Editorial supporting Jackson Road change is misleading
AnnArbor.com's editorial in support of the Jackson Avenue lane reduction project, “Public furor aside, rationale for changing Jackson Avenue to three lanes is sound,” (July 8, 2012) is both misleading and incomplete.
Ryan J. Stanton | AnnArbor.com
1. Although the project is described as a reduction from four lanes to three, the fact is that traffic throughput would be reduced from four lanes to two (the third lane would be for turns only). How could a 50% reduction in travel lanes improve traffic flow, especially given that all four lanes are currently full during heavy traffic times?
2. You characterize as a "misperception" the idea that "the project is being done primarily to allow bike lanes." However, bicycles are the exclusive focus in the lead paragraph of a Washtenaw Area Transportation Study document submitted to MDOT on April 10, 2012 in support of the lane conversion. That paragraph includes the following statement: "The Non-Motorized Plan identified Jackson Road from Maple to Dexter as a location of a future bike improvement. The Complete Streets Plan also identifies this corridor as one needing bike improvements." And this isn't primarily about bicycles? Moreover, it's worth noting that, for those seeking a bicycle-friendly route between Maple/Stadium and downtown Ann Arbor, Liberty Street already provides that accommodation.
3. Although I agree that significant improvements are needed for pedestrian crossings on Jackson, there is no relationship at all between that issue and the number of traffic lanes. You provide no argument to show that a lane reduction would benefit pedestrians. Crosswalks and/or pedestrian-operated signals could be installed across the current four lanes just as easily as three (they already exist at the intersection of Jackson and Maple).
4. You express alarm over the 53 sideswipe or rear-end accidents that reportedly occurred from 2008 to 2010 (I assume that this covers just two years). However, using your own figures on a street that averages 15,500 cars per day, the cited accident rate reflects one in every 213,491 vehicles, or one accident approximately every two weeks. That hardly seems extraordinary for a major thoroughfare. Data drawn from semcog.org indicate that more than 2,700 crashes of these very types occurred in Ann Arbor during 2008-2009.
As a resident who lives on a street adjacent to the proposed project, I often experience extreme delays when attempting onto Jackson from one of the neighborhood side streets (left turns can be virtually impossible). With traffic reduced to just one lane going in each direction, the wait time can only get much worse.
Charles Dunlop
Ann Arbor
Comments
BikeSafeInAA
Fri, Jul 13, 2012 : 4:52 p.m.
The three lane configuration will make it safer for pedestrians and entering traffic from side streets because, in uncontrolled intersections, there will only be two lanes of consistently active traffic to deal with instead of four. The bike lanes are the secondary outcome of the road reconfiguration. Additionally, this configuration will streamline existing traffic because the two center lanes will not be constantly stopped for turning vehicles and will allow traffic move more smoothly in the through lanes. This is contemporary traffic engineering and not the outdated 1950s traffic planning that has been the existing model in most of A2. @BILLY has some great points for this below. With this being said, having lived in more progressive, bike-friendly cities in the midwest like Madison, WI, it is disgraceful that so many Ann Arbor residents are so antagonistic towards making safe passages for bike commuters (even though this is not the main impetus of the reconfiguration). If this city is going to be as progressive as everyone pretends it is, then simple bike lanes and courtesy towards bikers is a necessity.
jcj
Sat, Jul 14, 2012 : 12:28 p.m.
"With this being said, having lived in more progressive, bike-friendly cities in the midwest like Madison, WI," And there it is! Throw all your other "rational" out the window! You like so many are all for being "progressive". IF it means more bike paths. Anything short of your agenda is not "progressive". You could at least be honest!
Phillip Farber
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 5:52 p.m.
I would like to add this video to the discussion. In my opinion, it It presents a good argument in favor of the 4 to 3 conversion. On the local Concentrate.org site: Short URL: http://goo.gl/zP2YH Full URL: http://www.concentratemedia.com/videos/inducedtravel0201.aspx?utm_source=VerticalResponse&utm_medium=Email&utm_term=The+Real+Costs+Of+Traffic&utm_content=%7bEmail_Address%7d&utm_campaign=Punch-drunk+Innovation Short URL: http://goo.gl/zP2YH
Mitch
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 1:46 p.m.
