficiently.
Sieben 7
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:37 p.m.
If this makes such good sense then why isn't this continued from the Dexter-Jackson split all the way out to the Washtenaw-E.Stadium split. Based on the study of traffic crashes it is obvious that the real danger is along Huron St - more side-swipes, rear-ends and injury causing crashes. Do you realize how harrowing it is to ride your bike around the curve at the power station? And Washtenaw east of S. University is narrow also. We need more bike lanes everywhere. We should also consider having satellite parking lots at the city limits with no vehicular traffic within the city limits (residents going directly to and from home excluded), save delivery and emergency vehicles and an elevated people mover style transit system above the bike lanes. A determining factor on who I vote for in November will be who supports these crazy ideas.
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:56 p.m.
Delivery vehicles? Only if the vehicles are bicycles or electric scooters. Better learn to enjoy cold pizza. Emergency vehicles? No worries there, the police and fire budgets will be cut so much that there will only be 2 officers on duty at a time, on foot. The fire department will still have trucks, but not hoses or ladders.
BobbyJohn
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:19 p.m.
Stop the madness
nobody
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:11 p.m.
What about 3 lanes inbound on Jackson to Huron, 3 lanes outbound Dexter Huron to Maple? You see this solution in a lot of towns
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:54 p.m.
That might make it more than slightly inconvenient for people to get home during peak traffic times.
Elijah Shalis
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:06 p.m.
Ok remember many years ago when the first 4 - 3 lane conversion took place. The City revealed the real goal was to discourage incoming traffic into the city. I suggest AnnArbor.com go back and relook at their older articles where that fact was revealed. I am in favor of a city income tax where city residents get a proportional credit due to their property taxes.
Jim Walker
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:53 p.m.
Proceeding with the conversion WITHOUT further public input at well publicized public meetings is simply not acceptable. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, www.motorists.org, Ann Arbor, MI
John Q
Wed, May 23, 2012 : 3:16 p.m.
The conclusion in the report look questionable in two areas. One, the traffic delays are reasonable well above 1,000 VPH. Even at 1,500 VPH, the delays don't reach a critical level. Two, the assumptions on LOS don't match with what you experience in urban area. Urban intersections rarely operate at LOS above level D especially at peak hours. The idea that these intersections are operating at higher level of LOS and the conversion degrades them simply isn't consistent with how real-world experience. This isn't surprising though since unlike other conversion studies, MDOT primarily focused on conversions in rural areas and small cities. MDOT should be looking at conversions done in areas that are urbanized like Ann Arbor.
P. J. Murphy
Wed, May 23, 2012 : 2:22 p.m.
Thank you for the link, a very interesting study for both sides of the question. It would have been nice for the original reporter to have included it in the article.
Jim Walker
Wed, May 23, 2012 : 3:20 a.m.
For P. J. Murphy: Many things in traffic engineering are counter-intuitive. Posting the best speed limits for the smoothest and safest traffic flow is one example, as the best posted speed limit is often higher than what people expect and higher than the level of the current posted limit. My skepticism about the 4 to 3 Road Diets plan for Jackson Avenue comes primarily from MDOT's own report #RC-1555 done by MSU under a contract from MDOT which can be downloaded here: http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0,4616,7-151-9622_11045_24249-270908--,00.html Quoting: Abstract, page iii, "The results of the operational analysis support a guideline that sugests that 4-to-3 lane conversions result in significant delay when average daily traffic (ADT) exceeds 10,000 and, more importantly, when peak hour volumes exceed 1,000. Page 1 has similar cautionary quotes for ADTs over 10,000 and peak hour volumes over 1,000. Page 2, "While the best estimate of a usable CMF (Crash Modification Factor) is 0.91, it should be noted that this is not statistically different from 1.0 and is an average across all sites." Page 3, "Changes is crash severity due to road diets were examined and the distributional shift over all sites was estimated (and then compared to statewide changes). The finding was that although there was a slightly more substantial shift to less severe crashes for the road diet sites, it did not seem operationally significant. Moreover, the shift could easily have been due to changes in operating speeds or enforcement rather than the road diets themselves." Later on Page 3, "This indicates that the crash/safety benefits are likely to be considerably less than what is suggested by naive comparison of before and after crash statistics." Given that Jackson Avenue has a current ADT of 15,500 which is expected to rise to 18,000 in future years, and given that the flow has very definite peaks in the AM and PM, I have considerable skepticism about the plan. Jim
P. J. Murphy
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:44 p.m.
Who knows Mr. Walker, maybe MDOT is shy because the conversion is one of those counter-intuitive traffic matters that turns out to run against the grain of the average person's perceptions. You are the acknowledged expert in this area. Despite your misgivings about the way this is being done, what's your view on it's utility as a traffic management measure on this particular street?
kalin
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:24 p.m.
I can't even find words to explain how something so ludicrous is actually going to happen. When we first heard it, we thought it was a joke, but I guess the joke is on us......
Ron Granger
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 1:08 p.m.
FACT: Over the past two years, this same change on Packard reduced the number of traffic accidents from 20 to 30 per year to 6 or 7 per year. Many people who were very skeptical of the change, myself included, found the new configuration works just fine. As reported here: http://www.annarbor.com/news/ann-arbor-officials-pushing-for-conversion-of-jackson-avenue-from-4-to-3-lanes/
Peregrine
Thu, May 24, 2012 : 3:25 p.m.
@SMC: Really, do you stand by these assertions? 1) You assert that the mayor and city council's true intent is to make life more difficult for motorists. Nonsense. 2) You assert that the only solution if the intent is to increase safety is to widen the road to add an additional lane. (You also state that safety will increase with the current 4-to-3 plan thereby contradicting yourself.) 3) You further assert that because widening the road would not have provided for bicycle lanes, the council decided against it. You don't think it has anything to do with a) the need to assert eminent domain, b) the costs associated with taking that property, replacing the curbs, reconfiguring the sidewalks, and c) that there is a far less costly alternative that will increase safety. So basically your position rests on your conspiracy notions that this decision has nothing to do with increasing safety and is truly about secret, nefarious plans to punish motorists.
SMC
Thu, May 24, 2012 : 4:34 a.m.
Here's my point, for anyone too daft to figure it out: During peak traffic, the backups at the intersection of Maple and Jackson are excessive with current configuration. Reducing the number of lanes will make this problem worse, not better, because merging always causes backups, especially at rush hour. The net effect of the reconfiguration will be traffic backed up an unreasonable distance from either of the merge points, and traffic moving at a crawl on the newly narrowed section of Jackson Ave. The safety benefits (caused by traffic crawling along at a speed slower than walking pace) are outweighed by the traffic jams the new configuration will cause. If this road plan were really being done in the name of safety, there would be a turn lane added, in addition to 2 lanes in either direction, by widening the road. However, that would not add bike paths, so the city council will have none of it. MDOT would simply repave the road as it is if the mayor and his pals didn't decide to make life more difficult for motorists, as has been their M.O.
Peregrine
Thu, May 24, 2012 : 3:13 a.m.
Does anyone else wonder what SMC's point is? Because the volume is greater, the effect of the reconfiguration on accidents will be what? Because that portion of Huron is a designated commercial route/business loop, the effect of the reconfiguration on accidents will be what? Because there are freeway onramps and off ramps 0.2 miles west of the proposed change, the effect of the reconfiguration on accidents will be what?
Sieben 7
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4 p.m.
@ Elijah What is old? Why not young drivers need to wait longer for their license? The idea that in order to prevent accidents it is age related ignores the fact that there are too many distractions, people do not know how to drive competently (you are right about road tests) and, at least on Jackson, the curb lanes are in deplorable condition - I have seen people swerve to avoid potholes ignoring the fact that there is a car next to them.
Elijah Shalis
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:55 p.m.
The problem is bad drivers on the road, not the need for wider lanes etc. There should be stricter road tests and old people should loose their licenses.
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:26 p.m.
FACT: That stretch of Packard doesn't have the same volume of traffic, isn't a designated commercial route/business loop, and does not provide access to a freeway interchange at either end of it. FACT: A horse is not a dog, even though they both have 4 legs.
gofigure
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 1:42 p.m.
What does that have to do with Football Saturdays?
gofigure
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:42 p.m.
Anybody think about Football Saturdays? Mere speculation but probably a "few" fans that come in via Jackson Rd to Main St. The brainiacs will probably want to turn Jackson into Eastbound Only before the game and Westbound only after the game.
Alan Goldsmith
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:21 p.m.
So is AnnArbor.com going to FOIA any communications between the City and MDOT on this?
Peregrine
Thu, May 24, 2012 : 3:05 a.m.
@SMC: If you actually believe that, what's the reason you're not submitting a FOIA? @Alan Goldsmith: why not you? Seriously, what would you hope to find, secret nefarious plans? Evil laughter transcribed as "mwaaa ha ha ha"?
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:25 p.m.
