12-03-2017, 08:21 PM
(12-03-2017, 05:01 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: I’m assuming that we’re talking about a reasonably comprehensive rebuild that includes the curbs and sidewalks, not just a repaving of the road itself. I agree that if the alternative is leaving the existing curbs in place, then it could add expense to move them (out or in).
In a lot of cases though what should be dropped is not a few tens of centimetres but entire lanes that are utterly unneeded. There are many roads around the region that have four lanes with no turn lanes. In almost all cases they would be better as two-lane roads with turn lanes where needed. I’m thinking about Union, Belmont, and streets like that where we are paying for four-lane capacity but not getting the benefits of four-lane capacity (and in any case if the road actually had four-lane-capacity traffic, it would be all jammed up due to the absence of appropriate turn lanes). There are probably even cases where the intersections should actually be bigger than they are (ought to have all possible turn lanes) connected to streets that are excessively wide.
Most street rebuilds (at least of non-regional roads) do not replace curbs: it's new pavement and paint, that's it.
Lane removals rather than lane narrowing is a worthwhile discussion, too, but a different one. And the number of streets where lanes can be reasonably removed is probably on the order of maybe 1/50 of the number of streets where lanes could be narrowed.