theDesMoinesPerspective

A recent letter to the editor written by Jon Turner to the Des Moines Register in favor of the MLK extension project falls prey to several commonly-held transportation myths. I want to debunk these myths here.

Come to my Beaverdale neighborhood anytime during peak travel hours and try to cross Beaver Avenue at an intersection that does not have crossing lights.

Traffic control and traffic volume are NOT the same thing. The letter to the editor makes this common error of assuming that reducing traffic volume is the only way to make a street easier to navigate at rush hour. In fact, controlling traffic flow is actually easier than controlling traffic volume - one can plan a control strategy. Volume is a function of a variety of factors, most of which are outside the realm of direct control. What the author can control is his own travel path during known times of heavy traffic.

Adding streets and Interstate connections will NOT reduce overall traffic. It is a commonly known, though not commonly acknowledged, fact that new and widened streets do not reduce congestion. Ironically, they increase congestion due to increasing the total vehicle miles traveled. Until we rethink our underlying transportation system and subsidies for single-occupancy vehicle travel, road additions and widening will remain a game of catch-up.

Let's reduce the number of vehicles speeding through my residential area trying to beat the flow out of town every night.

The author bases his entire argument on the fundamentally flawed assumption that a connector from Downtown through I-80 will reduce traffic through Beaverdale - a neighborhood several miles west of downtown, with no direct street connection. It is just too big a leap to assume that any measurable amount of Beaverdale's through-traffic is people trying to save time by cutting through 6 miles of local streets to get to the northwestern suburbs.

The last time I checked, not one single person lives in the pathway of the proposed extension north of Euclid Avenue.

There are two separate sections of the proposed extension. One section cuts through a protected wetland. The other cuts through an established neighborhood. The author minimizes the impact on the wetlands area (not my area of expertise) and ignores the impact on the actual residential neighborhoods affected by the expansion (my area of expertise).

While there may be valid arguments in favor of the extension, I have yet to hear any that positively and demonstrably benefit the City of Des Moines.

Ingersoll Avenue is on its way to becoming a "Complete Street". The 6th Avenue revitalization project has identified "Complete Streets" as a goal of the infrastructure improvements. Beaverdale intends to remake a major neighborhood intersection to align with a "Complete Streets" philosophy. The City of Des Moines has adopted, over vocal objections of some business owners and residents, a general policy promoting "Complete Streets".

What is a Complete Street?

Bike-Friendly Street in Toronto: Copyright notice: This image was downloaded from Wikimedia Commons and is in the public domain.Beginning with the advent of the interstate highway system and the ensuing suburban construction explosion, streets have been designed with one overarching goal: to move cars as fast as possible from starting point to final destination. In contrast, Complete Streets refers to a roadway that is designed and operated with all users in mind - including bicyclists, public transportation vehicles and riders, and pedestrians of all ages and abilities.

A complete street is not necessarily urban. However, urban areas are inherently compatible with the complete streets philosophy - urbanity depends on density, layered uses, and interacting transportation networks. The idea behind an urban "Complete Streets" makeover is to consciously design and operate a roadway to take advantage of all that an urban environment has to offer.

A Complete Streets Extreme Makeover

Several weeks ago, I proposed removing a section of Interstate 235 that divides downtown from the neighborhoods to the north and slices through the heart of several established neighborhoods.

Ultimately, the city would be better served by a transportation network that links downtown to the rest of the city instead of providing a direct conduit to the suburbs.

UPDATE, 6/25/2010After a long discussion with my wife last night, I came up with the following clarification. I think the highway should lead to Downtown Des Moines as a destination by dumping out onto a "connector" that is tied to the street grid between 42nd street and the Capitol complex. This "complete streets" connector would be designed to do all of the following:

• Move automobile traffic efficiently
• Create a better relationship between downtown and the neighborhoods to the north
• Layer transportation systems (pedestrian bike, auto, and transit) into a street that works for many different "trip types"
• Promote more efficient use of the existing urban street grid
• Take pressure off the streets that currently feed limited access points to the highway

But what would replace the Interstate? A Complete Street, of course! Let's see what that might look like:

Mixed-Use Complete Streets Replacement for Interstate 235: A potential design for reclaiming Interstate 235 through downtown Des Moines as a "Complete Street".

Interestingly, after posting the article today about removing the downtown portion of I-235 in order to promote development and reconnect downtown to the rest of the city, I received the following announcement. Local funding for the environmental impact study of the proposed north-south connector extending MLK to I-80 has been pulled, jeopardizing the project!

The MLK extension is a good idea from only one point of view: that of an Ankeny resident who works downtown. From just about every other perspective, it is a horrible plan.

Ingersoll Streetscape and Bike LaneThe sky isn't falling!

With just over a month's worth of experience (in time for "Bike to Work Week"), Des Moines drivers and bicyclists seem to be adapting (with a few exceptions) to the lane revisions on Ingersoll.

My thoughts as a regular Ingersoll driver:

• It is harder to make a left-hand turn onto Ingersoll from a side street or parking lot. With one lane of automobile traffic, the line of moving cars is longer and one must wait a little longer to cross over to the opposite lane.
• The new lane striping makes drivers more conscientious. I see drivers being more cautious about entering traffic (and feel more cautious myself) - people are taking more time to look for cyclists?. Perhaps we just aren't used to the changes and things will go back to normal behavior in a few months.
• Drivers are operating their cars more slowly. The new striping encourages slower driving. I'm sure this is a source of frustration to people who are used to weaving in and out of cars on a two-lane Ingersoll. It is actually better for business in a pedestrian-oriented district. However, the large plantings between traffic and the buildings partially negate this benefit because people in the slower-moving cars can't see signage and into the businesses.
• Drivers don't know how to use a center turn lane correctly. Inevitably, a driver new to center turn lanes stops in (or halfway in) the traffic lane to wait for a left turn opportunity.
• It doesn't take a whole lot longer to drive the length of Ingersoll. After reading some of the comments at dmregister.com, you'd think it now takes an hour and a half to drive two miles on Ingersoll. In reality, I haven't noticed a major difference (except for the left turn onto Ingersoll and for a few minutes during rush hour) from before. News flash: successful pedestrian commercial districts get crowded. People learn to expect it and plan accordingly. In fact, slowing cars down gives drivers the opportunity to notice the businesses on either side of the street! A "layered" space with pedestrians, cars, bikes, occupied outdoor spaces, and businesses lining the street is what we want for Ingersoll.