No, because it might cause people to form opinions that differ from those of annarbor.com and the city council.
Outside(:-o)looking in
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:17 p.m.
Take the sidewalks out, turn Jackson Ave into a six lane road, then everyone will be happy! Except the walkers, joggers, mailman... someone should study this.
Sieben 7
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:03 p.m.
I can see how the decision will go if they decide to change it. "This isn't working but the lines have a five year life so when they wear off we will repaint to the original configuration."
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:49 p.m.
How much will it cost to remove the pedestrian-safety island that they'll also install? Or will the cost of removing them justify keeping the new configuration, at the expense of motorists? Oh wait, was that the plan all along?
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:32 p.m.
Traffic lines are typically repainted once or twice a year.
golfer
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 11:29 a.m.
i hope they look at it and then make the right choice. giving it a test is fine in they look at the results. time will tell. i think it is a bad idea anyway.
firstfolio
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 7:14 a.m.
Thank God you are at home on line instead of sitting next to me at the pub.
hermhawk
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 5:07 a.m.
The very idea of lane reduction in lieu of rush hour traffic is totally absurd. To paraphrase then presidential candidate George H.W. Bush, this is "voodoo engineering."
Steve Beisheim
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:46 a.m.
Everyone needs to relax about this... Yes, people will drive slower and your precious commute time may increase by one minute.. Why in such a rush anyway.. Where the heck do you think you're going... You guys have hurry up and wait syndrome... It'll improve the quality of life for everyone since narrower roads make things better for everyone and improves quality of life...
Left is Right
Wed, May 23, 2012 : 2:03 a.m.
Might try laying off the utopium. Narrower roads = better quality of life? For whom?
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:24 p.m.
Commute times increase by more than a few minutes when traffic is needlessly dead-stopped for 2 miles, which it will be, once they're done narrowing the road.
Peregrine
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:18 a.m.
@Stephen Ranzini, you state: "Reducing the road to one lane from two won't lower the likelihood of drivers from rear-ending the next person in line, especially when the traffic stops dead suddenly, more frequently, and especially at rush hour when traffic volumes are so high." Given that you're not an expert in traffic, I would have expected some qualification in such a claim. For example, "I would guess..." or "Although I'm not an expert in traffic, I suspect...". But you just claim it as though you have some great insight. I am not traffic expert. But I'm guessing that this really hinges on what leads to a rear-end collision. For example, because the lanes are particularly narrow along this stretch, drivers *might* be dividing their attention between what's going on ahead and what's happening in adjacent lanes, making them less responsive to the car in front. And given some aggressive drivers inclination to weave back and forth, some drivers *might* try to minimize the gap between themselves and the car ahead to prevent someone from cutting in front, and the resulting tail-gating *might* lead to more rear-end collisions. Actually, with just a single lane in each direction, one can easily imagine that drivers focus on what's ahead will increase. Of course traffic experts collect data and make assertions based on them. And it sounds like MDOT is committed to collecting data before and after the reconfiguration. You and I, however, can only make our best guesses, whether you frame your assertions as guesses or not.
Bob Krzewinski
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:35 a.m.
Wait until gas hits $5, $6 or $7 a gallon. Suddendly people will start to see a need for bike lanes as an alternative form of transporation.
Elijah Shalis
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:52 p.m.
Just get a car that gets good milage lol
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:27 p.m.
Just wait until prohibition raises the cost of illegal liquor by an astronomical amount. Then people will stop drinking. Oh wait, that didn't work at all.
Sieben 7
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 1:55 p.m.
You know Bob, that's exactly what my friend who lives in Chelsea says, "When gas hits $5/gallon I will be riding my bike from home to work downtown Ann Arbor."
Giacomo Senna
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:48 a.m.
I see that it is the usual couple of dozen commenters who comment on any article having anything to do with roads, or pedestrians, or cyclists, or city hall with "get out of my way" or "People's Republic of Ann Arbor" sentiments who are not surprisingly appalled by this decision. In this case, however, you can't lay blame on the public art loving politicians who you normally fault for all of the decisions you disagree with - MDOT made the final call here on a section of road that they ultimately have authority over. My guess is that the majority of you don't live in (and pay property taxes to) the city of Ann Arbor because you clearly have such a low opinion of everything in the city. Given the Libertarian bent many of you seem to have I'm surprised that you are so against this sort of thing, I thought it was all about personal choice. You can always just stay out in the exurbs and avoid Ann Arbor and its residents that you have so much disdain for - I'm sure none of you could possibly work for the university, that would be like being a socialist, right?
Elijah Shalis
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3 p.m.
I am a gay liberal democrat and went to public schools here and college in Michigan and still live in Ann Arbor and this is one of those few hair brained liberal stupid decisions.
Brad
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 1:01 p.m.
Your "guesses" are universally wrong. I live in the city, don't work for the U and am not a libertarian. I am however not all that happy with how the city is run, and this is just one more example of why that is. The powers that be have their "vision" and they are not about to let the citizens interfere with that. Which is why they need to go.
Sieben 7
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:11 p.m.
I beg to differ as the request was made by city council to institute this change so we can lay blame blame directly at their feet. To quote - two of the four reasons given by MDOT were "the city of Ann Arbor's resolution in favor of the lane conversion, the city's previous documented plans for the lane conversion," I live in, pay taxes to the City and am directly affected by this proposed change as Jackson is my primary method of moving east and west. Or at least it has been.
Justavoice
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:24 a.m.
Ann Arbor just keeps adding to the decision to never frequent downtown unless I have to. I'll continue to take my money outside the city limits where I don't have to put up with the frequent lame brain decisions, poor city management and increasing need to fish for more money. One day the businesses downtown will get a clue their city management is killing their business unless they want to cater to only college students.
Peter Baker
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:22 p.m.
Downtown Ann Arbor is thriving, in spite of the things you think are "killing" them. It might just be that the opposite is in effect; the things council and other groups are doing to make downtown – and the city at large – more livable and accessible to multiple forms of transportation, are contributing to Ann Arbor's continued success.
Vince Caruso
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:14 a.m.
This is great. Living in the area I feel it will make a great improvement in the neighborhood and city. It is a gateway into Ann Arbor, why do we put up with such a awful roadway? I was at the public meeting and found the vast majority supported the change. Even residents from across town came to show support for the change, this almost never happens. Glad to see the Mayor finally support the change. At meeting a few years back, directed by a city paid consultant on more bike lane placements, the Mayor was firmly opposed to bike lanes on Jackson, even though the paid consultant was strongly in favor. Why pay for these consultants if you just ignore their advise. The most of the local residents, residents from across town, the chair of the Washtenaw County Road Commission, MDOT, the city staff in attendance all strongly supported the change. This is working very well as stated in many places in Michigan, now, we were told. We do need to put the crosswalk islands. discussed at the meetings, so people can cross the street without taking their life in their hands. Liberty got crosswalk islands, bike lanes and was not widened a few years back, strongly supported by residents, and it made a huge change for the better.
Kevin
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:11 a.m.
Unlike W. Stadium, Jackson/Huron is a business route in and out of the downtown core. If anything, MDOT should be talking about adding a center turn lane to the existing 4 lanes.
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:22 p.m.
I'm sure everyone's getting a lot of use from the 4 foot strip of grass between the sidewalk and the roadway, which, while they are responsible for its upkeep, they are not allowed to use as they would their own property.
alex
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 7:23 a.m.
sorry, but you're not taking any of my front yard away from me
1bit
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:31 a.m.
Great idea, except they'll have to dig up everbody's front yards for your convenience. And their will kids be seen anywhere in their own front yards as cars zoom by? Nope, I think this is a more sensible approach than increasing the size of our asphalt jungle.
townie54
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 11:52 p.m.
well the problem is the same people in ann arbor vote their same favorites in because the rest of you are to lazy to go out and vote.On non presidential election years it takes 15 minutes.Get out and do it.But my solution now will be to take Pauline to 7th and then to Madison or washington or whatever side street gets me to the part of town I want.That is until everyone else starts doing it and it takes 15 minutes to turn left on seventh from pauline.Then my eastern boundry will be stadium
townie
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 11:39 p.m.
Every weekday around 5:30pm traffic from the Stadium/N.Maple and Jackson intersection is so bad that it backs up to Worden Ave. Can someone explain to me how having one lane instead of 2 could possibly improve anything? I am in favor of improving bike lanes in and around Ann Arbor but this just does not make any sense to me.
Peregrine
Thu, May 24, 2012 : 2:59 a.m.
