Earlier this month I published a memo from Public Works Director Dave Barber to Second District Council Person Barbara Van Auken outlining four options for improving safety along the West Main corridor east of University Street. The Bradley Scout has since published an update with some interesting information:
…Van Auken said Option 4 from the memorandum has been selected, and city council will not vote about it unless the issue becomes much more costly. She said the decision was up to those who use the area, which includes the West Bluff Council, area businesses and Bradley.
The selected option includes lowering the speed from 30 to 25 miles per hour from Bourland Avenue to University Street and painting three and five feet buffer zones between sidewalks and the road.
“This is a way to get people to start thinking about stopping driving so close to the curb,” Van Auken said. “Ideally what we want to do is expand the sidewalk wider in that area, but we don’t have the money for it right now.”
So the changes can be made without any vote from the City Council (I find this somewhat surprising), and the plan is to move ahead with implementing Option 4, which looks like this:
As you can see, one east-bound lane of Main Street is being removed, and the remaining lanes are being shifted slightly to the south, moving traffic away from the sidewalks on both the north and south sides of the street. No on-street parking is being added between University and Underhill (shown above), but there will be some parking added to the north side of the street between Underhill and Bourland. Lowering the speed limit to 25 mph for these two blocks is the weakest part of this plan, as it will have no practical effect. If the speed limit is 30 east of Bourland and west of University, the odds of someone slowing down for 700 feet is nil.
But I’m glad some action is finally going to be taken to start making Main Street pedestrian-friendly. Getting cars further away from the curb and eventually widening the sidewalks is a small step in the right direction. It has long been suggested that an easy and cheap way to begin is by simply restriping the roadway, and that appears to be what they’re finally going to do. The changes are being made thanks to a state grant of $48,491. (This is the new trend — we use state money for basic City services, and we use City debt to subsidize private development.)
There’s a lot more that needs to be done, but this is a good start.
“This is the new trend — we use state money for basic City services, and we use City debt to subsidize private development”
I like that.
Is that parallel parking?….. **sigh** been there done that… it didn’t work. For those who don’t remember there used to be parallel parking on Main. It was scary to park on Main. Few braved it. It needs to be angled.
I agree with Mahkno. I think angled parking would be better but is it feasible. Atleast we are moving forward finally. This is good news for the neighborhoods and businesses around Main Street.
This plan is idiocy. You narrow the streets, the traffic will go into neighborhoods. Or worse, it won’t. I look for three, four-blog long back ups on Main Street approaching University. But what the Hell, it carried the “New Urbanism” stamp, so there’s no arguing against it.
The diverters in the University East neighborhood will ensure traffic won’t be going through most streets in the neighborhood, Bill. We’re hoping more of the Main Street thru traffic will use I-74. I’d prefer to see angled parking as well, but, at least, the on-street parking will be better marked than it was in the past. It is not perfect, but is a move in the right direction.
Each time I drive in the city of Peoria, it is clear to me that street engineers must spend most of their day inside of an office looking at computer screens, while politicians sit on their duffs thinking of pipe dreams that will never be based in reality.
Billy is absolutely correct in his comments. Narrowing Main is completely idiotic and the thought of it makes me wonder if any of these “planners” even drive this road or examine the area.
Frankly, the “planners” of this town need a good lesson in what it takes to get people to Peoria and how to get them to stay. As I’ve claimed for years, too many people in Peoria refuse to really look at their town without misty eye nostalgia and get down to the nitty-gritty of why it is a traditional river town and why it is going to stay a traditional river town.
I have to also agree with Sctobrien and Billy. This is just plan nuts. The way the city times traffic lights now, the traffic is already horrendous in the afternoon and you can sit and have a birthday at West bound Main Street and University and this is when there is moderate traffic. If the city can’t time a series of traffic control devices so traffic flows instead of racing to beat the next light, how in the hell is this going to make it better? For those that walk? Walk where?
Nope this is a waste of money spent or money that will be spent to benefit the few and make it hard for the rest of us. If Van Auken has got her nose in this, then it’s for her re-election brochure. Main Street is MAIN Street and it has a 30 MPH limit already. Enforce that and time the traffic lights so traffic moves instead of backing up at each light. In Fact, remove the light at Bourland and only allow right turns out of Bourland on each side.
Lets not forget you can always avoid main street entirely by going down Columbia Terrace which will just become the new through way. The neighborhood traffic diverters dont do much when the ally that runs behind your house becomes the new road as is the case at my home. There is already ample parking for the businesses from Bourland to University I dont understand the need to add more.
My block of Underhill will probably see an increase in traffic as a result of these changes, so I will be pushing to return the block to one way, in order to stop turn-offs from Main Street. I’ve been observing the traffic on the alley between Underhill and Bourland lately and think getting that thru-way shut off is something that is long overdue.
