ReImagine Washtenaw:

How Realistic a

Vision?

Washtenaw Avenue Concerned Citizens

February 15, 2015

2

The top of the poster that invited comments on “ReImagine Washtenaw”. There are several things omitted:

1. The list of objectives—“walkable, bikeable, transit-friendly”—does not include making the avenue more drivable.

2. The role ascribed to the avenue—“an important artery that connects Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti”—does not include several other roles for the covered portion in Ann Arbor, Business I-94. These include: as a link to US 23, through 23 a link to I-94, and as a major shopping area with many large, specialized stores and other businesses.

3. Those in motion in the picture include five pedestrians, one wheel-chair user, two bikers, one bus, but only one car, though another car and a truck seem to be parked on the right side of the picture.

4. The sun is shining, and most people are in short sleeves. There is none of the snow, ice, potholes, and traffic that often make bike riding difficult.

5. There are no shopping bags indicating that people may have bought things—maybe many things, some bulky-- at local stores.

One must wonder: does the proposed plan have anything to do with reality, or is it—at least as it pertains to the Ann Arbor portion of the plan—largely fantasy?

3

Business I-94 -- Vision vs. Reality

This is the vision in the report (p. 36) for the section near Huron Parkway:

This is how the avenue actually looked on an afternoon last December:

How do they imagine getting rid of all those ugly cars?

4

“ReImagine Washtenaw” - False premises

The plan fails in several ways to meet the needs of most users of the Ann Arbor portion of Washtenaw Avenue, which is both Business US-23 and Business I-94.

1) The plan focuses on only one role of Washtenaw—as “an important artery that connects Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti”—and neglects the avenue’s four other roles: a. As a link to US 23, on which many drive north toward Whitmore Lake,

Brighton, Howell, Lansing, and Flint or south to Milan, Dundee, Monroe, and Toledo.

b. As a link to I-94 (via US 23) and I-94, on which many drive to reach Belleville, Willow Run airport, Metropolitan Airport, Dearborn, Downriver, and Detroit.

c. As a destination shopping district, to which many from eastern Ann Arbor and beyond drive frequently. They typically make several stops during a single outing and often buy bulky items. For most of these shoppers, travel by foot, bike or bus is impractical—even when the weather and their levels of fitness might permit.

d. As a major route for emergency vehicles—police cars, fire trucks,

and ambulances going to St. Joe’s and the University hospitals. As cooperation grows among the public safety departments of the area’s municipalities, this role for the avenue also grows.

2. The plan fails to recognize that the biggest problem for the vast

majority of users of the avenue is traffic congestion, a problem likely to be significantly aggravated by many elements of the plan. The elements aimed at reducing congestion are unlikely to have any major effect.

3. The plan fails to take account of the nature of most of the businesses along Washtenaw. They are not Mom-and-Pop storefronts but businesses that are too specialized and too large to rely heavily on walk-in or bike-in customers from the immediate neighborhood or even bus-in customers from further away. These businesses rely heavily on customers arriving by motor vehicle. Any plan that increases traffic congestion threatens the prosperity—even the survival—of these businesses and undercuts the tax base of the city.

4. The plan proposes several policies that are inconsistent with each other. Expanding the right-of-way on both sides of the avenue is inconsistent with the pattern proposed—and already being imposed—of building commercial frontages right up to the sidewalks. Creating

5

dedicated bus lanes along “the entire corridor” (p. 59) is inconsistent the bike lanes and wide, green medians proposed (p.35). It is certainly inconsistent with maintaining any reasonable flow for private vehicles. Increasing housing density along the avenue and running a dedicated transit lane down its middle will encourage more people to attempt to walk across the avenue. These will create some combination of greater pedestrian hazards and more places where vehicular traffic must stop.

The problem to which the plan purports to be a solution is that the avenue is “autocentric”– primarily serving cars, trucks and emergency vehicles. Is this really so inappropriate for Business I-94, which is the city’s busiest thoroughfare, a “state trunkline” and “a designated truck route”? An “autocentric” Washtenaw west of US 23 is what is needed by the vast majority of those who actually use it and the businesses that so many of them drive to reach. The plan may or may not be appropriate for those portions of the avenue east of US 23, but it bears little relationship to the realities of the Ann Arbor portion. To move from the Business I-94 of today to the idyllic one depicted in the proposal is to pursue an impossible goal. No one has answered where all the cars are going to go, where all the specialized businesses are going to go, and where are all the customers of those businesses going to go to do their shopping. There is a serious danger in setting out an impossible goal and then asking the planners to implement it selectively as they see fit. One step may stymie another, more desirable step, and the result may be the opposite of the rational pursuit of attainable goals. Economic development has two sides—preserving the best of what you have and encouraging sound development beyond that. Undercutting the lifeblood of existing commercial developments along Washtenaw would be the opposite of economic development. Likewise, if, as some people complain, Ann Arbor has become “radioactive” to prospective developers, empowering the planners to selectively impose some of the elements of this plan can only make that problem worse.