@SMC: Again, would it be possible to dispense with the straw men? The ordinance says nothing about "stopping on a dime". In fact, pedestrians are prohibited from acting in a way where it is unsafe for a driver to yield. The text is included below. And by the way, did you forget that my point was that your claim that the change was done to provide the bike lanes was not true. 10:148. - Pedestrians crossing streets. (a) When traffic-control signals are not in place or are not in operation, the driver of a vehicle shall stop before entering a crosswalk and yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian stopped at the curb, curb line or ramp leading to a crosswalk and to every pedestrian approaching or within a crosswalk, when the pedestrian is on the half of the roadway on which the vehicle is traveling or when the pedestrian is approaching so closely from the opposite half of the roadway as to be in danger.. (b) A pedestrian shall not suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into a path of a vehicle that is so close that it is unsafe for the driver to yield. [note: (c) is omitted as it about pedestrians not in a crosswalk]
townie
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 10:24 p.m.
What about the traffic back ups? Am I the only one who thinks a 1/4 mile back up for an intersection is a problem?
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:38 p.m.
And therefore, no lanes are safer than 1. Abolish all roads! Seriously though, John, you have yet to explain how "what works in other places will work in Ann Arbor" can be applied to narrowing the road and slowing traffic, while you assert that the state of Michigan's guidelines for setting speed limits should not be followed, because "this is Ann Arbor.' Which is it?
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:34 p.m.
4 lanes are less safe than 3. It's that simple.
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:21 p.m.
@Peregrine: Don't kid yourself. The current lane width is adequate, and always was, until the road was allowed to fall into rack and ruin, effectively narrowing the usable driving area by not repairing the giant holes in it. As far as the left turn lane being safer, perhaps. However, if motorists are expected to suddenly stop on a dime for pedestrians in the roadway, as mandated by the pedestrian safety act, why doesn't the city council trust them to do the same for a car or truck, which is much easier to see? Because simply repaving the road would not add their precious bike lanes, that's why.
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:48 a.m.
By adding a left turn lane, traffic can flow better than the current lane configuration. More safely too. This is true whether you have bike lanes or not.
Peregrine
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:24 a.m.
@SMC: No, this reconfiguration was designed to improve safety since the current lanes are particularly narrow. Once you move from four lanes to three lanes you have some extra space. So the bike lanes are a bonus an attempt to take full advantage of the reconfiguration. To claim that the key reason for this reconfiguration is bike lanes is disingenuous. Please, let's stop with the straw men and have an honest discussion.
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 11:51 p.m.
It improves things for cyclists, not motorists. Washtenew county motorists don't have a lobbying group like the Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition to push their agenda.
Blue Eyes
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 11:04 p.m.
Yet another reason to avoid downtown AA. RIP downtown businesses!
HBA
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 9:50 p.m.
This reminds me of the so-called "experts" paid by the Kroger store on Plymouth Road years ago to "improve"check-out traffic. Before those guys came in, the 2 express lanes were at each end of the bank of checkout registers. However, these highly-paid "engineers"--working by a book--decided that traffic would flow much better were those express lanes scattered in-between the regular lanes. This occurred in the days before self-serve check-outs. Needless to say, their "engineering" turned into an absolute disaster. When check-out traffic was at its peak and lines long, nobody could find the express lanes. It didn't take long for common sense and practicality to return the lanes to their original locations. Unfortunately, once the damage has been done to the conversion of Jackson Road from the 4 lanes to three (an extremely unwise and impractical solution) it would be prohibitive to undo. There is still time. We hope common sense will reign.
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:47 p.m.
There's an entire field of science that has been around longer, that says it is impossible for two objects to occupy the same space, at the same time. So, tell me again how 2 lanes of traffic flow more efficiently than 4?
Swordsman
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:22 p.m.
That analogy is absurd. There's a enter field of traffic engineering that's been around for decades and is well grounded in data, modeling, and experience. It hasn't the foggiest thing to do with what Kroger does with it's checkout process.
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:47 a.m.
Or we could look at the road conversions done successfully all over the country and realize that your doomsday prognostications are wrong.
javajolt1
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 9:38 p.m.
Why? Awful decision. Where are the public hearings??
ordmad
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:09 a.m.
@SMC: "There aren't any. There was one .....". Brillant
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 10:11 p.m.
There aren't any. There was one, several months ago, attended only by the Washtenaw Biking and Walking Coalition, plus a few concerned Old West Siders, who took time out of their busy evening schedules of shaking their fists at traffic and letting their dogs defecate on a children's playground to attend. The people who actually have to use the road to commute in motor vehicles were not invited to the meeting, nor were they consulted, because it might have led to pragmatic common sense opinions being voiced in opposition to the predetermined course of action by the city council, which involves making good things happen by wishing harder.
Mike
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 9:23 p.m.
And the citizens remain at home behind their keyboards while public officials plan their lives for them....................
Halter
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 9:01 p.m.
Based on the almost daily collisions in both directions on Stadium where 4 lanes were converted to 3, I can guarantee that there will be no changes made back to 4 lanes if the 3 lanes "don't work" We already know this doesn't work. But I think the bigger lesson to learn is, by the time these stories hit annarbor.com, they are no longer relevant to any further discussion -- they are done deals and nobody wants our opinions. Vote, people, vote. Our entire council needs to go. We are going to have no impact here. We can with our votes. And if you are considering running for council, FILE NOW...enough is enough.
P. J. Murphy
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:56 p.m.
Interesting to note that sprinkled among the apocalyptic chorus are some testaments by those who have actually experienced the 4 to 3 lane conversion on their local route. So far they are uniformly positive. Add me to the list, I'm near Packard, and it's made the street easier to drive on and also live near. Buses and refuse vehicles are not significant problem. Right now Huron, most times of the day, is no picnic and the statistics seem to back that up. If this innovation makes driving the road safer, for drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists, then it's definitely worth a try. It's worked well elsewhere, and the negative predictions are pure speculation.
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:35 p.m.
Wrong. I said it was a local decision that should be decided by local officials.
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:55 p.m.
While John Q believes that Ann Arbor's speed limits should not be set according to state/MDOT guidelines, because "this is Ann Arbor, and we're different."
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:45 a.m.
Don't waste your time sharing facts. Road conversions have been done successfully all over the country but SMC is convinced that Jackson Road is nothing like any other road in the country.
P. J. Murphy
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:26 a.m.
Really? Where do you get your data? Published traffic counts suggest very similar volume between Packard and Jackson. And beyond just traffic flow are the advantages to local residents and road users. Jackson, right now is a fairly dangerous, unpleasant drive much of the day. What's wrong with making a serious test of an alternate solution?
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 9:27 p.m.
What's even more interesting is that not one of the streets whose narrowing is supported by testimonials has the same traffic volume as the stretch of road in question. In other words, it is a comparison of apples and bowling balls. Both are round, but that's where the similarities end.
Mike
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:54 p.m.
The idea here is to create gridlock folks and force you onto public transportation or your bicycle whether you like it or not. The city has all of these agenda driven, grand plans like stopping for pedestrians, building a bicycle bridge at Geddes road that nobody uses (the bicyclists like the roundabout better), narrowing of Stadium Blvd between Pauline and Seventh; maybe they should narrow down Washtenaw Avenue, after all there are more bike paths there than anywhere else in the city. I wonder how the traffic engineers are going to spins this? Keep voting in these "progressive" idealogues and you'll get more of this. Brighton is looking better and better everyday...........
Halter
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 9:03 p.m.
"Brighton is looking better and better everyday..........." No kidding....Florida is ever looming nearer....
Lou Velker
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:46 p.m.
Incredibly poor decision. Everyone start figuring out how to avoid Jackson now. Perhaps that is what they really want?
KMHall
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 1:16 a.m.
Yes. Slow down or take a different route.
Joe_Citizen
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:46 p.m.
That's it I'm leaving, just going to move away from this backwards happening town. Has anyone been in traffic during football time? or just rush hour traffic. The City's nuts plain out nuts. Bye Bye.
1bit
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:26 a.m.
There are 6 to 8 home games per year. Rush hour is a couple hours out of the day. And you're leaving? I don't think you were ever really here to begin with.
a2cents
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:29 a.m.
bye (or outlaw f'ball)
Bryan Ellinger
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:28 a.m.
Aw, I miss you already.
Bob W
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:40 p.m.
Surely a decision of this magnitude required a traffic analysis and data to support it. Can we see it please? It must have addressed some of the points raised, such as the impact on traffic flow of buses, waste removal? It seems A2 News Reporting simply means printing what the city officials say. Definitely no probing or thought provoking questions. Come on A2 News, can't you do a little better?
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:46 p.m.
They key to getting the roadway narrowed and slowing traffic down is to engineer your traffic study to only include those times of day that aren't rush hour.
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:38 p.m.
Most state road agencies support road conversions on roads that carry up to 20,000 ADT.
Subroutine
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:31 p.m.
A lot of people seem to hate this change. Not sure why exactly if they stopped to think it over. The lanes as they are now are really narrow; scarily so if you're not driving a compact car. And those wanting to drive above the speed limit are still limited by people who are trying to turn left or those of us who follow the posted speed limit. If you're coming in from I94 why not just continue on the highway to State St. and go in from there? Not much time lost if any. Or if your coming from the north on Maple you can take Miller Rd, Dexter Rd, or go past Jackson to Liberty Rd.