The change on Jackson is really not a change. I say we give this a try, if the accidents do not lessen over a year's time, strip the paint and re-apply back to the lessor of headaches. Otherwise are the people along Jackson Rd are willing to give up more of their front yard. Are we willing to pay to move the utility poles? Amongst the complaints I have heard is the approach to the light at Maple. The sensor for the lights needs to be increase and coordinated with the light at Stadium and Maple. As well as the lights at Maple Village and Dexter.
Hmm
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 1:11 p.m.
Great op-ed piece Charles.
Jake C
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 5:12 a.m.
This is ridiculous, I've driven Jackson Road in both directions around rush hour on a regular basis and I have yet to see these 40 minute delays people are complaining about.
Frustrated in A2
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 11:54 p.m.
Jackson Ave would be a great place for the city to put up art. Since it would take you 40 minutes to travel from W. Huron to Maple Rd you may as well have something to look at while your stuck in bumper to bumper traffic!
StopCrying
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 1:36 p.m.
I am not so sure I want anything to distract me from watching the Tae Kwon Do guy that stands in the field.
kk
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 6:01 p.m.
Could AnnArbor.com please put the meeting information at the top of this article? It has not been well-advertised and people are unlikely to read far enough through the comments to find out about it. I live in this neighborhood and had not heard about it. If the statistic Stephen Ranzini provided are accurate, then I think the city needs to explain how they do not apply to Jackson Rd.
Bob W
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 5:46 p.m.
How about considering no left turns (from Jackson) in-bound between certain AM hours and no left turns out-bound during peak PM hours. In addition, make the middle lane flexible. In bound in the AM and out bound in the PM. Dearborn does this on Michigan Ave. and it seems to work quite well. Just saying.
Jim Walker
Thu, Jul 12, 2012 : 2:47 p.m.
For Jake C.: There would be a learning curve for sure, but this system does work in many major metro areas. It takes LARGE overhead signs above each lane with brightly lit changing symbols to indicate the use at that time. We have family in Silver Spring, MD and there are several of these on major routes leading to and from DC. They work well. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, Ann Arbor, MI
Jake C
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 5:10 a.m.
Drivers are bad enough with set road rules, how do you expect them to know when they're allowed to use a center turn lane as a standard driving lane? The model works during football games because you have traffic cops and cones on the streets. It would not work for an average weekday commute.
Jim Walker
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 2:25 a.m.
The changeable direction center lane has been discussed at MDOT, but with no conclusions. Jim Walker, NMA
Jim Walker
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 5:27 p.m.
I have a serious question for the bike proponents. If Jackson Avenue gets bike lanes from somewhat east of Maple to a bit west of the Dexter split, WHERE do you go in the morning when the bike lane disappears just before the Dexter split? You might have your own comfortable bike lane in the center of the segment near Worden, but how about to the town side of the Dexter split? Do you get off the bike and walk it the rest of the way down the sidewalk to town? Or do you use the right lane as you can now on Jackson Avenue, where the cars have another lane to pass? What was gained? James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, Ann Arbor, MI
Jim Walker
Thu, Jul 12, 2012 : 2:42 p.m.
Thanks, Bryan. It seems obvious that the "bike lanes" do NOT meet the legal definitions. There is curb and gutter on the whole segment, so 5 foot lanes are required to safely designate bike lanes. If I read the rules correctly, the 4 foot width can only be used where it is a paved shoulder with no limiting curb and gutter, and even then 5 foot lanes are more desirable. I see why many cyclists I have talked to will not view Jackson as a proper bike lane route to the city, and will prefer Liberty and other bike routes. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, Ann Arbor, MI
Bryan Ellinger
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 7:57 p.m.
A short link to the MDOT design manual: http://goo.gl/P2mOq
Bryan Ellinger
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 7:55 p.m.
