Road Diet on Main in Medford
#1
I really like the new setup in Ashland. Mystified as to why folks, including the editorial board, seems to be against this in Medford, though lots of folks seem to dislike it in Ashland too.
http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll...-1/NEWSMAP
January 27, 2013
We were no big fans of Ashland's plan for a road diet on its main entrance to town, so you can imagine our reaction when we discovered that Medford is planning a similar squeeze play for one of its busier in-town connectors. Then again, maybe you can't.

We think the proposal to reduce the traffic lanes on East Main Street makes sense on a number of fronts, with the primary one being the safety of people — walkers, bikers and motorists — who use the street.

The road diet takes a four-lane street and reduces it to two traffic lanes, with a center turn lane and bike paths on either side. Traffic engineers say such a configuration can handle as much traffic, or even more, because the center turn lane eliminates back-ups caused by cars trying to turn left across two busy oncoming lanes.

Medford's Public Works Department is proposing to convert about a half-mile stretch of East Main, from Almond Street to Willamette Street, to the road diet configuration. It's worth noting that the good folks at the Public Works Department do not like the "road diet" tag, most likely because it stirred up such a hornet's nest in Ashland.

But, like it or not, that's what it is. There's even a road diet handbook that describes the plan and its advantages — and the plan in the handbook is the plan for East Main.

We should also confess that, despite our initial misgivings, we haven't heard a lot of negatives about Ashland's experiment; in fact, we've mostly heard just the opposite. There's still the high-traffic tourism season to maneuver through, so it's best to hold off on declaring it a success, but so far, so good.

We think there are even better reasons for Medford's East Main conversion, including:

The street is primarily a connector between downtown and residential areas to the east, as opposed to the main entrance to a town. Calming the traffic a bit before it reaches those residential areas is a good thing.
The four lanes that now occupy the stretch of road are snug, with little room for error, especially if you happen to be side by side with a bus or truck.
Sidewalks are right up against the outside lanes on both sides, putting pedestrians, including children, uncomfortably close to the traffic whizzing by.
Speaking of pedestrians, the area seems to have a lot of them, thanks to its proximity to local shopping, Hawthorne Park and downtown. With little street lighting, four lanes of traffic and a lot of walkers, it seems like an accident waiting to happen. Stopping to allow pedestrians to cross the street almost puts them at more risk, since there's no guarantee other drivers will do the same — or even see them.
The addition of bike lanes and a center turn lane will give bicyclists and pedestrians alike more room and make them more visible by cutting the visual clutter of vehicles spread across the four lanes and providing more separation between the traffic and the sidewalks.
Bicyclists could actually ride on East Main without fearing for their lives. A critic of the plan said bicycle use of East Main is "insignificant." That's certainly true today, because few cyclist are willing to try to squeeze onto a roadway that barely has enough room for cars, let alone bikes.
The plan will reduce the gas pedal pressure by the fast-and-furious drivers who are intent on saving a few seconds on their journey and do so by weaving in and out of traffic.
The left-hand lane for eastbound traffic already is a left-turn-only lane as it approaches Crater Lake Avenue. The new configuration would protect left turns the length of the project. (We do hope that a lengthy turn lane is established leading up to Crater Lake, as it's a common route for many drivers.
There's another reason that we don't necessarily think is a plus, but it is a reality: Transportation funding these days often comes with requirements that cities provide "multi-modal" options, that is, options for cars, buses, bikes and pedestrians. A city that accepts federal funding, as virtually all do, must do more than just pave streets for more cars.

People don't like change, so it won't be surprising if there's opposition to this idea. But we see many positives and not many negatives in the plan. And who knows? The life it saves may be the one that was about to step in front of your car.
Reply
#2
As an Ashlander, I can tell you it's a bit of a shift for those who don't use the road often but have lived here long enough to be familiar with it. Having a 2 lane suddenly shift to 1 lane when you're not expecting it can be aggravating. And I've never seen anyone in the bike lanes that were created by the change.

If there were an actual need or if it would have created a larger number of bicycle commuters, I'd be happy with it. As it is, I haven't seen enough evidence that it is making a difference, and I heard (no evidence, just hearsay) that it was an experiment but that we only had enough money to enact it, but not enough to change it back.
Reply
#3
Who was our Central Point City activitist....Dsinger or something? She posted a similar option for Pine in Central Point. At first it sounded awful, but when she explained it and posted a graphic it made a lot of sense. I haven't seen CP implement it though. I'm all for anything that makes alternate forms of commuting friendlier and safer and more attractive.
Reply
#4
Well, I haven't ridden my bike on it, but it drives nicely. It sure makes left turns a lot easier and traffic flows instead of being a series of wild lane changes.
Reply
#5
It just makes right turns onto the boulevard a pain in the ass during higher traffic times.
Reply
#6
what boulevard?
Reply
#7
(01-27-2013, 04:55 PM)orygunluvr Wrote: It just makes right turns onto the boulevard a pain in the ass during higher traffic times.

The whole 4 lanes is probably what? A mile long?
Reply
#8
The road diet takes a four-lane street and reduces it to two traffic lanes,

WoW all over the Valley ODOT has been wasting a shitload of money doing exactly the oppositeLaughing

Some one needs to call them and mansplain.
Reply
#9
I think it works just fine. If cars merge into one lane, then no one gets stuck behind another car turning left, looking for an opening to shoot out and cut someone off depending on how much traffic there is. I hope Ashland keeps it.
Reply
#10
(01-28-2013, 05:15 PM)TennisMom Wrote: I think it works just fine. If cars merge into one lane, then no one gets stuck behind another car turning left, looking for an opening to shoot out and cut someone off depending on how much traffic there is. I hope Ashland keeps it.

No, no one gets stuck behind another car turning left but you do get stuck behind the blue hair in front of you going seven miles per hour with their brake lights onLaughing

Just kidding, it's only for a short while and it it makes it better for everyone involved then I'm OK with it.
Reply
#11
no one goes slow on the stretch in Ashland. It is a lot smoother.
Reply
#12
For the record: "Road Diet" is really a lame term.
Reply
#13
(02-04-2013, 07:59 PM)Tiamat Wrote: For the record: "Road Diet" is really a lame term.
I don't think they made it up, and neither did I.

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencounter...12_013.htm

[Image: cartman-sweet-rascal1.gif]
Reply
#14
No, I didn't think they had. It's just an annoying term. It's weird and I don't think it really sums up the issue.
Reply
#15
I suggest 'Lane Subtraction'.
Reply
#16
Road liposuction.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)