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:44 p.m.
There isn't enough bike traffic to justify bike lanes on every road in town, but that's the direction they're going.
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:39 p.m.
There's absolutely no need for a 5 lane road. It's not justified by the traffic volumes.
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:54 p.m.
There's plenty of room to add a 5th lane, if they widen the roadbed. There might not be enough space to add bike lanes and a center turn lane, but oh well. I don't see bicycles delivering the essential goods and materials that allow the businesses downtown to function, probably because this is Ann Arbor, not Saigon circa 1978.
Peter Baker
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:30 p.m.
"Unfortunately, they didn't [widen the road to 4 lanes + a turn lane], because the Washtenaw bicycling and walking coalition have the ear of several city council members." They didn't do that because there's not enough room for the 4 lanes that are there already, adding a fifth would've just been absurd. Quit playing the bicycle lobby victim card.
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 9:42 p.m.
Because Jackson Ave is part of the designated business loop, and because the traffic backups on I-94 near the AA-Saline and State St exits are beyond belief. Also, some people believe that driving further than you have to is foolish and wasteful. Instead of passive-aggressive encouragement to do just that, perhaps the city council should have been lobbying MDOT to spend state money on widening the Jackson Ave roadway, to include 4 lanes plus a center turn lane. Unfortunately, they didn't, because the Washtenaw bicycling and walking coalition have the ear of several city council members. You have them to thank for the failed pedestrian safety ordinance, don't forget.
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:18 p.m.
"Narrowing the road to improve traffic flow," by the same crack team of experts that brought us "Downsize public safety, lay off police officers and firefighters, and gut their benefits, to make the city safer." This town really is 28 square miles, surrounded by reality...
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:50 p.m.
Falling gas tax revenues? You don't say. Back when said revenues were not falling, the blame was placed on the temperature differences between summer and winter (that apparently only occur in Michigan,) and so-called "frost heaves" that only our state, and not the surrounding ones, experienced. However, if you believed that nonsense, you had clearly never traveled across the river into Canada, where the highways are smooth, quiet, and pothole-free, despite Ontario having similar, it not more extreme summer/winter temperature variations. As for the common-sense answer that too many vehicles are trying to fit down not enough road, I encourage you to travel down Jackson ave at 5pm this afternoon, and witness this phenomenon firsthand. Then imagine how far the tailbacks will stretch as these cars attempt to merge down into 1/2 the space that is currently available. Then imagine one person at the head of the line who is paying more attention to his/her phone conversation than to the act of driving. (Oh, and the traffic backups I was referring to are the ones where traffic is flowing smoothly one minute, and backed up the next, for no explicable reason. Some say it is caused by tailgating, which itself is the result of drivers not using proper lane discipline, but that's another story.)
Swordsman
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:22 p.m.
Very simply, the reason you have congestion without one-off factors like accidents is that too many vehicles are trying to fit on a road designed for fewer. This principle is well known to the professional community (and also, I submit, common sense). Lagging road upkeep is a result of dwindling transportation funding due to falling gas tax revenues - not incompetence. Again, a well-known fact.
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:52 p.m.
MDOT is the same organization that has proven itself to be completely incapable of building and maintaining decent roadways in our state. Major freeways need resurfacing or complete rebuilding every leap year. Potholes are everywhere, and only get fixed when entire cars disappear into them. So, you'll forgive me if I don't believe everything that MDOT says, as if it were the word of God. Oh, and the combined brain power of traffic engineers, nationwide, has so far failed to properly explain why traffic jams occur on freeways when no construction, accidents, or merging is present. The traffic data that justifies this road-narrowing scheme is also so low as to defy belief.
Swordsman
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:17 p.m.
Actually, in many cases that is exactly what happens. There's a whole field called traffic engineering that actually studies this stuff. The career professionals @ MDOT that do this for a living are making this recommendation based on bona fide data, experience, and modeling. Traffic engineers don't tell you how to do your job. Don't tell them how to do theirs.
Halter
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 9:05 p.m.
No, this town is 8 square downtown blocks surrounded by the rest of Ann Arbor that in no way supports these bizarre council decisions....
LarryJ
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:17 p.m.
I was skeptical of the 4-->3 lane conversion on Green Road which took place over the past 2 years, but it has worked well. Traffic flows just as well as it did previously. For those of you concerned about buses and garbage trucks, they pull over into the bike lane, then the bikes have to carefully ride around them, just as they do on a 4-lane road. This doesn't slow down car traffic on a 3-lane road.
1bit
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:23 a.m.
Larry is right. SMC, you don't design roads for a couple hours of the day. You also make a recurring assumption that both lanes on Jackson have continuously flowing traffic, when they in fact do not. You can pass the slowpokes in the middle lane, I believe, if necessary rather than dodging and weaving as you have to do right now.
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:20 p.m.
Does the volume of traffic on Green road even begin to come close to that of Jackson Ave during rush hour? No, it doesn't, so there is absolutely no basis for your position.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:12 p.m.
Mayor Hieftje made the following statement in an email I saw earlier today: "If you have driven on the three lane section of W. Stadium and encountered a stopped bus you may have noticed how easy it is to pass the bus in the center lane. The busses pull over to the curb in the bike lane. This will be true on Jackson as well." Is this actually legal or not? I am curious if anyone knows. I've heard comments both ways.
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 9:47 p.m.
My pleasure. Now that I know that it is legal to pass the self-appointed planet guardians who purposefully slow traffic in their hybrid vehicles on 3-lane roads, I shall do so, more often.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 9:39 p.m.
Thanks, @SMC, for a very helpful post!
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 9:36 p.m.
Michigan vehicle code, section 257.642: (b) Upon a roadway which is divided into 3 lanes and provides for 2-way movement of traffic, a vehicle shall not be driven in the center lane except when overtaking and passing another vehicle traveling in the same direction, when the center lane is clear of traffic within a safe distance, or in preparation for a left turn, or where the center lane is at the time allocated exclusively to traffic moving in the same direction the vehicle is proceeding and the allocation is designated by official traffic control devices. In other words, if driver A feels like passing driver B in the center lane, for any reason, and it's safe to do so, it's legal. Which means that, if there are no police officers watching, it will be done at greater-than-legal speeds. So much for safety.
Halter
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 9:09 p.m.
Actually, yes it is legal. I looked it up in the Michigan driving manual once...the center turning lane can be used as a passing lane when you have blockage in the single driving lane (i.e. garbage truck, bus)...only exception is School Busses. Another good one to know is that when you are on a divided street with a median strip in the middle (i.e. Eisenhower/packard area) you do not have to stop for a school bus on the other side, even though Ann Arbor drivers stop anyway....I looked that one up as well.
David Cotton
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:57 p.m.
Personally, and I haven't lived in Ann Arbor for more than 10 years now, but Jackson was congested when I lived there. I can only imagine that traffic has increased. And for me this issue would be sufficient that I would vote out whatever city council members I could. This issue might even be sufficient for me to campaign against them. I can see nothing positive about this restructure. I live someplace that has light rail as a commute option. And for all the naysayers about rail, I say live with it for awhile, definitely worth it. Now if the said we're reconfiguring Jackson and we'll add light rail into downtown, I would be all for it. Or, we're adding a bus only lane that will express people from a commuter parking lot to downtown. But consider, people are going to still commute, changing the lane configuration is not going to change the number of cars that want to travel that route. I predict this will create sufficient backlog that people coming in from the west will instead take Miller, or perhaps go up 14 and come in on Main. Other people that were coming from a more easterly side have fewer choices. There's Main off of 94, or intown going all the way to Pauline. So the load will shift and adjust. But the congestion will only increase, because the number of cars wanting to go downtown isn't going to change. They haven't included in their proposal alternative ways for people to transit. And for those bicycle people, just because you you can do it doesn't mean someone else needs to do it. As much as you believe riding a bike is the right thing to do, that belief does not come with the inherent power to force your belief on someone else. To hear some talk bike riding is the new religion, you will convert or you will die. Is that really the perception you want to portray?
Larry Kestenbaum
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:54 p.m.
The conversion to 3-lanes on Stadium (7th to Pauline) did not turn out to be the predicted apocalypse, rather, it has worked very well. Stopped buses and garbage trucks are at the right curb, so they are very easy to get around. My experience (driving this stretch of Jackson Avenue every day, westbound at rush hour) is that the left lane is mostly unusable due to stopped cars waiting to make left turns, and other cars stopped behind them. That was also true of Packard before its 3-lane conversion.
Hmm
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 6:22 p.m.
Saying you can't use the left lane on Jackson at rush hour is a bit of a stretch. Yes there is sometimes a wait to let the traffic pass but guess what? People still have the option to drive in the other lane that is right next to them. What is being proposed is taking away your option of using the other lane to pass and now you will be forced to just sit there and wait until that car that is three cars in front of you in the line of cars tries to squeeze into the center turning lane. The whole time traffic is just sitting there at a complete stand still though!