Amen brother. Thats where 99.9% of the traffic on Bourland is coming from. I get to watch it all night from my deck.
These are the kind of changes that can get one a Driehaus Award. An award given by the very architects who designed the form based code. DPZ did Peoria and Denver and Ferrell-Madden did Miami and the principals of both firms sit at the top of the Form Based Code Institute. The awards are good business.
Reduce traffic on MAIN STREET and increase residential traffic… BRILLIANT!
Interesting that no one even bothered mentioning the signed thru traffic route in this area — traffic from the Bradley area (specifically SB University at Main) towards Downtown is actually signed to use University southbound, go down and loop under the MacArthur bluff bridge, and cut down Romeo Garrett Blvd to downtown (Romeo Garrett turns into Monroe at Kumpf). Romeo Garrett is never congested and is one of the best-kept “secrets” to go from Bradley to Downtown (I use quotes because it’s actually the signed way that no one uses).
From a planning perspective, neighborhoods like the Bradley area are why planners and engineers are constantly at odds with each other. Planners favor a more walkable community which often means that automobile traffic gets the short end of the stick in favor of better pedestrian access, and engineers often design vice versa, focusing on auto traffic rather than pedestrian traffic.
Recently (within the past 5 years or so), a main throughfare in Urbana near the U of I campus (Lincoln Avenue) was repaved and restriped, going from 4 lanes to three, also with no on-street parking. To avoid the frequent buses from clotting everything up, the transit district actually removed and consolidated a few stops into dedicated bus pull-outs with shelters and signage. Pedestrian crossings were clearly marked and “pedestrian calming” methods (fences, enforcement efforts, etc.) were used to discourage jaywalking. It actually ended up performing very well, even during peak hours, for both pedestrians and vehicular traffic.
Regarding using state funding on Main Street: some non-state highways still receive funding from federal gas taxes. These routes are designated “Federal Aid” highways by IDOT to specify their funding sources. While this stretch of Main Street is not a numbered highway, it may still officially be on the books as one of these types of highway. Furthermore, the state may have grant funding in place for projects statewide to improve pedestrian safety that the city could apply for, which this project may qualify for. But those would be great questions for IDOT or the City.
Okay, we use federal money to do city work and city money to do private work. That doesn’t sit well with me. Then we have the person who says, “Its not perfect but its a step in the right direction..” Is this the same as saying doing something is better than nothing? I think we have discussed that here before. So between federal and city money and doing something is better than nothing, exactly what are we accomplishing?
“This is the new trend — we use state money for basic City services, and we use City debt to subsidize private development.” – That’s a great line, CJ.
It’s a good thing the cops hang out at Campustown because there’s going to be a bunch of rear-end collisions with cars that try to park in front of the shuttered Walgreens.
Conrad: “We’re hoping more of the Main Street thru traffic will use I-74. ” Thanks to the diverters, I MUST use Main Street to get to I-74 or be diverted downtown, away from where I need to go. This isn’t civil engineering, this is SOCIAL engineering.
Feh.
Someone provide me with a list of merchants On West Main who are backing this so I will add them to the list of stores I will never, ever shop at again.
Boy, there sure are a lot of histrionics going on around here. You’d think they’d decided to close down the street and make it a pedestrian plaza. Folks, they’re taking out one lane, and it’s an east-bound lane. This isn’t going to cause an apocalypse. What it will do is make the street safer for pedestrians by getting traffic away from the curb.
People are going to have to get out of the mindset that the right-of-way is only for the speed and convenience of automobiles. The right-of-way is used by bicyclists, pedestrians, transit users, as well as motorists, and there is enough room to accommodate everyone safely. That’s not social engineering; it’s proper design and operation of an important transportation corridor. See: Complete Streets.
Billy — I bet Mr. G’s supports the concept. And Haddad’s. Now put your money where your mouth is.
C.J.,
Regarding the traffic safety on Main, of all the accidents and injuries, the number of run away cars is near zero. Almost every injury/death I am aware of on Main St and pedestrians has been due to pedestrian error.
On top of that, plans like this simply avoid solutions how to get people in Peoria and how to get them to stay here. Reducing lanes of traffic and providing on street parking is not going to increase participation when there are not additional places to attract people.
Unfortunately, too many Peorians with decision making powers are similar to that of people who love an ugly pet dog: they simply are unable to see how ugly their loved pet project is and refuse to admit it.
Sctobrien — Changing the streetscape is part of a bigger redevelopment effort; you’re looking at it totally out of context. The current streetscape has proven not to be conducive to attracting business. Take a look at all the vacancies on West Main. We’ve had numerous planning meetings with town planning experts, neighbors, business owners, etc., looking for ways to improve the area and make it a more desirable place to live and shop. As a result, recommendations were made for both the public and private portions of the corridor.
