More on Prince Avenue
I'm in the midst of a pretty interesting conversation with an anonymous poster regarding three-laning Prince Avenue (by the way, feel free to email me and let me know who you are without fear of my revealing your secret identity), and I felt my response to his latest post might be of some interest.
So please check out the comments first, and then read below ...
Good points again, though I do think we have some fundamental disagreements despite sharing some concern over shared causes (i.e. appropriate bicycle lanes, pedestrian safety, etc.).
For example you say that 'people' are one of the three primary users of 'streets' and I take that to mean 'pedestrians' (please forgive me and correct me if I'm wrong), and there is one disagreement. To my understanding, it is only lawful for pedestrians to be using the streets when they are in a recognized crosswalk. When they are not, they are in violation of the law. As a result, when I view how best to structure our roads, I want to find ways to develop safe crosswalks and traffic-calming measures around the pedestrian-heavy areas to ensure their safety. However, I would disagree in sacrificing additional highway space for the primary user of said road, the automobile, for the pedestrian if both of my goals can be achieved.
And I think that may be the crux of our disagreement - that I think we need to give more consideration to the primary users of our streets and roads, which are automobiles. Please don't misunderstand me as this isn't to say I don't rank bicycle safety or pedestrian safety highly on my list, but I also think the number of pedestrians/cyclists are considerably lower than the number of automobile drivers on any given day in Athens-Clarke County.
So the question is how to we provide better for the majority (the drivers) while offering appropriate safeguards for the minority (pedestrians/cyclists)?
I think much of the debate regarding increased protection for cyclists and pedestrians is to automatically three-lane the road and set up bicycle lanes along the side or for its opponents to cast a blind eye to the needs of that particularly community and be content with having cars race down a four-lane highway with no regard.
I like to think there are other alternatives to just that tired debate I laid out above. As a result, I've tried to offer one and it may be imperfect, but it's gotten us talking hasn't it?
Our community, within the next 40 to 50 years, is going to potentially double, possibly triple, in population. These people are going to put more cars on our roads, and I think it's imperative that we devise a long-term plan that can accommodate that additional number of vehicles and preserve the safety of our cyclists and pedestrians.
With regard to some of your specific questions/points - I would estimate that about 95 percent of my experience along Prince Avenue is driving, with the other five percent coming as a pedestrian (after driving to a set location in the area). I think I admitted that my perception of the area are heavily colored by my usage of it, which is predominantly behind the wheel of my 1998 Honda Accord.
Regarding Hawthorne, we have some disagreements. We share the belief the road should remain three-lanes (I assume), but I do so primarily because it's not a wide enough road to offer adequate space for four lanes. When I view that corridor, my biggest complaint is that it is a traffic nightmare (one which could probably be remedied somewhat by better synchronizing our traffic lights), and not your concern which is the width of the existing bike lanes.
Regarding the parking spots, I see you're not entirely opposed to my suggestion, but have concerns over how wide the road is. I actually meant to get an estimate last night during my drive home, but it seems to me it's wider-than-average from just past Athens Regional Medical Center down toward Milledge Avenue. The most difficult area to accommodate what I had proposed would be down by The Grit and the Bottleworks, which, admittedly, is the most traffic-heavy area.
Speaking to one thing specifically, I'm assuming your problem with the crosswalks stems from the ones you criticize, which are the ones with the signs in the middle of the road. Can I ask an honest, and possibly somewhat naive question ... why couldn't pedestrians travel down a half a block to the stoplight and use the crosswalk there? There, they would have the protection of the traffic light rather than trying to dart through traffic.
Regarding my last paragraph, it wasn't my intention to hit a nerve, and I may have worded that inappropriately. Please believe me that I try very much to be a 'big-picture' kind of guy and all of those things you list - responsible urban planning, social justice, etc. - are the types of things we must consider in the decisions we make. So I don't think that particular point has the meaning you thought it had.
My point was that, from my experiences as a driver on that road, I feel that shifting from four- to three-lanes would be detrimental for the commuters of that street in terms of traffic congestion and wait time ... as well as the very real concern that drivers might be tempted to hop into the existing neighborhoods to get around the traffic.
So please check out the comments first, and then read below ...
Good points again, though I do think we have some fundamental disagreements despite sharing some concern over shared causes (i.e. appropriate bicycle lanes, pedestrian safety, etc.).
