Bad Dieting Ideas

I can't link to the Wall Street Journal site behind the paywall, so I will just give you some highlights of a piece from today on the perils of "road diets".  They are becoming popular in the Bay Area including Menlo Park that just made one example permanent on Middlefield Rd. and, of course, our very own Carolan Ave. example.  I suppose you could add the roundabout as another example.  But.....

Los Angeles, like cities nationwide, is transforming its streets. In July 2017 the city installed a “road diet” on a 0.8-mile stretch of Venice Boulevard in Mar Vista, reducing four lanes to two and adding bike lanes separated from traffic by parking buffers. The project is part of Mayor Eric Garcetti’s Vision Zero initiative, which aims to eliminate traffic fatalities in the city by 2025. Launched in 2015, Vision Zero is the most radical transformation of how people move through Los Angeles since the dawn of the freeway era 75 years ago.

By almost any metric it’s been a disaster. Pedestrian deaths have nearly doubled, from 74 in 2015 to 135 in 2017, the last year for which data are available. After years of improvement, Los Angeles again has the world’s worst traffic, according to the transportation research firm Inrix. Miles of vehicles idling in gridlock have reduced air quality to 1980s levels.

Lane reductions, bike lanes, new meridians and other innovations designed to reduce vehicle speeds make it difficult for bulky ambulances and fire trucks to respond quickly to emergencies. 

Let's just file this under the Law of Unintended Consequences.  Here is our local example which is OK.  It gets a little confusing up at Broadway for both cyclists and drivers, but doesn't inhibit fire trucks and such.

 

Comments

[BillyGBob]

Did the WSJ article compare the fatality numbers at locations specifically addressed by Vision Zero projects or did it look at the citywide numbers only?

[Joe]

The article was not that detailed (i.e. down to street level) for the statistics but had a number of anecdotes from LA and Oakland about the issues where Vision Zero had been implemented.

[BillyGBob]

I'll have to check out the article. Transportation research has determined that statistically, road diets do reduce pedestrian fatalities mostly due to (a) at 20 mph, a pedestrian will survive 90% of collisions while at 40 mph, the rate drops to 20%, and (b) road diets seek to provide additional protection for pedestrians on sidewalks away from intersections (most fatalities occur on highways or mid-block).

[[email protected]]

I believe, as 86.1% of the other BV Community does:
- 92.6 of Human Beings "HATE" ALL SILICON VALLEY BYCYLE CLUBS."
The loss of life and accidents are a Real issue.
Watch out for each other.

[Joe]

@Billy Where might one find said transportation research

@holly What?

[HMB]

If only bicyclists would use the bike lanes! I am so tired of them using sidewalks. Especially those idiots on electric bikes -- those are way too fast on sidewalks. I know there arent that many pedestrians out there, but geez, they need protection!

[BillyGBob]

Just a flavor:
https://one.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/pub/hs809012.html
It's a little dated, but provides a multiple examples (and highlights some other variables in crash severity).

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/road_diets/case_studies/
This is definitely a pro-safety viewpoint.

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/road_diets/resources/pdf/roadDiet_MythBuster.pdf
Pro-safety, but discusses capacity concepts as well.

https://kinder.rice.edu/2015/09/10/what-are-road-diets-and-why-are-they-controversial
Provides examples of road diet applications and results and also addresses potential resistance to change.

If you’re curious about other topics related to pedestrian safety, the Transportation Research Board provides an abundance of material. Here’s a sample of recent research presented at one session of this year’s annual meeting, which was last week. (The annual meeting, which typically has over 10,000 attendees, had over 1,300 workshops, committee meetings, presentation sessions, and poster sessions, all of which are related to some facet of transportation.)
https://annualmeeting.mytrb.org/interactiveprogram/Details/11758

[[email protected]]

In order to provide safety for Bikers and Cars there needs to be a more aggressive delineation to keep Bikers away from traffic.
When it comes to transportation on City streets, Bicyclists are a Hazard to themselves and others.
Go to a Playground for God's sake.
Or get out of the way.

[MV]

I agree with holly.

When it comes to transportation on City streets, Pedestrians are a Hazard to themselves and others.
Go to a playground (or a treadmill) for God’s sake.
Or get out of the way.

People driving got places to go. We don’t have 10 seconds to spare.

[Just Visiting]

So a former lawyer and fiction writer, writes an anecdote-based op-ed, and people are ready to get the pitchforks, despite research and data that shows the road diets (including in Los Angeles) work.

And while the number of automobile-caused fatalities is steadily increasing (though not on road-dieted sections), people scream about cyclists.

Humans are strange.

[[email protected]]

No...
Humans are extreamly predictable.
If Humans do not work together, Humans will be gone.
All of us are intuitive, all the time.
Humans naturally know what is Right/Wrong.
That is a very good reason to learn History.
In my opinion, History has been unable to benefit Humans yet, lets not give up?

Comments, Hillsider, Hillsider?

[resident]

I don't have an opinion on the bulb outs like on Carolan or the even tighter one that is on Dwight I think. But I do know these big green stripes are confusing and distracting and I really doubt they make biking any safer.

[[email protected]]

Well, I guess that is another "Poor" idea signed off at the City Manager Desk."
There must be a Stanford MBA considering a Thesis on the subject of Civil Service Mismanagement, and the Culture of Sycophants'.
The City of Burlingame should be a case in "study."

[BMW]

Here is a video explaining why road diets work, for traffic volumes below a certain threshold (https://youtu.be/Rs7jHvh7v-4

Carolan is a good example of a street with volumes that work well with a three lane configuration.

People think that four lanes are automatically better than three capacity-wise or travel time-wise. In fact three lanes, with a center lane, can be an improvement. People underestimate the capacity loss or turbulence that happens on four lane roads. People turning left slow and block traffic and create lane changing that has a ripple effect on traffic. This video shows how it works. Traffic is more predictable because of the dedicated left turn lane, less lane changing, less rear end potential and the street maintains the same capacity.

[[email protected]]

Has anyone tried the Keto Diet yet?

Does anyone beside me have to "log in" three times every time I comment on a topic?

[Joe]

From Phil Matier today:

Despite millions of dollars spent on new bike lanes and other transit improvements, people still favor cars when it comes to commuting in and around San Francisco, a new report by the city’s Municipal Transportation Agency concludes.

Commuting by bike, which surged by 140 percent between 2005 and 2015, has dropped in recent years. The report estimated that bike riders made 16,224 trips to work on a typical weekday in 2017, compared with 21,377 in 2015. The drop corresponds to a similar dip nationally.

It appears, however, the presence of protected bike lanes makes a difference — at least for a while.

“We are seeing increases of over 20 percent on corridors like Folsom Street, where we have added protected bike lanes,” SFMTA spokesman Paul Rose said. Those lanes were added last year. Ridership along the Valencia corridor, however, where streetscape improvements were made in 2010, saw a decrease of 10 percent in the last two years.

[J. Mir]

**cough** ROUNDABOUT **cough**