Thursday, May 3, 2012

Road Diets


Image A, courtesy of HoustonTomorrow.


Image B, courtesy of Houston Tomorrow.


Image C, courtesy of Streets Blog.

Proponents of road diets generally cite to more efficient roadway usage, reduced vehicular speeds and crash rates, and the promotion of walk-able and cycle-able communities.  (This video provides a nice summary of these and the related benefits of road diets.)  In addition to these social and public health and safety benefits, it seems that road diets, when implemented on appropriate multi-lane arterials, also can provide a number of environmental benefits.  For example, bicycle lanes and expanded sidewalks can reduce dependency on automobiles (and thus reduce the environmental risks associated with the fossil fuels that power them).  Moreover, landscaping can reduce impervious cover (and thereby reduce stormwater runoff and improve water quality), offer cooling shade, and provide vegetation that can serve as carbon sinks. 

Nevertheless, road diets are not universally supported.  Opponents fear that traffic volume might exceed the capacity of the reduced lanes.  Additionally, some suggest that road diets can either (i) reduce the speed and reliability of public transit service where bus stops are located in pullouts and buses have difficulty re-entering traffic, or (ii) increase overall traffic congestion given that it will be more difficult for motorists to pass buses that make frequent stops. 

It will be interesting to see whether and how this latest, grass roots effort in Fort Worth, and related efforts across the country, prompt local land use entities to formally consider the environmental benefits of road diets in deciding whether the potential advantages of road diets outweigh the risks.

-Tim Mulvaney

| Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Road Diets: