by Steve Tracy –
Once again an opportunity has been missed to move forward with the redesign that is in the adopted General Plan. Replacing the 4 lane street we now have with the two lane plus left turn lane and bike lane configuration will finally provide some safety for the numerous bicyclists and pedestrians using the corridor, and has no negative impacts on vehicle flow. The two most recent traffic models, one funded by the City and one from the UC Davis School of Engineering show that the redesigned street will actually improve traffic flow and travel times.
Once again opponents attempted to minimize our efforts by claiming this is just so a small group of selfish Old North Davis residents can stroll across the street at the expense of vehicle drivers. This is simply not true. Ten percent of all the traffic accidents in the entire City of Davis happen on the short stretch of Russell/5th between A and L Streets. Very few of these accidents over the years have involved Old North residents. We have pointed out that the General Plan’s design will improve travel in this corridor for ALL residents of this community.
Once again we sat in dismay as the City’s engineering staff with their professional obligation to look out for public safety, have admitted they have not reviewed the large volume of material we have provided them over the past year. We are told this is because it might compromise their neutrality on this study. I believe they are capable people, and can take in information and filter it for credibility as an ongoing part of their analysis. But they choose not to do so. In other cities I have worked in, the engineers have been eager to explore solutions to their safety problems, and in many cases embracing emerging designs like the road diet after seeing all the successful examples.
Once again we are seeing funding opportunities slip away because of conscious decisions to not apply for the funds. This winter and spring the City chose to ask for federal stimulus package funding to fix a very low level safety problem on 2nd Street while ignoring the larger issue on 5th Street. Here are the statistics for 2008: on the 2nd Street corridor downtown (within 100 feet of 2nd Street) there were six accidents, none involving bicyclists or pedestrians, with one injury. That same stretch of 5th Street west of the tracks saw 30 accidents in 2008, 8 involving bicyclists and pedestrians, with 13 injuries. It’s pretty clear where the safety crisis is, and now it is too late to ask for the federal stimulus funds to fix it.
Once again, we are seeing another funding opportunity threatened because of the interminable delays in this review process. The original motion from May 5th was to have staff come back as soon as possible with material that would allow the Council to make a decision on the road diet concept. That eventually devolved into a September return. We were told this would allow engineering staff time to then meet the December deadline to apply to SACOG for Community Design grant funds to repaint the lanes on the street and replace traffic signals at the F and G Street intersections. But SACOG staff will soon formally announce that the deadline will be moved forward to late summer to accelerate the influx of funds into the economy. Our current schedule will miss this deadline.
Once again we have waffling opportunities brought to the table at the last minute as the gavel was being brought down before the vote. As a late addition, staff was instructed to do a thorough analysis of the exact causes of the accidents in the corridor and only bring back solutions that address those causes. This is concerning on several levels. First, it requires an ability to carefully read police report information and decipher the codes. This is a tedious and time consuming (therefore expensive) process. Next, this requires accurate reporting of the information to the Council, and we are nervous about that given our experience from a year ago. Staff announced safety efforts on 5th Street had paid off with only 14 accidents in the corridor in 2007, when the actual count–35 accidents–was 2 ½ times higher. Additionally, it is pointless to over-analyze this solution, when it has brought about such dramatic improvements in safety in so many other communities. It will work here. Finally, what this last minute task may actually be intended to do is provide political cover. It sets up a situation for a reluctant, oh yes so very reluctant, conclusion that this particular solution must be rejected because the analysis does not absolutely show that every accident cause will be eliminated. Nobody ever claimed that the road diet solution will eliminate every accident. Yet this will avoid taking a stand for all the users of this corridor in the interest of public safety by giving in to the unwarranted fears of the few people speaking for the business community.
So once again we should rise to this occasion and ask for our Council to take this opportunity for leadership on this critical issue. Here are the steps each of us should take:
1. Tell your City Council representatives you hate this stressful street, are sick of the delays in this review process while the accident toll continues, and want an immediate decision to try this proven alternative. Their email addresses are available on the City website.
2. Ask them to direct staff to return back to the Council prepared for that decision in the early summer, not September. Failure to do so will essentially be a rejection of this proven and safe design, allowing the unacceptable accident toll to continue.
3. Tell every downtown merchant you encounter that the downtown business community should take a good look at their leadership and their position on this issue. A position that is hostile to their best customers: people who live nearby, people who are doing an environmentally sound thing by walking or biking to downtown, people who don’t pollute or clog up the streets and parking spaces, and people who are beginning to take their dollars elsewhere.
We need to get this item back to the Council ASAP, get this lane reduction design approved, and reduce the trauma so many of our residents are subjected to when that doesn’t have to be the case.
In 1999 or 2000 when renting an office at F and 5th and hearing crashes several times a month I contacted the city’s traffic engineer suggesting staggered E-W green lights. She emailed me they were unaware there were more accidents at that intersection but would look at the data. Must have agreed because we now have the arrangement we have which is better but not what I would call staggered since each side has its own complete green. I agree to try something as driving with bikes is impossible if you are a responsible driver. I vote to ban bikes but knowing that will not work, I am willing to give the road diet a chance. Thank you Steve for not giving up.
