Evidence in favor of jackson ave. conversion

[Erica]

Hi Ken,

Sorry it took a couple of days for me to respond to this email. 

Your concern is logical, but from what I've been told by the traffic engineers, this project will not cause additional congestion on Jackson Ave. I live on Jefferson Street, so I too would be concerned if I thought this would cause spill over like the Liberty Street construction created. That was awful.  This conversion is not anticipated to create additional congestion, in fact it has been proposed to help solve the traffic problems that currently exist by helping to manage traffic flow better and reduce the conflicts that are currently slowing traffic... no dedicated left turn lane, accidents, narrow lanes. 

Here are a few facts:

• The Michigan Department of Transportation completed analysis and computer modeling for the 3-lane traffic operation at Jackson Ave including the modeling for the traffic flow during the rush hours. They determined that the 4-3 lane conversion would improve the traffic flow at the corridor.
• The street width on the section of Huron Street with 4-lane ranges from 46 feet to 42.5 feet, where Jackson Ave with 4 lanes is only 40 feet wide. 40 feet is not wide enough for 4 side by side through traffic lanes.
• In the three years from 2008 through 2010, there have been 70 accidents along Jackson Ave with the injury rate at 19%. The proposed 4 to 3 lane conversions at Jackson Ave is expected to calm the traffic as it has in other places and lower the number of accidents at Jackson Ave. Many of these accidents were due to side swipes and people trying to veer around cars trying to turn left. 
• MDOT’s preliminary plan is to convert the 4-lane section of Jackson Ave to 3 lanes within the residential area of the corridor from Revena Blvd to Burwood Dr or Collingwood Dr. That plan will leave over 900 feet of 4 lanes and 5 lanes traffic at Jackson Ave east of N. Maple, for the westerly traffic queue at the signalized intersection.

So with improved traffic flow and the opportunity to provide bike lanes and additional pedestrian crossings, this project seems like a no-brainer. The problem is that it isn't intuitive, if feels like problems will be created. But our local experiences with 4 to 3 lane road conversions on Platt Rd and Stadium have shown that they can improve everyone-- those traveling along the roadway and those living in the neighborhoods surrounding them.  

I hope that you come to the MDOT public meeting tomorrow night at Abbott Elementary between 5-8. MDOT officials will be there to answer questions. Of course, we want to see lots of supporters at the meeting, but it's a great opportunity as well to come and learn more about the project if you're undecided and still have concerns. 

Thanks,

Erica Briggs

WBWC Chair

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Ken Freeman" <kenfre...@gmail.com>
Date: Jul 6, 2012 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: [WBWC] Jackson Rd. Meeting tonight!
To: <wb...@googlegroups.com>

This comment is undoubtedly belated, but I think the recent road work on Liberty illustrates what may happen.  Traffic may well spill over to Liberty from Jackson/Huron, but from there it spills to Jefferson.  Jefferson is a residential street with a public school on it, and it is the foot access to Bach school for the primary grades and to Slauson MS for the intermediate grades.  The crossings of 7th at Jefferson are ambiguous at best, and would be additionally hazardous if stressed by hurried rush-hour traffic.  Football Saturdays are a good illustration, as are the recent Liberty Detour days.  

In the mornings we have dozens of adults and children passing our Jefferson house on the sidewalk (and amazingly some people find reasons to walk down the middle of the street instead of on the sidewalk!!), many cyclists regularly, and of course local cars accessing the Madison, 7th and Liberty arterials as well as short-cutters.  Adding traffic stress to these streets cannot be seen as any kind of safety relief on the West Side.

I think the impact of reducing road capacity on Jackson/Huron needs to be reviewed in light of these considerations, and the residential component of all the streets that may be impacted.

I am very in favor of improving pedestrian crossings on Jackson/Huron, completing the bike lanes so access is clearly deliniated from Stadium west past Weber's, restoring/maintaining pavement edges and curbs, and even some bike lane marking.  But I think eliminating an entire lane of traffic in each direction is not going to be a net safety improvement for the whole area.

Is Jackson/Huron really required to be a bike corridor?  Or can perhaps alternative east/west corridors be improved, even if they will be less direct?  And if Washington and Jefferson Streets are to be those corridors, don't take measures that shift additional motor vehicle load onto them.

