General Road and Highway Discussion

[ijmorlan]

I wonder if it would help to sell it as intersection improvements rather than lane reductions.

With any transportation construction project, how good it is will depend on all sorts of details about exactly what gets built. And this is true no matter ones priorities: somebody who wants more car capacity should be unhappy if they get more lanes but intersections are still jammed up, somebody who wants better transit will be unhappy if the exact location of the bus stop makes it hard to board and difficult for the bus to navigate traffic, and somebody who cares about bicycle infrastructure will be unhappy with bicycle lanes that interact poorly with fast-moving traffic.

So the one-line “this is what we’re doing” is really just a marketing slogan, and it should be chosen to be both accurate and sell the positives (to all the relevant constituencies) of the proposed project.

This is assuming that a) the city controls the message, and b) people think carefully about things.  So many ways this can get lost.  Even just your example, if intersection improvements were emphasized, the media may still report it as "Losing two lanes on Belmont", or worse, and most likely "bikes vs. cars, bikes are stealing your lanes"....but even if the newspaper reported it sanely, people are just as likely to read that headline into it.  They're unlikely to really understand that congestion occurs at the intersections, people don't think too deeply about this.  It's very hard to force them to understand, even harder when they're emotional and angry about it.

Again, this is exactly what happened with Davenport.  A road which was rebuilt into a vastly better road, with better traffic flow, better bike infra, and a more pleasant streetscape, people freaked out about it because the only thing they heard was that they were taking away 2 lanes.  And the city sold this hard as an improvement (because it was).  

As for "what is built"...you're absolutely right, and I have found no way to overcome this issue.  I'm so frustrated by seeing bad designs get built.  I mean, what miracle of nature would it take for us to pave flush curbs when putting an (unnecessary) curb in at a trail entrance.  Brand new curb built on the IHT has a 1 inch lip for no reason except to make the trail more unpleasant for road cyclists and mothers with strollers (and frankly dangerous for those with a mobility device, or skateboard).  But I've found no room from anyone anywhere in the government to give feedback on detailed design issues of any kind.  Very frustrating.

I agree it’s difficult. One question about that IHT problem: is it possible the final coat of asphalt just hasn’t gone down? I don’t actually know exactly what location you are referring to so I can’t tell if my question actually makes sense.

My idea on the publicity may not really work. But my idea is to try to get out ahead of the story with a set of headline improvements that most people will see as improvements. Let those who come to the public meetings notice that lanes are being strategically removed where they are not needed. By contrast, I think I recall the city specifically advertising the Davenport changes as a road diet. I would emphasize the more pleasant environment, removal of bicycles from the general traffic lanes, and more distinct pedestrian crossing facilities. Get that message out in the media first.

On the other hand, the Davenport changes went through successfully. By contrast, it doesn’t appear Kitchener even tried with Belmont — they just flushed the money without bothering to review the design at all (other than repainting to provide a left- rather than right-turn lane at Victoria). So maybe the problem isn’t so much what happens when plans hit the media (some noisy opposition, but often still a good plan in the end) as what happens when the city just doesn’t bother.

Hmmm, I wonder what the overlap is between those who would complain about almost any lane removal and those who would complain about any roundabout installation. Both are unreasonable positions but is there a large overlap?