06-24-2016, 09:57 PM
(06-24-2016, 09:47 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: So 3 million isn't *just* for pedestrians, for one, they repaved the road, so that's for drivers, built a traffic circle, again for drivers, and as a result traffic speeds are decreased and the road functions better, which also does benefit drivers as well as other users. Finally, there's cyclists as well.
As for your numbers, let me ask you this, have you actually walked or ridden down the road? I believe it is fairly common for drivers to underestimate the number of pedestrians using a road simply because they don't see them, as, quite reasonably, drivers are usually focused on the road. When I drive, I certainly don't notice pedestrians as much as I do while walking. Even biking I will tend not to notice them as much. You should try walking it, or at least riding it before passing judgement. You've heard from several on here who have ridden or walked the road who contradict your numbers. And again, there's a bus route and several destinations on the street which would see far more foot traffic than you suggest already.
Also, about cost, Davenport was a full rebuild, most road diets are just paint, and maybe a few curb changes, and often cost not more than 150k.
You make a good point that this cost includes repaving and that other road diets tend to be cheaper.
As for the numbers, I stand by them. I'm generally a fan of road diets but I'm also a fanatically numbers guy. So when something like this happens I pay a lot of attention to see if the data confirms or refutes my opinion. When Davenport opened I was originally very much in favour, since as I said I like the look. However, as a numbers guy I kept a tally and realized that neither Davenport nor Lexington changed much with the diet.