On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Vivienne Armentrout <vnarme...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

This is all speculation, but I think the only impact on the other streets would be during rush hour (fluid dynamics again).  This is my side of town and I already cut down to Liberty via Seventh if I am going to any of the businesses near Liberty or south/east of the Liberty-Stadium intersection.  The big inhibition is that awful Jackson-Maple intersection.  I'll bet a lot of other people take Miller, Dexter or Liberty only when their itinerary takes them that way.  For example, in order to access the Maple Village shopping center, it makes much more sense to use either Dexter or Miller (avoiding that awful intersection again).

Washington does not go all the way to Stadium so is not all that useful as a bypass.

When I do take Jackson, the inhibition is the traffic that is too fast and too impatient.  I frequently get tailgated or inappropriately passed (on the right, etc.) when I am going at speed limit or a couple of miles faster.  Some people seem to have a sense of entitlement to go much faster than the posted speed.  Another problem when driving in the left-hand lane is the really fast traffic coming the other direction and actually straying over the line at times.  A third lane in the middle would be a welcome relief from that.

On 2/17/2012 11:32 AM, Eric Boyd wrote:

MDOT made no implication about traffic shifting. My engineer's intuition (this is basically fluid dynamics) is that it should shift very slightly, but that's just a guess and not a very knowledgeable one.

On Feb 17, 2012 11:27 AM, "Linda Diane Feldt" <ldf...@holisticwisdom.org <mailto:ldfeldt@holisticwisdom.org>> wrote:

    Great information on the meeting, which I was unable to attend at
    the last minute.
    This type of info would be invaluable if it was more widely
    distributed. It give so much more background than sound bites and
    encouragement to see this as polarizing - bikes against cars.
    There is a comprehensive plan that considers all users.

    Many years ago (10 or 15?) the neighborhood was organized around a
    very similar idea, and it seemed to be coordinated partly through
    the Party Center. There are new owners now, I don't know how much
    of a neighborhood center that still is. But still a place to get
    info out.

    Has there been any study of how this would impact Dexter,
    Washington, Miller and Liberty? It sounds like someone expects
    they would take up slack, if in two years numbers of cars are
    expected to decrease in the other section. Would I be correct in
    saying expecting around 6,000 fewer cars for that part of Huron
    end up on Miller, Washington and Liberty, equals about 2,000 each,
    at least 3/4 are daytime use, 1,500 over 12 hours is over 100 more
    cars per hour about two a minute. That is a rather large increase
    even with my back-of-the-napkin math. In reality, Miller and
    Liberty would absorb more as Washington is such a more difficult
    street to drive with all the Y traffic.

    Anyone of these E-W streets malfunctioning causes observable
    changes in traffic on the remaining streets now. They are very
    tightly dependent.
    Thanks so much, Eric.

    Linda Diane Feldt
    Holistic Health Practitioner
    Three new books! www.writing.lindadianefeldt.com

    <http://www.writing.lindadianefeldt.com>
    twitter.com/wildcrafting <http://twitter.com/wildcrafting>
    734-662-4902 <tel:734-662-4902>

    On Feb 17, 2012, at 10:44 AM, Eric Boyd wrote:

    Greetings,

    I attended most of the meeting and spoke as did many others. I
    estimated there were about 40 people there.

    The plan, assuming it stays unchanged, is to repave from 1rst to
    Webers, and do a road diet on the stretch from Jackson to Dexter.
    They are only considering a road diet on this section, because
    that's the only section with a traffic count under 20,000. The
    actual traffic count is 15,500. They don't need a public meeting
    for under 15,000. They do need a public meeting for 15,000 to
    20,000. They can't do a road diet over 20,000.

    The roadway width is 40 feet. Currently they have that split up
    into 4 10-foot lanes. The plan is a 4-foot bike lane, 11 foot
    driving lane, 10 foot turn lane, 11 foot bike lane, 4-foot bike
    lane. In response to a question about the bike lane being to
    narrow, they pointed out that they would pave up to the curb and
    there would be no gutter, so it would effectively be wider biking
    area than most bike lanes.

    Suggestions brought up that they didn't appear to have considered:

    1) Pedestrian islands. (This seems unlikely for now as they want
    to be able to repaint to 4 lanes if it doesn't work.)
    2) Permeable pavement. (This was a great, well researched comment
    by the gentleman who made this point.)
    3) Fixing the sidewalk issue on the north side of Jackson under
    94. (This seemed unlikely as they made a point about bridge piers
    and there no being room. I think the city should really push them
    on this and see if it's possible.)
    4) Fixing the missing chunk of bike lane north of Webers.
    5) If the road diet between Maple and Dexter slightly reduces
    traffic on Huron between Dexter and 1st, could they also consider
    a road diet in that stretch?