Jim, According to the MDOT Road Design Manual (http://mdotwas1.mdot.state.mi.us/public/design/englishroadmanual), "The basis for the design of bicycle facilities is the AASHTO design criteria of the "Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, Aug. 1991. " Bicycle lane width (AASHTO Guide, pp. 22–24): 4 feet (1.2m): minimum width of bike lane on roadways with no curb and gutter 5 feet (1.5m): minimum width of bike lane when adjacent to parking, from the face of the curb or guardrail 11 feet (3.3m): total width for shared bike lane and parking area, no curb face 12 feet (3.6m): shared bike lane and parking area with a curb face Bicycle lane stripe width: 6-inch (150mm): solid white line separating bike lane from motor vehicle lane (possibly increased to 8-inches (200mm) where emphasis is needed) 4-inch (100mm): optional solid white line separating the bike lane from parking spaces The MDOT Road Design Manual further states, "Part-width paved shoulders that are intended for bicycle use should desirably be 5' wide. The minimum width for shoulder ribbons intended for bicycle use is 4'."
Jim Walker
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 2:24 a.m.
Thanks for the clarifications, Brian. Can you point me to a state reference showing bike lanes should be 5 feet? I have talked to residents in the area that see PM backups westbound commonly going as far as Worden and sometimes to Grandview. With 50% of the capacity taken away in that .6 mile stretch, we might see westbound backups in the afternoon going to the Dexter split or beyond. If this does happen, hopefully MDOT and maybe even the city would concede failure. Jim Walker, NMA
Bryan Ellinger
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 12:27 a.m.
Jim, Here is a serious answer from this bicycle proponent: The "bike lanes" on this .6 mile stretch will not improve the cycling environment in Ann Arbor. Washington and Liberty remain superior routes into and out of downtown. The benefits of converting this stretch of Jackson to three lanes will be enjoyed by motorists through increased traffic predictability and efficiency. Say goodbye to panic stops and wild lane changes. Perhaps rush-hour backups will stretch further west from Maple than they do now, but due to the 1000 foot expansion to four lanes east of Maple, they will take about the same time to traverse. Incidentally, the MDOT spokesman at tonight's meeting referred to the "bike lanes" as wide shoulders -- four foot shoulders. Bicycle lanes are five feet wide according to the state. Ann Arbor's mayor and council-majority are pushing for the bike-lane designation. This change appeals to me as an occasional motorist, and not as a cyclist.
Jim Walker
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 5:17 p.m.
MDOT promised the use of programmable message signs to advertise the meeting tonight. This was to inform the commuter and commercial drivers who do not live on or near the Jackson Avenue corridor that is proposed to change, and who may not read the Ann Arbor papers. The fixed MDOT sign at about mile 165 between the Old US 12 and Baker Road exits for eastbound traffic showed travel times to US23 both Monday and Tuesday (today). There were NO portable MDOT message signs advertising the meeting on I-94 in the 10 miles between the Jackson Road and Old US 12 exits. There were NO portable MDOT message signs advertising the meeting on Huron Street, Jackson Avenue, or Jackson Road past Stadium/Maple as far out as Baker Road on Monday or Tuesday (today). The only MDOT signs I saw on Monday or Tuesday (today) were on Maple Road northbound at Dexter and southbound just before Miller. People who live north or northwest of Dexter Avenue and Maple, and north or northwest of Miller and Maple, are VERY unlikely to actually use Jackson Avenue as their commuting route to and from central Ann Arbor or the U of M. They would use Dexter or Miller as these routes are MUCH shorter from those areas than detouring all the way over to Jackson Avenue. The places the portable MDOT signs might have informed the actual commuters and commercial drivers using Jackson Avenue as their route to and from the city to the west had NO signs to advertise the meeting on Monday or Tuesday (today). Could the sign placement show a severe lack of understanding of the actual traffic patterns or ...... ? People who understand the already severe traffic congestion issues on Jackson Avenue and are concerned the travel lanes will be cut in half need to attend the meeting tonight at Abbott School, 2670 Sequoia Parkway from 5 to 8 PM to voice your concerns. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, Ann Arbor, MI
grye
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 4:04 p.m.
I find it interesting that bikes lanes are not required for bicyclists. They currently are allowed to ride in the vehicle lane. I'm not sure I would even ride in a designated bike lane since I have seen many cars veer into these lanes without a bike in the area. No safety features. Sidewalks are much safer.
StopCrying
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 4:12 p.m.
My personal favorite is that biker that just cruises past 6 cars at a stop sign and all of a sudden is first in line and now in my way as I am trying to make a right turn. Two thumbs down bikers...two thumbs down.
Billy Bob Schwartz
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 4:01 p.m.
