follow us:Google+FacebookLinkedInTwitterVimeoRSS Feeds

advertisement
CPBJ Blog Extras

Will the road diet survive in Carlisle?

By

Back to Top Comments Print

When I bought a home in downtown Carlisle in April 2006, I looked forward to the immediacy of living close to everything.

I walked to the library. I walked to breakfast. On the weekends, I never had to worry about having one beer too many. In short, I enjoyed town living.

But when I had to drive to Home Depot way across town, I could get there fine, providing there wasn’t a car show happening at the time. The only problem with town driving is that the two main thoroughfares, High and Hanover streets, often resembled a racetrack.

Both carried two lanes of traffic each through town and drivers often pushed speeds up to 35 and 40 mph. In other words, way too fast for the walk-around kind of town Carlisle wants to be.

So officials decided to do something about it. In 2007, the borough began studying a “road diet” plan as a way to reduce the speed of vehicles and to better accommodate walkers and bike riders.

The $2.8 million plan reduced travel lanes to one each way on Hanover and High streets, with turn lanes at intersections and a dedicated bike lane each way. Traffic signal timing changed and sidewalk “bump-outs” cut down on intersection crossing distances.

But once the public heard “reduced to one lane,” the predictable howling ensued. Without any knowledge of what a road diet is, or how it works, the carping commenced. It struck me as short-sighted and I decided to withhold judgment until I understood the concept.

I found, and continue to find, that road diets are immensely popular and growing more so with time. The idea was fairly radical when first conceived by traffic engineers in the 1970s. After all, how is traffic congestion to be helped by reducing lanes? It seems to work against common sense.

Yet, it does work. First of all, larger traffic-clogging vehicles -- such as tractor-trailers -- tend to avoid a road diet. Secondly, better traffic signal timing and dedicated turn lanes mean the through traffic keeps moving, albeit at a reduced speed.

Finally, all that speeding and lane changing produces accidents, and accidents cause congestion.

Some cities and towns have gone wild for the road diet concept, which is limited to roads carrying less than about 20,000 vehicles per day. San Francisco neighborhoods have adopted more than 40 road diets since the 1970s and the idea spread to nearby Palo Alto and San Jose. Pottstown is one of several Pennsylvania towns and cities to adopt the concept.

I lived downtown before, during and after the road diet and noticed few changes to my driving experience. Perhaps it does take a minute or two longer to get to Home Depot now -- I haven’t timed it -- but I’ve never really noticed.

Still, the critics remain. My favorite accompanies every big car show, when they take to Twitter and Facebook to eviscerate the road diet for the traffic tie-ups across Carlisle. Of course, car-show congestion is an annual summer occurrence that long predates the re-engineering of the roadway.

Recent news that Carlisle Borough Council plans to evaluate the road diet in the coming weeks gave the critics new blood. But the exercise looks to be routine, with minor tweaks possible, such as adding crosswalks.

Those tweaks no doubt are needed. What do you think will happen with the Carlisle road diet?

John Hilton

John Hilton

John Hilton covers Cumberland County, manufacturing, distribution, transportation and logistics. Have a tip or question for him? Email him at johnh@cpbj.com. Follow him on Twitter, @JHilton32. Circle John Hilton on .

advertisement

Comments


John said:
The road diet is an amazing failure! This is what happens when liberals get to put their bad ideas to work. All the road diet has accomplished is traffic jams, headaches, no consumers for the business's (what's left of them) and a fearful public. Nobody wants this crap in their own towns. Kudos to Carlisle for ruining a nice town. I will avoid it like the plague.

June 3, 2014 3:34 pm

Elaine said:
I love the road diet and know there are many others who support it too. The people who do not like it are the ones making their voices heard. It is much easier to park downtown now. I patronize many downtown businesses and recently retired after working downtown for thirry years. For those of us who actually use the downtown instead of just passing through, it is a huge improvement.

May 31, 2014 7:34 pm

Mike said:
You don't cite on piece of data to support your conclusion: "Yes it [road diet] does work." Tractor-trailers tend to avoid road diets. Says who? Citing what source? PennDOT traffic counts? Satellite imagery? Your perceptions?

Speeding and lane changing cause accidents. But you don't cite the reduced number of accidents that apparently you perceive as a result of the road diet.

Don't these things strike you as important as you make your case?

Maybe road diets are a waste of time and taxpayer money. Just because you perceive that they're better based on your position in town doesn't mean they "work."

I recommend doing some more homework before you pronounce them "working."

May 30, 2014 4:19 pm



Please note: All comments will be reviewed and may take up to 24 hours to appear on the site.

Post Comment
     View Comment Policy
advertisement
  
  
advertisement
  
  
advertisement
Back to Top