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:10 p.m.
If the traffic volume on that section of Stadium came remotely close to what it is on Jackson Ave at rush hour, you might have a point. However, it doesn't.
Linda Peck
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:50 p.m.
Trash day is going to be really interesting. I wonder how many people will be passing those garbage trucks as they inch their way downtown. I wonder also how many people will be passing buses as they stop to pick up passengers. Even though the middle lane is only to be used for left turns, what is your guess my fellow West Side neighbors, we will be sorely tempted to break the law.
Linda Peck
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 11:44 p.m.
We will be part of a possibly lethal experiment, then? As I mentioned earlier, Bloody Telegraph is so easily forgotten by the youthful.
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 9:45 p.m.
According to the state motor vehicle code, it is legal to use the center turn lane for passing. Whether or not it is any safer to pass a vehicle in a lane where there is the possibility of oncoming traffic doing the same thing, remains to be seen.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:49 p.m.
I have been pondering two new flaws in the argument for this proposal. Reducing the road to one lane from two won't lower the likelihood of drivers from rear-ending the next person in line, especially when the traffic stops dead suddenly, more frequently, and especially at rush hour when traffic volumes are so high. I think that the traffic data doesn't properly model the rush of people into and out of the city all at the same time when our public employers' shifts begin and end. Ann Arbor is anomalous in that 10 of the top 10 employers are all government entities. I find for example that between 8am and 8:15am in the morning all approaches in the city leading to the U-M Hospital complex are very busy and traffic is backed up at all choke points, but at 8:45am not at all busy, for example. The same works in the evening rush hour down Jackson and elsewhere in the city. Whatever new studies are done should take into account the volumes on a 15 minute timescale during the rush hour periods. I think that you'll find that the per hour volume rates far exceed the levels appropriate for a single lane road in each direction.
1bit
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:14 a.m.
Seriously, you would like to design a road for a 15 minute period of traffic? Or an hour or two rush hour? This stretch of road is too narrow for four lanes. People zip in and out dangerously and recklessly. Slow and steady traffic makes more sense. If it doesn't work then go ahead with the "I told you so", but my guess is that it will work for most hours in the day just fine.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:46 p.m.
Here is a link to my column on this topic which has a long list of reasons why the proposal is a bad idea: http://annarbor.com/news/opinion/ann-arbor-finally-putting-money-into-its-neglected-roads-but-executing-plans-that-are-flawed/ I think it is appalling that MDOT decided in the end not to have a public hearing *that was actually well advertised* on this issue since it impacts so many people!
ordmad
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:03 a.m.
Sorry your unofficial run for something in this town hit a snag.
tim
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:44 p.m.
This is a truck route. That means that commercial vehicles can't go around this foolishness. I really can't believe that MDOT is that inept. The situation on Jackson road is bad , and now the city wants to make it worse? Maybe UM should leave Ann Arbor so locals can have their bicycle paradise. Just nuts!
Mike
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 9:21 p.m.
And the citizens remain at home behind their keyboards while public officials plan their lives for them....................
hail2thevict0r
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:19 p.m.
I wonder if anyone that's making this decision has ever driven down this road during rush hour? Not only are there constant buses stopping every block but on certain days there are trash vehicles that block an entire lane of the road. If this actually happens this road would become almost completely unusable for anyone's morning commute into the city and most would be forced to take a longer, more indirect, route around this madness. Unless they change the bus route, there's no way this works out well for anyone except maybe bikers.
1bit
Wed, May 23, 2012 : 1:49 a.m.
Wait, so all this angst is all about saving 5 or 10 minutes for commuters during rush hour? The road is too narrow for four lanes. It either needs to be widened or changed to three lanes. Before tearing up the yards of the people who actually live there to save commuters several minutes (which, may not even slow commuters down anyway) does it not make sense to try the less costly solution first? For 22 hours of the day, it will be fine. Making the road bigger will mean more expense to maintain and excess capacity for the majority of the day.
hail2thevict0r
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:25 p.m.
1bit, It's clear by your comment that you don't drive down Jackson during rush hour. It's not that it would just be an inconvenience, it's that it would literally make the road impassible during those times. On the way into Ann Arbor you'd be stuck behind multiple buses and trash trucks the entire way into the city with no way to pass. On the way out the intersection of jackson and maple would be struck down from two lanes to 1 and a turn lane - backing that intersection up 1/2 of a mile. That would literally take 15 minutes to get through just that light. Heck, look no further than what the current closure of Dexter as to what a cluster Jackson becomes with more, or condensed, traffic. I avoid that intersection now simply because of the little bit of added traffic. It takes 10 minutes to get through during rush hour coming home. Going around it takes another five minutes but it's worth it not to wait at that light that's backed up. The narrowness of that road has never bothered me. And for the few drivers that it does bother they could easily adjust their route. I've never seen an accident that was caused by the lanes being narrow and I'd assume that's why the speed limit is only 35. It's certainly not enough of a problem to literally ruin the road for all commuters who live just outside the city and drive in. And sure, it's fine most of the day - but when there's not a lot of traffic the narrowness shouldn't be a problem either. Drifting over the line when no one is in the lane next to you isn't really an issue.
1bit
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:07 a.m.
Hail: The road is too narrow as it is. Rush hour will be a problem but that is the nature of rush hour. Most of the day is not rush hour and I'm sure it will be fine. If it becomes a huge problem then repaint the lanes.
hail2thevict0r
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:45 a.m.
Or they could just leave it the way it is and resurface the existing road. The only problem with that road is that there are pot holes the size of basketballs from maple to main.
a2cents
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:22 a.m.
4 lanes for autos + 2 for trucks + 2 for buses + 2 for bikes + 2 sidewalks = ... rip out the lawn extensions; uproot the trees and pave right up to the houses. These folks deserve the very best asphalt taxes can buy.
thinker
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:18 p.m.
There is only one solution! Vote out our mayor and our council! I know it's drastic, but it's the only solution.
Oleg M.
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:14 p.m.
I am 100% for the THREE LANE on Jackson Ave.
Tesla
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:11 p.m.
I couldn't read ALL the replies. It would make me feel like I have chuildren. Good grief what a bunch of cry babies. I think this us a good idea and everyone knows the road is dangerous as four lanes now. lol Go outside people.....holy mackeral.
Elijah Shalis
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:04 p.m.
I don't think the real Tesla would agree with you.
alterego
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:11 p.m.
The conversion from 4 to 3 lanes seems to have worked well over here on W. Stadium Blvd. Allowing yourself 5-minutes of extra travel time on trash day is really not that big of a deal. Plus, buses only run every half hour in either direction. Slow down and enjoy the scenery.
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:45 p.m.
You're right, Peregrine, everyone's observations are completely valid, and should be taken as absolute truth. For example: every time I've ever driven anywhere during peak traffic, I have observed that traffic backups occur where roadways narrow and motorists are required to merge down one lane. I also observe that this gets worse as the road gets narrower. I imagine that this is due to the impossibility of two objects occupying the same space at the same time, and I didn't even need a traffic study to figure that out. Sometimes, common sense is all it takes.
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:33 a.m.
Don't bother SMC with facts. They get in the way of the ranting.
Peregrine
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:30 a.m.
@SMC: So someone's actual observations don't matter. But you feel free to speculate all you want in this thread. For example, above you state, "Trying to merge two lanes of traffic down to one will back it up all the way to Wagner."
Ann English
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 11:57 p.m.
I avoid West Stadium not because of any heavy traffic volume but because of all the traffic signals. I avoid the Stadium-Maple-Jackson intersection unless I intend to shop at Dollar Tree or Plum Market. That particular traffic signal is one of the extra-long-waiting ones. I don't want eastbound traffic on Jackson backed up to Wagner; I often use Wagner instead of Maple in order to avoid stoplights. I know, it's a digression from the main subject.
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 10:19 p.m.
Unfortunately, your anecdotal observations have exactly nothing to do with this issue, since the volume of traffic on W Stadium does not come close to that of Jackson Ave at rush hour.
mckinne65
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:11 p.m.
About time!
rkb0929
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:10 p.m.
Was there really every ANY DOUBT that this project WOULD proceed as they planned??? Not in my mind for sure....Ridiculous! Let's get the Stadium Bridge done!!!
thinker
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:09 p.m.
Oh, no! Another main road to avoid!
st.julian
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:04 p.m.
It seems to me with the city council's love in with developers, and high density residential, the reduction of traffic lanes limiting access to the city the next few steps would be to build a fortress -perhaps of high density apartments around the perimeter, have entry checkpoints (with identity cards), entertain a perimeter moat to create the CITY STATE OF ANN ARBOR. The tag line shall remain, and perhaps become more pertinent, 9 square miles surrounded by reality. follia solo in materia governi
Arboriginal
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:16 a.m.