6

Most Washtenaw businesses depend on customers coming by car or truck

Several are inherently “auto-centric:” Midas Muffler Gerber Collision Belle Tire Discount Tire

Shell gas station BP gas station Uncle Ed’s Oil Shoppe Firestone auto repair

Many others are large and/or specialized stores. They draw customers from a large area and cannot thrive primarily on walk-in, bike-in, bus-in traffic: Hiller’s Supermarket—only general supermarket in southeast AA Whole Foods Paesano’s—large restaurant for fine dining ACE-Barnes hardware—only hardware store in southeast AA Conlin Travel Wright and Filippis medical supplies Barnes & Noble books—largest book store in AA Office Max office supplies Michael’s Crafts—largest craft store in AA Sherwin-Williams Paints—only paint store in southeast AA Allstate Billiards, Spas and Hot Tubs—maybe only one in AA. Joseph A. Bank and Brooks Brothers – high-end clothing stores DSW and Famous Footwear—large shoe stores Nordstrom Rack Petco—largest pet supply store in AA. Old Navy—specializes in one brand. Marshalls—large discount general clothing retailer on east side of AA. Arhaus – high-end furniture Most of those in Arbor Hills Crossing—Zola’s Bistro, Anthropologie, etc. Pierre-Paul design and framing Wheels in Motion bicycle shop Mimi’s Bridal Boutique – only one or one of two in AA Quality Alterations—one of the few in southeast AA Divers Inc. Scuba and Snorkeling 3380—probably only on in AA Casual Male XL - men’s big-and-tall clothing store Vitamin Shoppe – only vitamin store east of the Stadium-Washtenaw split Toys ‘R’ Us—largest toy store in AA, maybe the only one. Honey Baked Ham Ann Arbor Stamp and Coin Walgreen’s – largest drugstore in SE AA south of Packard and east of Industrial Sleep Number and Perfect Sleep--mattress stores All of these Washtenaw businesses (and more) need a smooth flow of traffic to remain attractive to their customers.

7

The real face of mixed use development If the traffic on Washtenaw slows down further because the city gives priority to every other form of travel along it besides cars and trucks, many of these businesses will be forced to relocate—and not necessarily within Ann Arbor—or go out of business entirely. They may be partially replaced at some locations by small coffee shops, pubs, liquor stores, corner bakeries, fast-food operations, and 7-11 stores catering to customers in the immediate neighborhood. But existing customers of existing businesses will be disadvantaged and forced to drive longer distances, creating a waste of time, money and gasoline. The values of the commercial properties will fall--and with them the tax base of the city. Arborland Mall alone is the city’s third largest taxpayer, with a taxable value in 2014 of $29.8 million. By tempering imagination with realism, it is possible to look to the city’s own experience to envision the kind of businesses that actually crop up when density increases. Since the development of high-rise apartment buildings on South University, the nature of the shops has been transformed. Businesses that once drew customers from greater distances—like Artisans gift shop, Centicore Books, and Mary Dibble women’s clothing—are almost entirely gone. A typical example is the mixed-use structure known as University Towers, which contains apartments at the upper levels, and at the ground level a liquor store, a cookie store, and a hamburger joint:

South University, January, 2015

8

Changes that could Increase Traffic Congestion

In the effort to make Business I-94 less “auto-centric,” the “ReImagine Washtenaw” plan proposes many changes likely to impede the flow of traffic along the avenue. Precious few changes are realistically aimed to provide a smoother traffic experience for private motor vehicles, which contain 93% of the people taking vehicle trips on the avenue as a whole—and more for the Business I-94 segment. 1 Existing lanes for cars and trucks would be narrowed from as much as 14 feet to 11 feet (p. 35). This could easily result in more vehicle-to-vehicle crashes. Road space presently utilized by vehicles would be replaced by “a buffered bike lane” alongside a continuous pedestrian zone with a landscape buffer.” (p. 35) The existing middle turn lane would be replaced by a 44-feet-wide “median boulevard cross section,” requiring many drivers to commit “Michigan left turns” (pp. 34-5). They would have to drive extra distances and contribute to the traffic flow in both directions. This would also create the potential for serious traffic backups during busy times, as cars lined up in a short left-hand lane overflowed into one of the lanes intended for through traffic. “Bus/Transit-Only Lanes,” apparently occupying the 44-foot median. are “part of the long range vision.” (p. 51) This might be inconsistent with having regular breaks in the median for cars making “Michigan left” turns. Buses would be given “transit signal priority” and “queue jumps” over other vehicles, designed to make bus ridership more attractive. (p. 50) There would be at least one more mid-block pedestrian crosswalk. At traffic lights, there would be more and longer waiting times for pedestrians to cross and restrictions on the ability of vehicles to turn right-on-red. (p. 68) In varying degrees, each of these “proposed solutions” will only make congestion worse for drivers of cars, trucks and emergency vehicles. 2 Some of the tradeoffs, e.g., with pedestrian safety, may be worthwhile, but the plan does not evaluate these. The “Traffic Volume Reduction” suggestions (p. 79)—including shifting drivers into buses, discussed above—are at best token and at worst impractical. 1 That percentage is based on the entire avenue (p. 8) but is undoubtedly far higher for the Ann Arbor segment of Washtenaw, where there is heavy passenger car and truck use for shopping and access to US 23 and I-94. 2 Note that the proposed off-road bus “Super Stops”—one of the few parts of the plan that would help motorists as well as bus passengers—can be implemented by AAATA whether or not the ReImagine Washtenaw plan is adopted.