For example you say that 'people' are one of the three primary users of 'streets' and I take that to mean 'pedestrians' (please forgive me and correct me if I'm wrong), and there is one disagreement. To my understanding, it is only lawful for pedestrians to be using the streets when they are in a recognized crosswalk. When they are not, they are in violation of the law. As a result, when I view how best to structure our roads, I want to find ways to develop safe crosswalks and traffic-calming measures around the pedestrian-heavy areas to ensure their safety. However, I would disagree in sacrificing additional highway space for the primary user of said road, the automobile, for the pedestrian if both of my goals can be achieved.
And I think that may be the crux of our disagreement - that I think we need to give more consideration to the primary users of our streets and roads, which are automobiles. Please don't misunderstand me as this isn't to say I don't rank bicycle safety or pedestrian safety highly on my list, but I also think the number of pedestrians/cyclists are considerably lower than the number of automobile drivers on any given day in Athens-Clarke County.
So the question is how to we provide better for the majority (the drivers) while offering appropriate safeguards for the minority (pedestrians/cyclists)?
I think much of the debate regarding increased protection for cyclists and pedestrians is to automatically three-lane the road and set up bicycle lanes along the side or for its opponents to cast a blind eye to the needs of that particularly community and be content with having cars race down a four-lane highway with no regard.
I like to think there are other alternatives to just that tired debate I laid out above. As a result, I've tried to offer one and it may be imperfect, but it's gotten us talking hasn't it?
Our community, within the next 40 to 50 years, is going to potentially double, possibly triple, in population. These people are going to put more cars on our roads, and I think it's imperative that we devise a long-term plan that can accommodate that additional number of vehicles and preserve the safety of our cyclists and pedestrians.
With regard to some of your specific questions/points - I would estimate that about 95 percent of my experience along Prince Avenue is driving, with the other five percent coming as a pedestrian (after driving to a set location in the area). I think I admitted that my perception of the area are heavily colored by my usage of it, which is predominantly behind the wheel of my 1998 Honda Accord.
Regarding Hawthorne, we have some disagreements. We share the belief the road should remain three-lanes (I assume), but I do so primarily because it's not a wide enough road to offer adequate space for four lanes. When I view that corridor, my biggest complaint is that it is a traffic nightmare (one which could probably be remedied somewhat by better synchronizing our traffic lights), and not your concern which is the width of the existing bike lanes.
Regarding the parking spots, I see you're not entirely opposed to my suggestion, but have concerns over how wide the road is. I actually meant to get an estimate last night during my drive home, but it seems to me it's wider-than-average from just past Athens Regional Medical Center down toward Milledge Avenue. The most difficult area to accommodate what I had proposed would be down by The Grit and the Bottleworks, which, admittedly, is the most traffic-heavy area.
Speaking to one thing specifically, I'm assuming your problem with the crosswalks stems from the ones you criticize, which are the ones with the signs in the middle of the road. Can I ask an honest, and possibly somewhat naive question ... why couldn't pedestrians travel down a half a block to the stoplight and use the crosswalk there? There, they would have the protection of the traffic light rather than trying to dart through traffic.
Regarding my last paragraph, it wasn't my intention to hit a nerve, and I may have worded that inappropriately. Please believe me that I try very much to be a 'big-picture' kind of guy and all of those things you list - responsible urban planning, social justice, etc. - are the types of things we must consider in the decisions we make. So I don't think that particular point has the meaning you thought it had.
My point was that, from my experiences as a driver on that road, I feel that shifting from four- to three-lanes would be detrimental for the commuters of that street in terms of traffic congestion and wait time ... as well as the very real concern that drivers might be tempted to hop into the existing neighborhoods to get around the traffic.
posted by Jmac at 8:39 AM
4 Comments:
Three-laning the downtown end of Prince would actually make it safer for the drivers, too. When I drive through there, I feel threatened by the impatient and careless drivers switching lanes rapidly when dealing with cyclists or cars turning left. I also do not see a potential for too many backups. It is true that the cars turning right on Pulaski to go south would have to wait longer, but that intersection is already dangerous since that right lane is not marked for right turns by any more than arrows painted on the pavement; there is plenty of potentials for drivers to make an error and go straight, which would be an easy error to make since Prince's two southeast-bound lanes neatly meet up with Dougherty's eastbound lanes.