We need a physical wall to match our socio-economic one!
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 10:13 p.m.
I prefer "The People's Republic of Ann Arbor." which sounds democratic, but is really a dictatorship, since no one ever runs against Dear Leader in what passes for elections around here. Oh, and it's (roughly) 28 square miles, surrounded by reality.
K32
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 6:48 p.m.
Unbelievably stupid decision.
G. Orwell
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 6:36 p.m.
This is what the UN has in mind for the city of AA. Whether we want it or not. No cars will be allowed for us commoners and everything will be decided for us by central planning. Right out of Orwell's 1984. They are actually showing this to children in England to indoctrinate them. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7rCAYkoMT0&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Elijah Shalis
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:03 p.m.
Oh God, not a UN scare monger. Quick put the tin foil hat on before the Reptilians get you!
blahblahblah
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:50 p.m.
While safety may be improved on one stretch of roadway, there is no doubt other areas will be negatively impacted as mentioned above. I would also add that if the east bound traffic backs up to Stadium/Maple, that would make that intersection even worse. Westgate shoppers already have trouble turning left onto Jackson Rd (something I no longer attempt). Traffic could easily be backed up to the I-94 freeway ramps as well as up and down Maple and Stadium as a result. potential for backups into the Maple/Jackson/Stadium intersection
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 6:05 p.m.
Eastbound traffic on Jackson is already backed up to the overpass during rush hour every afternoon. Trying to merge two lanes of traffic down to one will back it up all the way to Wagner.
Billy Bob Schwartz
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:47 p.m.
The more I read about AA drivers/bicyclists/pedestrians and the more I see of them, the more I tend toward the following solution: 1. Built large parking areas just outside AA. 2. Allow no cars or trucks beyond that point. You must park there, and use your bicycle, or rent one there, or hire a pedicab. This will be the only traffic allowed into the city. 3. Build barricades near the inner part of AA. No bicycles or pedicabs allowed beyond that point. Only pedestrians and wheel chairs (with doctor's note) allowed past that point. Now, we have motor vehicles, cycles, and pedestrians all working safely. Now, we will no longer need to yell at each other about your form of transportation vs. mine. Pedestriand can bump into each other, bikes can crash into each other, cars can run into each other, but forms of transit will be segregated. At long last, we don't get punished if we text while driving, race theough lights on bikes, or wander into streets while walking. Now, if only City Council will buy in.
Elijah Shalis
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:02 p.m.
lolz ya lets go all the way baby, why not make it like a catholic pilgrimage where you have to crawl on ur knees.
a2cents
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 12:14 a.m.
1 & 2 WERE the mayor's desire years ago... and we got the hole-in-the-ground.
mike gatti
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:41 p.m.
I think it will work out fine. At least the road will get paved and on the grand scheme, even if it doesn't help if it is the worst mistake made then that's ok.
Dog Guy
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:30 p.m.
Council will soon institute fines for bicyclists not using this end of Jackson Ave. (just a dollar a day per bicycle).
Ron Granger
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:24 p.m.
Wah, me and my car. Me and my car. I don't want to share the road! The sky is falling!! I don't care if these changes cause fewer accidents! I don't care if these changes make crossing safer for pedestrians! I don't care that car use has peaked! I don't care that other road users pay taxes too! I live in a fantasy world where all roads were paid for by gas taxes, even if it isn't true. My SUV must be free! Me and my car.
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:41 p.m.
You brought up pedestrian safety, Ron. As it pertains to this matter, the incidence of preventable motor vehicle/pedestrian accidents is not abnormally high, despite the inability of most Ann Arborites to read and comprehend signage and crosswalks. If the streets were littered with bodies, you might have a point, but they aren't. I'm not one to buy into the Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition's scare-tactic YouTube videos like the city council (and clearly many others) were. The pedestrian safety ordinance simply places the convenience of pedestrians over that of motorists, which isn't even close to being correct. Not long ago, i witnessed a man crossing Huron st, just east of Chapin, by blazenly jaywalking. 50 feet from the expensive pedestrian-activated red light that would stop traffic for him. But, rather than walk the extra 50 feet to press a button, he chose to make the intersection more dangerous for everyone using it. I know it's only anecdotal, but since that passes for fact around here, I'll just go with it and say that pedestrians are lazy and need to learn to look both ways before crossing the street, as we were all taught when we were children.
Ron Granger
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 1:50 a.m.
@SMC: "You don't see my commentary on pedestrian fatality stories, because they don't happen that often." -- It isn't just fatalities, it is also injuries. They are all too common. Your dismissal of vehicle pedestrian injuries and deaths as insignificant compared to the importance you give to your examples of "almost accidents" with bicycles would be laughable if not so sad. Contrary to your assertion, a large part of this plan is pedestrian safety. Similar changes to Packard resulted in a dramatic reduction in vehicle crashes. But don't let the facts get in the way. Clearly the sky is falling.
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 11:28 p.m.
You don't see my commentary on pedestrian fatality stories, because they don't happen that often. On the very rare occasions that they do happen, I don't really feel the need to add pointless commentary to a terrible tragedy that could have been avoided by both parties paying closer attention to what they were doing. Pedestrian fatalities are not caused solely by unlawful operation of motor vehicles. Not that it really matters, since the topic of this discussion is narrowing a road for the wrong reasons, not pedestrian safety. I don't suggest all bicyclists are lawless, just most of them. The large packs of Lance Armstrong wannabes that refuse to make way for faster moving traffic, for example. Or the cyclist who was nearly hit as he attempted to cut inside of my car while I made a right hand turn. Or the cyclist who wasn't paying attention as he came down a hill flat out, and struck my car as I waited to turn. I could go on, but I won't, because it's common knowledge that the cyclist community in this town think they can do whatever they like, and now they have a city council resolution and an MDOT plan to prove it. The world does not revolve around my car, nor does it revolve around your bike. However, there are more cars than bikes using the road every day, and despite your constant and endless assertions, motor vehicle traffic in this country is not being replaced by cyclists at any meaningful rate.
Ron Granger
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 10:30 p.m.
"Cyclists don't have to obey traffic laws designed for motor vehicles, because their choice to ride their little bicycles everywhere makes them morally superior, and therefore above the law." SMC, why don't we see you posting about unlawful and dangerous car drivers on the pedestrian fatality stories? You ignore the unfortunate regular accidents reported on annarbor.com where car drivers injure or kill pedestrians. You suggest all bicyclists are lawless, yet we don't read about bicyclists killing pedestrians. You balk at sharing the roads. The world does not revolve around your car.
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 6:02 p.m.
Cyclists don't have to obey traffic laws designed for motor vehicles, because their choice to ride their little bicycles everywhere makes them morally superior, and therefore above the law.
Brad
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:54 p.m.
Word!
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:44 p.m.
Me and my recycled comment that I post on every single discussion thread, ever.
Richard
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:19 p.m.
I envision two problems already; cars having to merge and a solid line of cars, not moving, backed up from east of Maple Road to Revena Boulevard.
Indymama
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:16 p.m.
It is almost that bad now leaving town on any workday evening between about 3:30 p.m. to at least 6:30 p.m. on Jackson from Revena to Maple. Then try going out of town during the same times on Miller instead, that traffic backs up for 3 or 4 blocks. I think instead of reducing to one lane each way, the street should be WIDENED!! to increase each lane and widened even more to accomodate the dozen bike riders who think they are, and insist on being a big car!!
firstfolio
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:17 p.m.
I'm all for it.I've had to abort lefts onto Worden several times by punching the gas to avoid getting rear-ended.Spooky stuff.And i'm all for accomodating bicyclists.
Alan Goldsmith
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:11 p.m.
Sabra Briere, yeah it's 'only paint'. Now you'll see increased traffic leaving and entering the City on Scio Church, Liberty and Miller to avoid newly created fiasco to be on Jackson. Thanks Ms. Briere for making three other neighborhoods more congested and dangerous so an interstate business route can have bike lanes. Profile in courage.
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:57 p.m.
In other words, MDOT does not mandate reducing the available lanes, just as the state does not mandate setting speed limits to appropriate levels, yet the top-down data is used to justify your position in both cases, and increasing the speed limit to state-appropriate levels did not result in increased traffic accidents or injuries, according to the studies. The word of the day is "hypocrisy." I'll leave it to you to look it up.
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:47 p.m.
It's been done on many roads that have an equal or higher volume of traffic. As for the speed limits discussion, I said it was a local decision. The state isn't mandating anything in this case. It was locally decided by the city council. Guess you'll have to try again with your failed attempt at gotcha.
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:31 p.m.
It hasn't been done on thousands of roads with the same traffic volume, John Q. Hey wait, wasn't it you who was using the "our town is different" argument against raising the speed limits to an appropriate level, as prescribed by the state motor vehicle code? Something about not going along with the top-down, one-size-fits-all legislation, wasn't it? What was it that the pot said to the kettle?