Can we get an ordinance passed that regularly publishes the trash pickup schedule for each side of this street? I think this will be a real joy for drivers. Most fun: when, after a half hour or so, you actually get to be first in line behind the truck, the trash guy waves you around. Since he can't see what's happening ahead of the truck either, of course he waves you grill to grill with an oncoming car. Either you crash, or you wait for another half hour before you can get back in line to start your trek over. Good luck, all!
bunnyabbot
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 3:37 p.m.
What I don't understand is why they don't widen or just fix the sidewalk to have it double as a bike lane. The sidewalk along that stretch of road is not so busy that a person on a bike could not safely pass a pedestrian. All you have to say is "on the left" before passing. As for the narrow lanes reduce the speed limit to 30 or 25
Jim Walker
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 4:57 p.m.
For bunnyabbot: Reducing the numbers painted on the speed limit signs does NOT reduce the actual speeds of traffic, nor does it improve safety. It can actually reduce safety by causing more speed variance as a tiny 5% to 10% of the flow complies but 90% to 95% do not comply. We have enough of those horror story areas with arbitrarily low limits in now and do not need more of them. The 85th percentile speed under good conditions with free flowing traffic in 2006 was 42 mph on Jackson Avenue near Worden, per the State Police studies. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, Ann Arbor, MI
bunnyabbot
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 3:34 p.m.
Don't forget people, there is a meeting tonight regarding this at Abbot School from 5-8pm, Abbot is located on Sequoia Parkway which is near Maple and Miller.
shepard145
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 2:51 p.m.
Maybe this is about adding a bike lane to one of the busiest roads in AA.
Robert Northrup
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 1:58 p.m.
I'm neutral on whether it needs bike lanes, but that stretch is scary to drive through because the lanes are so narrow. Maybe instead of a left turn lane, they could make it into a "high occupancy vehicle lane" to encourage car pooling. During morning rush hour, it's two lanes heading into town. At evening rush hour, it's two lanes heading out of town. Off peak hours it's a normal left-turn lane. (This paragraph has been a joke. I'm thankful that Ann Arbor won't need Houston-style traffic solutions for a few more decades at least.)
Jim Walker
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 4:53 p.m.
For Robert Northrup: The option of a center lane for inbound in the AM and outbound in the PM HAS been discussed by MDOT, with no conclusion. It does work in the Maryland/DC area with overhead signs that change during the day. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, Ann Arbor, MI
SMC
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 2:14 p.m.
The lanes wouldn't seem so narrow if the road were properly maintained. The potholes on the curb side in either direction just make it seem like the road is narrower.
brimble
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 1:41 p.m.
I've yet to find the answer to this one: how does reducing the number of lanes (and installation of bike lanes) help when the change only takes place on a small portion of the corridor? Where do the bicycles go when they get east of Dexter? How are four narrow lanes safer there than they are west of the Dexter interchange?
Atticus F.
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 1:40 p.m.
I promise you, if this goes through, it will affect traffic all the way to Main Street during rush hour. And has anyone even bothered to consider what will happen when we have 100,000 people migrating to this city for a football game? Will people try to come in off M-14? will they decide to come off at the State exit (which is a nightmare already), or will they all just continue down a single lane that backs up I-94 all the way to Parma?
Atticus F.
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 2:18 p.m.
I hope so!
SMC
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 2:13 p.m.
Daily afternoon traffic backups to Main street are a conservative estimate, in my opinion. I'm betting they'll stretch past State.
Atticus F.
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 1:31 p.m.
Have you ever driven in a constrution zone on the highway, and came to a bottleneck that causes traffic to back up for 5 miles, and you to sit in traffic for 30-40 minutes?... Well get ready, because thats whats about to happen on Jackson road. I hope the folks in that neighborhood are fully prepared to have 100's upon 100's of residents from Jackson, Pinckney, Chelsea and Dexter zooming through their neighborhood going 35-40 mph. The city can do nothing to stop it, as it would be illegal for them to put up a sign that says 'local traffic only', unless it's a temporary construction zone.
Paula Gardner
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 1:17 p.m.
The headline on this story was just corrected to reflect that Jackson Road's number of lanes will be reduced.
annarboral
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 1 p.m.
