Commuting trends: transit vs driving vs ...

[Pheidippides]

Downsizing a significant percentage of (non-arterial) residential streets is probably a non-starter even in the medium-long term.  Maybe someday, but for now the combination of costs and resident resistance would surely kill any such initiative.

We do have traffic data for city streets.  I think I might want to do some data exploration over the holidays to see whether there is another way.  Even if your employer is on Weber St, for example, doesn't mean that you need to ride on Weber to get there, if there are other good alternatives.  As an existing example, I can ride on Iron Horse Trail rather than on Park or Courtland.  A little bit less direct if my employer is on one of those streets, but not that far out of the way.  Non-arterial neighbourhood streets could nicely complement a decent trail network.

Right-sizing of roads might be more palatable if it is framed the right way.

If framed as a fiscal argument, that narrowing streets saves the tax dollars through lower infrastructure costs, both capital and operational, and lower costs environmentally, socially (health care costs, etc.) could be a convincing argument to some councillors (and the general public). It could be a way of narrowing the infrastructure deficit while simultaneously enhancing the infrastructure for all users. In the end, if it results in better infrastructure for all does it matter what reasoning and arguments got us to that ultimate goal?

I tried to quantify this once using open data from the region and did a quick calculation (I am less confident in the tax savings calculations), but I don't know how good of an estimate it is. Feel free to contribute and edit as needed:

-The region owns about 714km of paved road representing about 1,751 lane kilometres.
-The total area of those roads, including paved shoulders, is 9.9km2 (imagine nothing but asphalt stretching from Fisher-Hallman to Weber and Erb to Victoria).
-Excluding the shoulder areas, and assuming a regional standard lane width of 3.65m, the total “driving area” of regional roads is 6.3km2 (underestimate).
-Meaning, that for every 10cm reduction in lane widths the region would have 0.175 km2 or 2.8 per cent less driving space to maintain (operating and capital).
-As of 2016, the Region of Waterloo’s total cost (operating and capital including amortization) to maintain paved roads was $32,568 per lane kilometre (I assume this includes the paved shoulders)
-Assuming a regional standard lane width of 3.65m that means it costs $8.92 per square metre to build and operate our roads.
-Therefore, for every 10cm reduction in lane widths the region would save $1,562,548 per year (so reducing lane widths by 30cm would save $4,687,644.36)
-Note that a 30cm reduction in lane widths would still leave lanes that were 3.35m wide which is 10cm larger than maximum in much of Europe (3.25m) and the regional minimum standard (3.25m)

-Reduced lane widths across regional roads could lower taxes or free up tax dollars for other purposes by 0.33 (10cm reduction) to 0.98 per cent (30cm reduction).
-By comparison the total tax increase for regional services (excluding police) was 2.31 per cent in 2017, 2.29 per cent in 2016, and 2.00 per cent in 2015.
-In other words, 23 to 49 per cent of the average annual tax increase each year goes to maintaining overly wide and unsafe lane widths.

Addition savings could be obtained if, when rebuilt, roads were made narrower by:
-eliminate on-street parking on arterials (e.g. Queen’s Blvd, Union Blvd)
-reduced on-street parking on residential side streets (basically any street that is wider than two travel lanes and especially those with parking on both sides and two car widths (four lanes total e.g. Forest Hill Dr.)).
-excess lane capacity were removed from roads such as Belmont Ave, Queen’s Blvd, Union Blvd, Home Watson Blvd, or Avon Pl, etc.
-and bike lanes were built as part of the boulevard and not the roadway.

Again, this is likely an underestimate because,
-This only includes Region of Waterloo owned roads; the majority of the street network is city and township owned (see below for a rough estimate of all roads, not just region).
-It assumes driving lanes are smaller than they actually are (many are >3.65m).

A rough(er) estimate for all roads (not just regional):
-For every 10cm reduction in lane widths the region, cities, and townships would have an estimated annual savings of 643,862m2 x $8.92/m2 =  $5,743,249 (30cm =  $17,216,716.19).