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:30 a.m.
It's only been done on thousands of roads across the country. Not sure why Ann Arbor drivers think that their roads and their driving is somehow different than everywhere else this has been done successfully.
Chimay
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:24 p.m.
Interesting point Alan. I'm opposed to this change but hadn't considered what will happen to those three areas. I live off Miller and it already can be a nightmare during rush hour and the hospital shift changes. Also on point is the question about why an interstate business route needs bike lanes. I drive, bike, and walk all around this city and have never considered that part of Huron to be a viable option for the latter two. This plan is only going to make being a pedestrian on Miller worse. They can't even say for certain that this will work. Seems like the resources needed to repaint and then research the effects of the paint could be used elsewhere until the research is done first. Boneheads!
deputydwag
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:05 p.m.
Many good comments from both sides. Not sure if some were advocating that bikes obey traffic laws as they are supposed to or that cars should be able to disregard the same signals that bikes do. Then maybe both sides already disregard the law. One thing wasn't quite clear........Why is it that I would want to come to Ann Arbor??
motorcycleminer
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:54 p.m.
To look at all the art and tour the underground bomb shelter of course...
Indymama
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:04 p.m.
You wouldn't WANT to!!! But if you HAD to, you should prepare to leave a day early to get downtown from the outer limits of the city!!
aatownie
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:52 p.m.
How will traffic flow when you are stuck behind a bus?
Frustrated in A2
Wed, May 23, 2012 : 3:35 a.m.
I guess you're forced into the center "turn" lane to do your passing. Makes sense to me if someone's trying to turn left while you're passing. Man this is a dumb idea!
alex
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 7:05 a.m.
learn how to pass a bus properly...
Forever27
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:25 p.m.
it won't
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:50 p.m.
Once the plan is implemented, it will only take one self-righteous planet-steward Prius driver to cause a mile-long traffic backup, as opposed to the two Prius owners (or one, plus an elderly person/texting driver) it takes with the current setup. This must be the efficiency improvement they were talking about.
Brad
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:28 p.m.
The safety improvements are due to the fact that everyone will be driving 3mph.
tim
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:30 p.m.
Boo----- Let the people vote! Bad Bad idea. They don't even know that if it's a good ida--- MDOT won't evaluate until after they make the change. Good luck getting around the garbageman/busses during rush hour .
Bertha Venation
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:28 p.m.
[Big sigh] Ah, yes... 'tis a sad day for us here in Poker Flats.... very sad, indeed.
say it plain
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:28 p.m.
Sell your cars, folks, and buy really nice bikes for everyone lol, because the city has decided this is how you must live ;-) They've been doing what they can to make it miserable to drive around here... Waiting waiting waiting for you to give 'em up, c'mon already! Now, if they would only do what @Ryan Mosher suggests--making it so that the 'in-city' roads which we drivers must use to get around the town aren't horribly traffic-clogged--then we could be happy with more biking and walking once "in town".
Barzoom
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:24 p.m.
This plan is completely foolish, but no amount of reasoning will convince our mayor or city council. Forfuneately the plan woun't be implemented until 2014 (after the election). Maybe we can elect some people who have some sense and get this decision reversed.
Warbler
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:18 p.m.
In the past 2 years both Green Road and Stadium Blvd were converted from four lanes to three. I personally think traffic flows much easier on these streets now with the additional of the left turn lane. Previously you would have cars in both lanes and then a car in the left lane would stop to turn left. This screwed up traffic and created dangerous situations (still does on Huron west of 1st Ave). Cars would pull out to the right and risk life and limb just to get by the stopped traffic. I welcome with open arms the addition on this new traffic plan. Thank you MDOT and City Council. As for all the people who screamed bloody murder when Geddes Rd would have three roundabouts added at Earhart and US 23 intersections, I hope you realize that MODT was spot on with this decision. Traffic flows through this area now FAR BETTER than it does on Plymouth Rd or Washtenaw Ave. Give the three lane concept on Jackson Ave a chance, you will learn to love it and appreciate the improved traffic flow.
Woman in Ypsilanti
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 6:22 p.m.
I drive through the Geddes roundabouts all of the time and agree that they have vastly improved traffic flow through that area. I also find things are much improved when there is a three lane conversion and only wish they would include N. Main Street between downtown and M-14
63Townie
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:29 p.m.
Warbler65, have you actually driven through the Geddes roundabouts?? At evening rush hour, it's almost impossible for northbound 23 traffic to exit onto eastbound Geddes. I can't tell you how many times I have sat and waited an eternity for an opening in traffic which never comes. Roundabouts are NOT the panacea for all traffic problems!
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:28 p.m.
If you believe the numbers in the traffic study, which are clearly altered to bolster the city's position.
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:28 a.m.
Jackson is not over the limit for a 3 lane conversion.
Ann English
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:21 p.m.
Washtenaw Avenue has five lanes with a left turn lane in the middle, so I don't have to wait behind a bus there when it stops. A three-lane road can't enable traffic to flow as smoothly as a parkway or Jackson Boulevard can, with their left-turn islands. With a single left-turn lane in the middle of any road, now and then two left-turners will meet each other from opposite directions. Each had better be in the right spots to turn left, or turn left to whatever driveway is there anyway. With a roundabout, you can make U-turns more easily if you missed your turn. Don't know how many people going east on Jackson Road are headed to homes on Pleasant Place or Virginia Street, but closing one lane on Jackson might result in residents getting on Abbott or Charlton Street in order to avoid crowded traffic on Jackson Road that is going into town.
BobbyJohn
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:31 p.m.
The difference is that Green and Stadium roads have the recommended traffic volume, according to the stat for a conversion from 4 to 3 lanes, While Jackson Road does NOT. Jackson is over the recommended traffic volume limit for the conversion. The MDOT is not following their own guidelines and neither is the city.
aabikes
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:11 p.m.
We need the Idaho Stop Law here in Ann Arbor. How can we get a proposal in front of city council? Anybody want to help get something rolling? http://bikeportland.org/2009/01/14/idaho-stop-law-faq-13387
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:54 p.m.
Speaking as a bicyclist, I think this Idaho Stop Law is a wonderful idea! Thanks for the post!
aabikes
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:56 p.m.
SMC, I believe the Idaho law does in fact applies to red lights too. The way I understand it: (for cyclists) Reds as stops. Stops as yields.
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:36 p.m.
You mean that isn't already the law here? The local cyclists seem to think it is, and that it applies to red lights as well. Which law allows cyclists to cut to the head of the line at an intersection, then slow traffic down while they try to pedal up to speed? Is it the same law that allows cyclists to cut up the inside of a car making a right turn, and cut them off?
Tex Treeder
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:28 p.m.
I was thinking about something like this the other day. Let's face it, cars and bikes are different and shouldn't necessarily be bound by exactly the same rules. I didn't know someone had put this into effect already. Good idea.
Dave
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:01 p.m.
The continued issue is that the City Council proposes making a bicycle friendly city. Unfortunately they do not take into account the drivers that have to use these roads. Especially since bicyclists are supposed to follow the same rules of the roads that cars do. I have seen multiple almost accidents due to bicyclists running stop signs, riding in the middle of the road, cutting across lanes of traffic and riding on the wrong side of the road. If City council is going to continue turning Ann Arbor roads into Bicycle Lanes they need to begin focusing on the cars that have to share the roads with individuals who are not held accountable for their actions. If a bicyclist blows through a stop sign, its the person in the cars fault. If they weave past traffic, its the cars fault. Instead of chopping up roads to make things safer, how about enforcing traffic laws for everyone that shares the pavement.
Ron Granger
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:23 p.m.
"I have seen multiple almost accidents due to bicyclists" I have seen multiple ACTUAL accidents due to motorists disobeying traffic laws. And we regularly read reports of motorists striking, and sometimes killing pedestrians. Why no mention of that? Why fixate on bikes?
Bertha Venation
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:58 p.m.
Well said, Dave. I couldn't agree more. However, I've often thought, if I were to ride a bike downtown, I would not feel safe in the bike lane. A white line will not keep a car from crushing me. Even though it is "illegal," I'd feel much safer bicycling at a slower pace on the sidewalk, IMHO.
ralphypsilanti
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:39 p.m.
Dave, I agree that bicyclists need to follow same rules. I ride bike and I see cars blowing through stops, speeding, blocking pedestrian crosswalks and sidewalks. Even worst, when I'm following the rules, signaling left to change lanes. I'll see a safe gap between cars to change lanes, but cars will speed-up, to block my manuver. It happens nearly every day!
a2cents
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:32 p.m.
From the perspective of a cyclist the contested bike lanes are more like multi-use lanes for trash display, deliveries & loading, short-term parking, skate boarding, mopeds, joggers... even light pole storage. I ain't bashful. If "my" lane's taken (or unridable) I'll simply use another provided lane, to your probable delight. My true, absolute stop at lights or signs will impede traffic, but at least you'll applaud. If I'm turning left I won't be on the "wrong side" of the road, I'll be positioned to discourage being sideswiped by an aggressive motorist.
ordmad
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 3:50 p.m.