If MDOT thinks the lanes are too narrow and that increases the risk of accidents then the solution is to expand the lanes that already exist. Reducing lanes will increase traffic jams and delays and have a questionable impact on accidents. Increasing the size of the existing lanes will remove any accident issues and actually improve traffic flow. This isn't "rocket science". Please spend money only when a clear benefit is achieved.
StopCrying
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 12:28 p.m.
What happens when traffic increases from the already maxed out 15,500 vehicles per day guesstimate that makes these type of changes appropriate? Are we expecting traffic to decrease in Ann Arbor? If so, then why are there 4 or 5 new high rise apartments being built?
Brad
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 12:27 p.m.
The AA.com "editorial board" should just issue a one-time blanket editorial blessing and cheering (rah!) anything and everything that the mayor/council/DDA are in favor of. It would take a lot less time and be just as useful. Which is to say not useful whatsoever.
jmac
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 12:15 p.m.
A more useful solution would probably be to widen the road, keep all 4 lanes, put in a 5th lane (turn lane) and maybe some bike lanes along the sides. But this would require much more infrastructure work than reducing everything down to 2 lanes plus a 3rd turn lane and some bike lanes - the tree lawns would have to be destroyed, utility poles moved, sidewalks possibly moved, land that is private property rather the easement would have to be purchased - which is probably why it isn't even on the table. Personally I try to stay away from that side of town during rush hour. I have that luxury since I don't live on the west side. I do feel for people who have to commute through that area every day. Maybe the major and city council should drive through that area during morning and evening rush hours for a week and see what it's like on a continual basis.
Chimay
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 12:58 p.m.
Funny StopCrying. I do live on the west side, off of Miller, and avoid that area during rush hour as well - by going down Miller or Seventh/Liberty, or cutting through on Arborview to Dexter. More cars on Miller is going to be awful - the left turn lane at Seventh is going to clog everything going westbound as well the left turn onto Arborview. Not to mention what will happen during the school crossing hours at Newport Road and at Mack. Looks like I am going to have to start using Sunset.
StopCrying
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 12:30 p.m.
I made it through the light for the first time in about a year yesterday. It was an accomplishment that left me proud to be American. I fear I will never have this opportunity again with the lanes decreasing.
hail2thevict0r
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 12:24 p.m.
I think that's the only way they could understand the traffic down there around 5:00pm...especially on a Friday. I try to avoid the jackson/maple intersection right now because just with the closure of Dexter Ave it has made that a 10 minute wait to get through the light. I can't imagine what would happen if they took it down to 1 lane right as the road forks into jackson and dexter ave. The traffic backup there would be outrageous.
hail2thevict0r
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 12:14 p.m.
Another thing I don't see being discussed is the poor surface of jackson road pretty much all the way into Ann Arbor. Are the lanes really too small or do they just seem small because there are 2-3 feet worth of pot holes on the entire left side all the way into the city? Thus causing whosoever in the right lane to drive 2-3 feet over to the left lane. I've noticed this habit over the last 3 years just simply because of poor road conditions. Simply resurfacing the road could do wonders for the perceived "small lanes".
Hmm
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 1:35 p.m.
You hit it on the head! The poor condition of that stretch of road (and g on Huron into downtown) is the main cause of accidents, people swerving unexpectedly to avoid the 2 foot craters in their lane of travel. This is the main cause of the problems you got that right!
say it plain
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 7:25 a.m.
Exactly @hail2thevict0r! I feel it myself when I drive there...unless you hate your car, you try to avoid the craters and end up not being able to use the whole lane for some stretches. I wonder how many accidents the city has caused with their refusal to fix the horrendous potholes.
hail2thevict0r
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 2:51 p.m.
and by left I really meant right.
SMC
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 2:12 p.m.
Agreed. The lanes are not any narrower than they need to be, if it were possible to use all of them up to the curb, or performing pothole slalom maneuvers. What this stretch of road needs in a center turn lane in addition to the 2 lanes in either direction.
Jim Osborn
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 12:05 p.m.
This is a very poor idea. Packard, just east of US 23 has been reduced to a 3 lane road for the past month and has caused great delays. Seeing this, why pay a lot of taxpayer money to ruin Jackson Road? If turns are such a problem, they can be prohibited during rush hours, as they are on other streets. There are one or two curbs that jut out that do narrow the lanes and can be fixed.