    It wasn't clear if they would really consider these or not.

    General tenor of the presentation:

    1) Road diets work and don't cause significant congestion.
    2) Crashes go down.

    Supplementary comments from county and city officials
    1) Road diets have worked out really well elsewhere. A lot of the
    immediate concern goes away after skeptical people living on the
    street see the result.

    Problems with the presentation.
    1) They kept talking about video in a way that suggested they had
    actually put a camera out on the street. They eventually cleared
    this up. They did traffic counts and modeled a video.
    2) The video they did show was confusing in that it appeared to
    show green traffic islands when actually that would just be the
    center lane for an area with driveways, but no cross streets.
    They should fix the software.

    General tenor of the support:
    1) Bikes have a right to use the road. This will help get bikes
    off the sidewalks and onto the road for folks who are not
    comfortable taking the lane, but are comfortable with bike lanes.
    (This was me.)
    2) Drivers are crazy on this stretch, because it looks like a
    highway. Road diets calm traffic and work.
    3) The road is in terrible shape.
    4) Road diets and bike lanes will improve the pedestrian experience.
    5) It's not safe for kids to play in their front yard today.

    General tenor of the concern:
    1) I live on Jackson. I can see the backups are already worse
    then you are modeling.
    2) If the backups are worse, I'll never be able to back out of my
    driveway.
    3) If the backups are worse, people will race through residential
    cut streets and traffic will increase on Liberty / Dexter / Miller.
    4) All the other road diets given as examples weren't on major
    truck routes. I'm worried the number of trucks will make this
    proposal behave differently.
    5) There's a firestation and lots of ambulances. How will this
    work? (I think this one was effectively addressed as a non-concern.)

    General tenor of the opposition:
    1) This is a truck route, a busy road, and lots of exhaust. Bikes
    should use other roads and stay off this one.
    2) Pedestrians should walk to the crosswalk at Maple and don't
    need special accommodations like pedestrian islands. (I'm not
    sure if this one was said publicly or just muttered. It was in
    response to comments about kids from Slauson crossing Huron at
    non-crosswalk locations and to get to the Vets pool.

    Hopefully that characterizes the meeting accurately. Please weigh
    in if you attended and have additions or corrections.

    My suggestions to the city:

    1) The city should push MDOT harder on fixing bike/ped access
    between Maple and Webers and/or do some complementary projects at
    the same time.
    2) The city should push MDOT harder on having a fixed timeframe
    for when ped islands (such as one at the Vets pool, and one near
    Slausin) will be evaluated. (2 years after completion?)
    3) The city should push MDOT harder on having a fixed timeframe
    to re-look at traffic counts between Dexter and 1rst and see if a
    road diet (paint only) in that stretch is legal. (2 years after
    completion?)
    4) The city should decide if we as a city are serious about
    permeable pavement as a major tool in how we built major streets.
    If it's a good idea, why not do it here? (I have no personal idea
    whether it is a good idea or not, but the comment from the
    audience was very compelling.)

    --Eric

    --     You received this message because you are subscribed to the
    Google Groups "Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition" group.
    To post to this group, send email to wb...@googlegroups.com

    <mailto:wb...@googlegroups.com>.

    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
    wbwc+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

    <mailto:wbwc+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>.

    For more options, visit this group at
    http://groups.google.com/group/wbwc?hl=en.

    --     You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
    Groups "Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition" group.
    To post to this group, send email to wb...@googlegroups.com

    <mailto:wb...@googlegroups.com>.

    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
    wbwc+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

    <mailto:wbwc%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com>.

    For more options, visit this group at
    http://groups.google.com/group/wbwc?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition" group.
To post to this group, send email to wb...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wbwc+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wbwc?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition" group.
To post to this group, send email to wb...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wbwc+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wbwc?hl=en.

--
Ken Freeman
Ann Arbor, MI USA

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition" group.
To post to this group, send email to wb...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wbwc+uns...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wbwc?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WBWC Board" group.
To post to this group, send email to wbwc-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wbwc-board+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wbwc-board?hl=en.