The parking spaces also seem pretty dangerous to use since there are two lanes of cars barrel-assing down each side of the road. I'm not sure what should be done with them, if anything.
Would the MACORTS site have information on traffic incidents/accidents on Prince Avenue? I'd be curious to see the number of accidents on that street compared to other ones - both four lanes and three lanes.
I've never felt that Prince Avenue was dangerous by any means, so it's interesting to hear someone say otherwise.
I would write another comment but Google Blogger stinks. -- Adrian
I think we have a misunderstanding. “People” are the users of streets, whether they’re in an automobile, on foot, or on a bicycle. Does this clear up what I wrote?
We seem also to have different ideas of what a street is. Correct me if I’m wrong, but you view it as gutter-to-gutter asphalt (bike lanes fit in here nicely, from what I can tell, so kudos for that). I include sidewalks, tree-lined buffers, outdoor café seating, and sometimes buildings if they’re part of the overall streetscape. “Streets” (to me, anyway) are ways to convey people - there’s that word again - whether it’s from A to B or just a leisurely circuit that begins and ends at home, the office, or wherever…regardless by which mode one chooses to move.
According to Georgia law, pedestrians may cross a street at any crosswalk, which is a vague term that does not only include clearly delineated areas. “Crosswalks exist on all four corners of most intersections in Georgia, whether or not they are marked by painted lines,” according to GDoT (http://www.dot.state.ga.us/bikeped/pedestrian_plan/ga_ped_guide_chapter4_laws.pdf). Additionally, check out PEDS, GA’s walking advocacy group: http://www.peds.org//rightofway.htm – this is a good primer on automobile/pedestrian interactions (funnily enough, called “conflicts” by traffic engineers, who also call sidewalks “recovery zones” for cars that might veer off the road!).
On that subject, I’ll skip to your comment about why some people don’t cross at intersections as opposed to mid-block crosswalks. I can answer this in the same way you would respond if I asked why all drivers don’t slow down: they’re busy, in a rush, lazy, etc., or even better, “it (an accident) won’t happen to me”. Or maybe it’s just because the crosswalks are there. For me (I alluded to the fact that I’m a vigilant pedestrian, and the same applies to cycling), it’s more an issue of asserting rights. I’m confident enough in my abilities to cross a street or ride with traffic without getting hurt that I’ll go out of my way to do what I can to establish a crosswalk or bike lane as someplace where a person absolutely has a right to cross or ride. The more regularly motorists recognize this, the more frequently bicyclists and pedestrians will be treated as legitimate street users.
Given that I’ve done some projections for the Athens region, I’d be surprised if our population doubled and shocked if it tripled within the next 40-50 years, but even so, this leads very well into the connection between land use and transportation. In very few cases is it responsible to talk about one without being mindful of the other. In Athens, even (or especially!) if we do see our population break 200,000 by 2050, we need to find a way to house these immigrants (a large portion of whom will really be “immigrants” from countries where you just don’t drive everywhere) close enough, or rather accessible enough – let’s not forget transit – to their places of employment, recreation, and acquisition (shopping) so that driving isn’t absolutely necessary. Half of that involves zoning that challenges developers to come up with something better than sprawl (go West on Prince if you want to know what this is – where all the traffic is coming from), and the other half demands that we make it safe and convenient for regular people – not just freaks like me – to get out of their cars.
Why do this? Because it’s better for our planet, for our society, for our health, and for our wallets.
But back to specifics on Prince: do you have a problem with removing on-street parking anywhere it’s necessary to incorporate bicycle lanes/adequate sidewalks if that meant that Prince kept its current configuration? From a non-driver standpoint, it’s always better to cross fewer lanes (whether you’re literally crossing a street as a pedestrian or going from bike lane into traffic lane into turn lane to make a turn), but I’d bet most would be willing to forego fewer “car” lanes by eliminating parking if it meant creating enough space to provide adequate facilities for walking and cycling.
I agree that three-laning isn’t a panacea; but like I said, it’s one of the only ways that Athens has been willing to retrofit existing streets into configurations that will be safe and efficient for people in cars or not. And if, in fact, it doesn’t turn out to be more efficient for driving…so be it, because in the end, we can only increase capacity so much (I know you’re not advocating this) before the entire county is covered in asphalt.
Hope this clears up some of my points and brings forward newer, cloudier ones.
Post a Comment
<< Home