Mike
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 2:51 p.m.
You don't understand Jim. First of all this is not your money. You may think it is but your elected officials use it as they see fit. People didn't want the crosswalks on Plymouth Rd and guess what? By the people , for the people, and of the people is no longer valid; it should be but it isn't. Get used to it, it's only going to get worse as we march towards a more socialist utopia where your opinion will count less and less.
hail2thevict0r
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 12:03 p.m.
What i don't understand is that people keep pointing out that the 2-1 lane conversion would end 1,000 feet before the Jackson/maple intersection that backs up. What I can't grasp is why they don't think that the same amount of traffic that backs up at the Jackson/maple intersection won't also back up when the lane goes from 2 down to 1 lane right outside of Ann Arbor? I think this is a key point that people seem to be overlooking. The lanes will go from 2 down to 1 and it will seriously back up traffic; especially during peak hours. They're planning to turn 2 lanes into 1 driving lane essentially right where jackson splits off with dexter ave. That means everyone will end up merging into the left lane right before that intersection and the light there will end up backing up all the way to the 7th st light. In the end, will this merger end up saving or causing more crashes? IMO it will end up causing more considering you'll now have people darting into that left lane as they realize that jackson and dexter split off into individual lanes. Combine that will increased bike traffic and guaranteed backups at the 2-1 road merger and I wouldn't be surprised if it did nothing to prevent these fender benders. If you want proof as to why this will be worse - look at what just closing dexter ave has done to the traffic flow all the way up and down jackson ave.
clownfish
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 11:29 a.m.
As it appears that the changes made to Packard, Stadium and Platt have not resulted in worse traffic, I would like to read why Jackson Ave would be different.
Frustrated in A2
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 11:52 p.m.
If you see Stadium on a football Saturday that part of the road just complicates an already bad situation.
iamwrite
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 1:34 p.m.
Let me fix that for you: Jackson Road has more traffic than Packard, Stadium, and Platt. According to MDOT: Jackson Rd. (15,500 ADT) (this will go up over the years as population increases) South Main, Ann Arbor-Saline to Eisenhower (13,300 ADT) Platt, Packard to Ellsworth (13,800 ADT) Packard, Stadium to Jewett (12,000 ADT) Huron Parkway, Nixon to Plymouth (6,100 ADT) West Stadium Blvd., Seventh to Pauline (14,900 ADT) Green, Plymouth to Glazier Way (9,200 ADT)
Kevin McGuinness
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 11:22 a.m.
Jackson will remain a four-lane street for nearly 1,000 feet approaching the intersection, and most of the traffic that chokes that intersection at the beginning and end of the day doesn't come from that direction anyway. The preceding statement is a key part of the article. The congestion is at the intersection -- getting people to the intersection in a faster manner and more dangerous manner will not improve the congestion there. It is like everybody getting up at the same time when airlines announce now boarding. It only creates chaos as everyone thinks standing up and waiting will make things go faster. I say we trust our city planners and see how things work out.
Mike
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 2:45 p.m.
"I say we trust our city planners and see how things work out." - Trust the government? What have they done to deserve your blind trust?
motorcycleminer
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 11:06 a.m.
I'd say that all of the current " governing " ??? body's pie in the sky crapola from the tongue depressor and Fema style city hall to the bomb shelter, the hanginging dangler and its gaurds as well as the proposed thomas the train station and zebra crossings just to list a few ..should be a massive case of voters remorse , but alas this is OZ and the sheeple that voted this band of : ( add your own adjective ) in are too busy grazing and drinking kool-aid to care ..a sad story in what used to be a great town...
Hmm
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 1:31 p.m.
"Grazing and drinking kool-aid" Nice lol
Jake C
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 4:49 a.m.
I just got a Tin Foil Hat BINGO!
Billy
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 10:53 a.m.