On the private side, there were numerous changes made to the zoning code — in fact, it was replaced with a form-based code. That code gave property owners more flexibility on the uses of their properties (including mixed commercial/residential use) as long as they held to a certain form (one that would create desirable public spaces and a predictable investment climate).
On the public side, it was recommended that sidewalks be widened and/or parking reinstated on the street to provide a safer pedestrian environment and more convenient access to the commercial buildings. West Main is also part of the city’s enterprise zone.
Before making this recommendation, the Public Works department did a traffic study of this area and a much larger area surrounding it. These changes aren’t being made in a vacuum, but on the basis of actual traffic counts and traffic models. And these changes are very conservative. Town planning experts had recommended narrowing the street from five lanes to three.
I knew Main was in a zone. Almost every street in Peoria is in some kind of Zone. So, wasn’t a lot of money spent on this Ren-Park idea which is Main from the top of the hill all the way to University? Didn’t they replace all the sidewalks and add ornamental lighting? Didn’t they also add hanging baskets and move all the utility wires to the back off of Main? Wasn’t that to attract businesses? Now you are saying we need to change the street in a one block area and that is going to attract businesses?
All this sounds like a waste of money when money could be spent elsewhere on streets that need work. Better yet, dump the funds into the general fund and hire a police officer to enforce the speed limits.
“Didn’t they replace all the sidewalks and add ornamental lighting?”
Yeah… we (the neighborhoods) talked about that when it went in. The planning and budgeting for the sidewalks, lighting, and baskets, all occurred before Ren-Park became a reality. It is unfortunate that the timing of the installation occurred after Ren-Park had passed.
C.J.,
Sincerely, thank you for your reply, study and all the work that you do do. I sincerely mean that and have come to realize you are one of those people who does the research and doesn’t blow smoke.
Once again, we are doing the “it’s good enough” option. Money was allocated for these improvements. Five years of CBDG funds were allocated to be exact. It was spent elsewhere. How many things do we “it’s a start” and don’t implement or just drop to move on the next great thing. Too many to count. I would suggest banking some funds, look for additional funds, implement the project that is wanted in the stages that will be fiscially and systematically possible and stop wasting money on it’s good enough or skip it.
Charlie
Exactly.
Next they’ll have traffic calming speed humping on Moss Ave.
I’m gonna roll down Moss Ave and turn onto Barker, Callender, or Ayres.
I said ‘speed humping.’
heh heh Settle down Beavis!
Neighbors,
As CJ mentioned, this parking, etc. is a step in the right direction. It comes at very low cost and should have minimal impact on traffic flow on Main and in the West Bluff. On Westbound Main, nothing will change in the block-and-a-half closest to University, except that the cars will be 3′ further from the pedestrians on the sidewalk. As you walk in front of One World, you should feel marginally safer, much safer if you’re trying to steer your kids away from the curb.
Eastbound, the traffic counts show that the volume of traffic in that direction is much lower. Reducing a lane in that direction should not be an issue that would encourage drivers to avoid that route, send them down Columbia Terrace, etc. (If people are turning from University onto eastbound Main to head downtown, we might want some of that traffic to take I74 anyway…)
There are still some items that need to be addressed here — There are not enough crosswalks and if you’ve ever tried to get from Jimmy John’s to Campustown, you know the trouble in getting across the street. That said, the city is to be applauded for taking some action during a time of fiscal difficulties and not waiting 10 years for a capital windfall so they can come out and pour new wider sidewalks. Frankly, I’d rather see if this works before I’d be willing to invest my money to pay for wider sidewalks.
The good news here is that this plan did not take 10 years to compile and implement, it is cost effective and installs nothing permanent in the roadway. Traffic counts will be performed after the students return and the data will be analyzed.
After the modifications are made, if you notice detrimental effects of traffic volume or speed in the neighborhoods, please raise the issue — here or in your neighborhood meetings. No plan is ideal but this one seems like a positive step. Glad to see someone in the city is actually doing something worthwhile for a change.
If you step back a minute and consider the broader changes on Main Street, there are a LOT of good things happening here: the area is so full of desirable places that the parking lots are jammed at lunch and in the evening. This is the right problem to have. We need to continue to see improvements and see new places slowly moving down to the other end of the street. If you haven’t been to Blue, I’d encourage you to patronize the place. Talk about people taking a leap and investing in Main St. — Go there and spend some money. Later this summer you will be able to park directly in front of their building (instead of in the dark lot next to the liquor store). Campustown, while many have objections, is full (no boarded up stores) and having Bradley moving into some of the space will help address the safety and panhandling issues that made the east side of campustown an unsafe/hostile area.
No question that Main St still faces many hurdles, but it is on the upswing. Don’t stop shopping there or eating there. Keep on eating — and go visit Blue too. The next place for some new businesses is between the new Haddad’s and Blue. Let’s make it happen.
See you on Main,
Richard