Bikes are part of the equation, but not the only part. The other are vehicle turns and dangerous ones merging on trying to beat traffic and coming off, either clogging traffic and forcing cars to dangerously go around or trying to beat oncoming traffic with a quick left.
Mr. Tracy,
You write: “We need to get this item back to the Council ASAP, get this lane reduction design approved, and reduce the trauma so many of our residents are subjected to when that doesn’t have to be the case.”
Please include me out of your group. I don’t think it’s a very good idea to “get this item back to the council ASAP.” Spending hundreds of thousands on a project involving yet another instance of government inserting itself into citizens’ lives is misguided at best, cynically manipulative at worst.
I’m confused Brian, isn’t government already involved in the regulation and maintenance of roadways and isn’t it their job to ensure that they are safe and efficient?
Why don’t we have any leadership on this issue from the City? This morning I watched as two elderly ladies clung to each other in the middle of 5th at the intersection of 5th and D St. as large trucks and SUVs roared by them. They looked like they were on their way down to Peet’s for morning coffee and they had misjudged the length of time it would take them to get across all four lanes. Of course, there are no cross walks or medium islands there, so the drivers of the vehicles weren’t clear as to who had the right-of-way, either. Providing crosswalks that are very visible helps remind drivers that these are pedestrian crossings also. With a center turn lane there is an opportunity to install a crossing island, thereby reducing the number of travel lanes to two at the crosswalk. Unfortunately, I see these potentially disastrous situations almost every single day since I cross 5th twice a day between C St. and F St. to go to the Amtrak station. It’s really a lamentable situation for this town. You shouldn’t have to risk your life to walk or ride your bike downtown from north of 5th Street, but residents do it every day.
What the heck is wrong with the downtown businesses? This should be a no-brainer for them, but I guess they don’t want or need foot or bicycle traffic at their establishments from folks coming from the neighborhoods to the north. In any case, they apparently aren’t concerned a whit about the safety of folks trying to walk or bike into downtown. This lack of community-mindedness has turned me off from shopping or dining downtown. In so much as they don’t care about my safety, I could care less anymore about their survival.
The situation is particularly troubling during the summer months when the City hosts their “kids on bikes” day-care activities in Central Park facing C St. On those mornings, parents accompany groups of small children on bikes down C and D Sts and often, the groups get separated from each other trying to cross 5th due to the inability to predict the length of time it takes to cross and the (often) high speeds of the approaching cars. I’ve seen anguished parents on one side of 5th begging and pleading with the children not to proceed into the street after them; I saw a mother on a bike in the middle of 5th standing down the approaching cars to allow her gaggle of kids to get across. We have crossing guards and cross walks around all of our schools, yet not even one painted crosswalk at the intersections of 5th and C, D, or E, despite the fact that the City itself lures dozens of children into the park for their summer daycare programs.
Meanwhile, through the efforts of Steve, ONDNA, some graduate students, and coins found under their sofa cushions, they handed the City Council a workable plan for free, no expensive out of town consultants! What are our City fathers waiting for? Someone to get killed? The inevitable liability lawsuit that would follow?
Again, I fully support Steve Tracy’s analysis.
As far as I am concerned, the City’s delay in improving the safety of 5th Street from B to G puts on city hands the blood of most of those victims.
DPD: please summarize and post the IDs and businesses of the DDBA/Chamber of Commerce “leaders” who oppose the safety improvements. Maybe we can get some picketing and letter writing going?
Also, anyone have photos of those accident crashes out in the street? Take them to CC public comment and post them up on the video for all to see, and demand that the City do its job. (John Lofland, I know you sometimes take photos!)
Finally: if any readers see the typical scenes of elderly and parents with strollers trapped in the middle as cars whiz by, whip out your cell phones and snap the photos, get the names of the people and their permission, print out 8 x 10 color glossies, and bring them down to public comment. or email/text to DPD, and maybe he will post them?
I live and work near the corner of 5th and D St, and I see and hear a lot of what has been described at public comment and on this Blog. I’m getting a new cell phone with camera, and will watch out for interesting shots.
“Yet when we showed the Chamber of Commerce spokesman statistics documenting the serious safety problem on 5th Street he said that is an “acceptable level of risk”.”
Fine, then we can boycott downtown stores until the Chamber of Commerce comes to its senses, and starts caring about its customers!
“Yet when we showed the Chamber of Commerce spokesman statistics documenting the serious safety problem on 5th Street he said that is an “acceptable level of risk”.”
Or perhaps we need to get a new Chamber of Commerce that cares about customers. Clearly the current one doesn’t! Hey, downtown businesses, if you care about customers, support the road diet, and call for the ouster of the current members of the Chamber of Commerce if you want business downtown!