"How could a 50% reduction in travel lanes improve traffic flow, especially given that all four lanes are currently full during heavy traffic times?" Traffic Flow Dynamics.....there is HEAVY science behind this and it's quite accurate. Also....traffic along Packard where they switched it to 3 lanes.....IS INFINITELY BETTER compared to 10+ years ago. "And this isn't primarily about bicycles?" I'm sorry....do you not understand context? I read the report and the part about bicycle lanes was FAR from any kind of "opening thesis statement" like you're making it out to be.... "Although I agree that significant improvements are needed for pedestrian crossings on Jackson, there is no relationship at all between that issue and the number of traffic lanes" This is also incredibly wrong......AGAIN this can be covered under "traffic flow dynamics." You could also learn this by playing that classic Konami game Frogger. The later levels have more lanes and are quite a bit harder to traverse. "Data drawn from semcog.org....." While I applaud using their own statistics against them....your statistic-fu comes up short when you then make comparisons to data that isn't comparable. E.G. Those 53 sideswipes would INDEED be of concern if the next highest "corridor with sideswipe problems" were only a mere 12. Also....you can't really go about comparing data from two different sources like that since their testing methodologies could be completely different. "I often experience extreme delays when attempting onto Jackson from one of the neighborhood side streets" Which means you should be ALL for this because even though you don't believe it, it will DEFINITELY make it easier for you to pull out. I think most of your concern is coming from no understanding of how traffic flow works. You're taking your assumptions and running with them as if they are gold. You've gotten yourself worried about stuff that's not
Billy Bob Schwartz
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 3:40 p.m.
Frogger? I'm confused. Were there TRAFFIC LIGHTS and LEGAL CROSSINGS in Frogger! Omigosh! And here all my little frogs were squished just because they didn't realize that there were controlled crossings just down the street! Oh, the HUMANITY! Or the FROGGANITY!
Atticus F.
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 2:22 p.m.
Billy, I'm talking abot traffic backing up from Jewett to Stadium in the morning as people are heading into town, and traffic backing up from Stadium to Mckinley as traffic leaves downtown in the afternoon. Just to clarify.
Billy
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 2:11 p.m.
Yeah I've driven that section about as long as you have...and you're complaining about a backup at Jewett? I'm sorry but that backup is NOTHING compared to the backup that would occur where Packard meets Stadium. That was a MUCH worse traffic problem because it was at that intersection. Traffic backing up by Jewett is a lot more desirable than traffic backing up at Stadium.
Atticus F.
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 1:22 p.m.
Your wrong! Packard is not infinetly better than it was 10 years ago... traffic backs up to Jewett in the morning, and Mckinnly in the late day. I have driven that rout for 18 plus years. Beside, even if it has made traffic better, which it has NOT, you are still comparing apples to oranges, since there is no 'Packard off ramp' from I-94, traffic flow is alot less on Packard, and the strech of 3 lane road was only extended by about 0.5 mile (If that). Why dont you try driving down packard near Platt at around 5:30, that would be a more accurate comparison. But even that nightmare would not compare to what would happen on Jackson.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 10:49 a.m.
@Jim Walker wrote yesterday a very interesting comment on this proposal which indicates that MDOT is ignoring highway engineering best practices since 4 to 3 lane conversions should NOT be done when hourly traffic rates exceed 1,000 vehicles per hour. MDOT indicates peak hourly numbers for Jackson Avenue of 1,145 in the AM and 1,364 in the PM. It seems very likely that the conversion will result in significant traffic delays, using MDOT's published report. His comment was: "MDOT published a major report on their Road Diets #RC-1555 available here: www.michigan.gov/mdot/0,4616,7-151-9622_11045_24249-270908--,00.html Quoting from the Abstract on page iii at the very front of the report: "The results of the operational analysis support a guideline that suggests 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." On page 51, Recommendations for Implementation of Research Findings: "MDOT should share the following quantitative, operations-related findings of this research with the FHWA (Federal Highway Administration) and suggest changes to the appropriate section of the Michigan Operations Manual which is addressed to "4-to-3 Lane Conversions." -The ADT threshhold for considering such road diets should be changed to < or = 10,000 -More importantly, detailed operational analysis should be done when ADTs are 10,000 or more OR when pear hour volumes exceed 1,000." Jackson Avenue has an ADT of 15,500 now which is projected to grow to perhaps 18,000 in the foreseeable future. MDOT used peak hourly numbers for Jackson Avenue of 1,145 in the AM and 1,364 in the PM. It seems very likely that the conversion will result in significant traffic delays, using MDOT's published report. Interested users should attend the meeting tonight at Abbott School on Tuesday July 10 between 5pm and 8pm to voice their opinion."
LA
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 3 p.m.