Let the "I want things to stay exactly the same and never thought that by living in a growing city this place would actually start to become more like a city" hating begin. If you want that small town, only two minutes into downtown feel, it's time to move.
Left is Right
Wed, May 23, 2012 : 1:06 a.m.
Bizarrological.
Brad
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:30 p.m.
"Growing city"? Try again ... http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=kf7tgg1uo9ude_&met_y=population&idim=place:2603000&dl=en&hl=en&q=ann+arbor+population
motorcycleminer
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:51 p.m.
If you want to ride your bicycle move to China or Holland...
Forever27
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:24 p.m.
if you want a small town, limit the amount of people who can enter the city by cutting traffic lanes down. Your comment is counter intuitive.
garrisondyer
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 3:45 p.m.
I'm somewhat of a bike commuter, so the addition of bike lanes here would be nice, I don't think this will improve anything on Jackson, especially the moods of anybody in a car. Yikes.
garrisondyer
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:29 p.m.
@Bertha, I hear ya. I actually yell at bikers who just blow through red lights and stuff, because it makes us all look bad. Of course, it can make for some awkward situations at the next red light down the road, but oh well... :) I'm thinking of the slow traffic arising just from two lanes of cars needing to merge into just one lane.... And I personally can't stand being stuck behind a slow driver when I just want to get from point A to point B.
Bertha Venation
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:54 p.m.
I actually followed a bicyclist downtown who was following the rules of the road! IMAGINE THAT! Perhaps if more bicyclists did that, instead of blowing through stop signs and weaving into traffic, there would not be the frustration and resentment on the part of motor vehicle operators.
Bertha Venation
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:33 p.m.
A car AND a Hoveround! Watch out, Charlie... I got knock offs on my chariot :)
garrisondyer
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:27 p.m.
@a2cents, sorry, I didn't see your comment before I posted about my hasty grammar mistake. I haven't personally had any bad interactions with cars while on my bike in Ann Arbor, but I'm just thinking about how frustrated drivers may become with how slow the traffic moves since you have no choice but to drive behind the person in front of you, no matter how slow they are moving. No chances to pass can make for some frustrating driving conditions.
garrisondyer
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 3:56 p.m.
Oops, grammar failure. Should have been a "but" after the second comma.
a2cents
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 3:48 p.m.
You mean you have detected aggresive motorist behavior... in annarbor?
a2roots
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 3:44 p.m.
This is absolutely absurd. New leadership is needed now. The non-motorized transportation plan also needs to be either revised or burned altogether.
Left is Right
Wed, May 23, 2012 : 12:57 a.m.
I didn't vote for these people to lead me, I voted for them to represent me--at which they are not doing a great job.
America
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:14 p.m.
But we need a good rational way for non-motorized traffic to become part of the main stream if we want to increase that type of transportation. The plan may not be perfect but I come from Detroit and we didn't even have a plan much less a bad plan.
Bertha Venation
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:31 p.m.
Amen to that, honey!
a2cents
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 3:40 p.m.
What a jolt to pride and esteem: my street only rates 3 lanes. What next, my SUV ain't a obnoxious?
Ann English
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 8:03 p.m.
Not even the reduction of Platt Road to three lanes is three quarters of a mile long, like they propose to do to Jackson. They'll have to change the lane markings on Huron just east of the traffic signal at Revena Boulevard; I can already see two lanes of westbound traffic on Huron Street trying to merge into a single lane when the light turns green at Revena.
Forever27
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:22 p.m.
this isn't about pride or any other emotion. This is about taking the main thoroughfare of a city and cutting the traffic flow in half. It's just plain dumb.
ruminator
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 3:39 p.m.
Another reason not to go to Ann Arbor. Better add a roundabout to the plan. That would complete the bad decision. If the curb lanes were smooth, drivers would be better able to hold their lane.
alex
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 7:01 a.m.
Roundabouts are only a "bad decisions" to morons who don't know how to use them properly. I'd rather get hit going 10mph in a roundabout than someone blazing through a red light at an intersection going 50.
Scotsman
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 3:37 p.m.
Great idea! This is long overdue.
Ryan Mosher
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 3:33 p.m.
Perhaps the STATE and City should stop reducing the amount of lanes we have and start looking at putting a "beltline" around the city. The traffic is only getting worse and they keep reducing the lanes and increasing our drive time and frustration! It is terrible to get from one side of the city to the other and US 23 what a joke! Grand Rapids for example has done a great job, of putting in a East Beltline, A South Beltline around the City to help ease traffic and get people around in a timely matter. Anywhere you drive in Ann Arbor is plagued by untimed lights, traffic, and crosswalks stopping you every mile. If this city wants to grow, it needs the foundation to enable it to do so.
SMC
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 6:08 p.m.
I hate to burst your bubble, Ron, but the city is growing, whether you and those that share your minority opinion like it or not. The university isn't getting any smaller, and it will not stop attracting new people and businesses to the area, just because an inconsequential number of people feel like riding their bikes everywhere.
Belgium
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 6:07 p.m.
Billy Bob, Stop doing that, we're sick of all the extra traffic on our exit (Zeeb). So many do follow your advice and have no idea they need to move to the right to get back on the highway, get off in the left lane and drift over into the right lane, often without looking. I've almost been hit 4 or 5 times by folks running the Zeeb loop and being poor drivers. : ) I'm sure you're fine.
Billy Bob Schwartz
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:32 p.m.
@RonGranger,,,"Have you never been on I-94, 14, and 23? We have a "beltline"". If the belt doesn't go all the way around, your pants fall down. The above is not a beltline. Try going south on 14, then just hang left when you get near 94 and enjoy the smashup. The closest I can find to that one is to stay on 14/94 West, get off at Zeeb, cross the bridge, take the entry ramp to 94. amd head back east. That's a beltway?
Forever27
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:20 p.m.
"If this city wants to grow, it needs the foundation to enable it to do so." you hit the nail on the head. It seems that, at every turn, this city enacts idiotic legislation and urban planning designs aimed at specifically stopping growth. Look at the skyline and greenbelt laws for example. If you can't grow up, or out, you can't grow at all. If a city isn't growing, it's dying.
Ron Granger
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 5:20 p.m.
"start looking at putting a "beltline" around the city." Have you never been on I-94, 14, and 23? We have a "beltline". It's a green belt. It is intended to stop sprawl and over-development. "If this city wants to grow, it needs the foundation to enable it to do so" The city does not want to grow. We don't want sprawl. We don't want speeding cars. We don't want to be like Troy, Canton, Dearborn, Eastpointe, etc. Those places are just lovely if that's what you want.
justwondering
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 3:33 p.m.
So this is the famous "no brainer" decision? Obviously. How does the city plan to deal with the fact that on trash day a garbage truck, and a recycling truck, and a composting truck will stop at EVERY single residence on Jackson? Do you really think that this will have no impact??? Same for city buses, although many fewer stops. Why put in bicycle lanes if they are going to stop when Jackson and Dexter converge into West Huron? Alaska has its bridge to nowhere and now Ann Arbor has its bicycle lanes to nowhere. Come on folks, use the grey matter!
thinker
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 7:17 p.m.
Or can we, with a signal, carefully pull around a stopped vehicle, such as a bus, garbage truck etc.. Do we really want to follow one of those at a stop, go, slow rate? That will get us just as rear-ended!
a2cents
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:42 p.m.
2-lane + bike lanes (S.State & Packard from E.Stadium to Main): bus or garbage truck finds the obliging opposing motorists using their side's bike lane while traffic behind x-s the double yellow. A center turn lane is much more commodious. (quit whining)
GoNavy
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 4:29 p.m.
Excellent points; I would have liked to have seen this addressed.
whojix
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 3:28 p.m.
They'll change it back to 4 lanes if it doesn't work? Who do they think they're kidding? Tell MDOT to run their experiments in a different city.
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 4:48 p.m.
I'm for the decision being made by local officials.
SMC
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 2:58 p.m.
Just like raising speed limits has not caused the roadways to be awash with the blood of traffic accident victims, yet John Q is against raising the speed limits in Ann Arbor per state guidelines.
John Q
Tue, May 22, 2012 : 3:14 a.m.
It's not an experiment. This has been done successfully in cities across the county without all of the negative effects that some are predicting.
SemperFi
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 6:49 p.m.
Did you miss this? "MDOT is responding to a direct request from the Ann Arbor City Council to reduce the number of lanes to increase lane width, improve safety, and possibly add bicycle lanes." It's not an MDOT experiment, it's another lame-brain A2 City Council decision.
Forever27
Mon, May 21, 2012 : 3:19 p.m.
this is in the running for "worst decision ever", even by the standards our city council sets!