Thank you Stephan
SMC
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 2:24 p.m.
In other words, the lane conversion will work during the hours when there aren't that many cars on the road, which in this case means worse traffic backups during peak congestion times. That pretty much sums up what everyone who is opposed to this plan was thinking, but without the statistical data to back it up. I'm certain that the mayor and city council had access to this exact data, yet chose to ignore it because it didn't fit into their plan. It's one of the many side effects of arrogance.
Chip Reed
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 10:38 a.m.
Opinion: headline for opinion piece misleading. Each individual lane will be widened, but the number on lanes will be reduced. The road will not be made wider, no matter what the outcome of the project (I am in favor of it).
Barzoom
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 10:24 a.m.
Our mayor and city council have already decided to proceed with this. MDOT is going along with their decision. It doesn't matter what the residents of the city want. Our city leaders have their agenda and will continue down this path. It's time that the tax paying voters of this city take our city back.
Jake C
Wed, Jul 11, 2012 : 4:46 a.m.
"It's time that the tax paying voters of this city take our city back." How? By voting? Mass protests? Armed revolt?
mixmaster
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 1:30 p.m.
I suppose that you will run for office and run the city after you "take it back"?
Halter
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 10:03 a.m.
Charles, thanks for your opinion. I think many here will agree, including myself. But as usual, it boils down to the same result: our City Council is out of touch with the people it represents, yet they keep getting re-elected and more Insightful people do not come forward to run against them election after election.
Goober
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 10:01 a.m.
The mayor, most of city council and other city leaders already made it known that they want bike lanes on this stretch of road. Now that they seem to have MDOT willing to do what they want, opposition is futile. AA does not like cars and consider them a nuisance. If our city leaders had their way, we would have all bike lanes and mass transit only; no cars allowed. It will be interesting to see if public opposition to this lane change has any affect. My guess - it will be done as desired by our city leaders.
Goober
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 2:08 p.m.
It's called spending tax payer money with total disregard to the proper use of these hard earned dollars. The same holds true for the new building housing police. There are many, fine, open business buildings in the area, but our leaders decided they wanted a brand new home - all at the expense of tax payers.
Atticus F.
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 1:13 p.m.
Warbler, it's all about 'kick backs' from contractors. Big project=big kickback. This sort of corruption is pretty evident when you look at all of the multi million dollar construction projects going on.
Warbler
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 12:56 p.m.
Goober - The city leaders you claim who want "all bike lanes and mass transit only; no cars allowed" are the same leaders (mostly) who voted for the massive underground parking lot between Liberty and Division. Why say such nonsense when it conflicts with the truth? By chance, did you also complain about the city spending all that money so we can park "more cars" downtown? Can't have it both ways.....
Will Warner
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 9:40 a.m.
If the proposed change is really all about bicycles, then I say we skip it. But in my judgment the road is too narrow for four lanes. Worse, it is a busy road with no left turn lane -- that is the major problem. I'm willing to bet that most of the accidents result from attempts to abruptly move to the right lane when a left turn signal appears on the car just ahead in the left lane.
Mike
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 2:41 p.m.
I'll bet the accident rate remains the same and traffic jams will be unbearable causing road rage. People in Ann Arbor aren't that patient. This is bad public policy and the only explaination that makes any sense is that people will be so sick of the traffic jams they will walk or ride bikes because it will actually be faster. That will work real well in this state when the weather is bad which is more often than not. This proposal appears to be an agenda driven excuse to reduce the ability to use automobiles and encourage public transportation; no other explaination would make any sense.
SMC
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 2:20 p.m.
I'd say it's less about the vehicles than it is the competence of the drivers. Moreover, if the width of the lanes weren't adversely affected by the presence of all the potholes near the curbs, I doubt that anyone would complain about their width.
Billy
Tue, Jul 10, 2012 : 10:58 a.m.
It isn't that the road is too narrow for four lanes....it's that the lanes are too narrow for most drivers to competently traverse. Can't tell you how many times I've almost been run off the road where Jackson meets Dexter while headed into town. There is more than enough room to drive two suburbans side by side down that road and through that intersection. But too many people drive vehicles they are incapable of driving safely.... Now with all that said, we still have to lower our standards for those with the least ability....which means widening the lanes needs to happen.