9

Will more buses reduce traffic congestion?

If Business I-94 were in reality primarily a link between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, it might be possible to imagine that increased bus service between the two cities would significantly reduce overall traffic congestion on the Ann Arbor portion. The idea would be that more commuters between the two would switch from automobiles to buses. This theory is no justification for endorsing the ReImagine Washtenaw report.

1) Ann Arbor-Ypsilanti commuters are a small share of those driving on Business I-94. Increased bus service will do little or nothing to reduce the use of private cars and trucks travelling to and from US-23 and I-94.

2) Increased bus service will also do little or nothing to persuade those using Business I-94 to shop at its many businesses. They will still be deterred by:

a) the need to make multiple stops; b) the need to carry bulky purchases, including shopping bags full of goods, from store to store and on the bus; c) the extra time required to walk to and from the nearest bus stop and to wait for two buses, the minimum required for a round trip; and d) the greater physical demands of such walking and waiting, especially on older shoppers and especially in cold or rainy weather.

3) As a result of the 2014 millage increases, AAATA will be expanding this

service whether or not the other elements of the report are endorsed and implemented.

4) There is a danger that increased bus traffic—with its frequent stops and starts--may in fact slow down vehicular traffic as a whole. Aspects of the report that might reduce this danger—such as the creation of off-road “super-stops” for buses—can be adopted without endorsing its overall priorities and goals.

It is easy to imagine that this increased bus service will improved the flow of traffic along Business I-94, but the theory rests on very shaky foundations. Ironically, the one form of bus service that might improve traffic flow along Washtenaw would be express service between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti using alternative routes like Packard and I-94. AAATA has discussed one or both of these possibilities, but they appear nowhere in the ReImagine Washtenaw report.

10

Will bike-friendly policies reduce the use of cars?

Several years ago, the city undertook an interesting experiment in traffic reduction by building of a pedestrian and bike path along Washtenaw from Tuomy to Whole Foods. One objective was to encourage shoppers to bike rather than drive to places like Whole Foods, especially in warm weather.

As shown in the two photos, taken from the same spot on a sunny Saturday in 2013, the parking lot in front of Whole Foods was packed, but the bike racks were not.

11

Citizen Comments

The report lists (on pp. 94-104) a number of comments on the preliminary proposal that the planners received during meetings with the public. Here are some that received little or no attention in the report’s recommendations: p.94: “Traffic congestion is a major problem. The lights are poorly timed. 5 lanes are needed to maintain efficient traffic flow,” not “a ‘road diet’ or dedicated bus lines.” p. 95: “It’s a busy street. I try and usually do only use this Ave when I need to. I also try to do more than one errand when I go. . . I really have to take my car.” “I avoid driving on it as much as possible.” “Bike paths would be nice . . . as long as they don’t increase traffic congestion.” p. 96: “Washtenaw is a thru roadway, not a neighborhood. Please don’t reduce lanes for any reason like bike lanes because they are not really needed. It is a through road.” “There are a lot of good businesses in the area, but they can be hard to reach sometimes due to traffic congestion.” “What is most frustrating is that it takes 10 minutes to drive 2 miles…The worst part is the timing of lights does not change throughout the day as volumes change.” p.97: “I drive a cab in Ann Arbor. . . I believe you would be creating a giant bottleneck making even roads once passable very congested. I truly love the European style that I (am) seeing dreamed about. However, when you take a closer look at those café lined streets, they are not roads leading to any freeway system.” p. 98: “The traffic lights turn the area from Stadium to US-23 into a 20 minute gauntlet.” “Congested and full of angry drivers, I avoid it as much as possible.” p. 99: “I’m skeptical of plans to reduce general traffic lanes” in the course of improving the Avenue “without larger systemic changes in traffic flow. . . I think coordinated tactical changes—filling sidewalk gaps, intersection repair, transit signal prioritization—can show high return in a short timeframe.”

12

“The traffic lights, especially those between Huron Parkway and Carpenter, need to be synched to provide a steady flow of traffic.” p. 100: “Better coordination of traffic lights would help traffic flow. Do NOT favor any major change to the road. . . Do NOT like malls that come out to the streets. Bike lanes are not important and are negative. This channel is for cars. . .use slower routes for bike lanes . . . keep the bikes separate from large volume auto corridors. Better for all . . . cars, bikes ….” “The new design does nothing to reduce the big problem: traffic volume. Please do not tell us the bus lanes will fix that because commuters going to Livonia/Northville/Novi will NOT opt to take a bus.” “Don’t waste time and dollars trying to make (Washtenaw) what it is not.” p. 101: “You need more information about how vehicles are used along Washtenaw Avenue. Specifically, you need to know how many vehicles use (it) in order to access US23 and then other interstate highways for commuting purposes. You would not want to delay this component of traffic.” “It is ridiculous for a vehicle to take 30-minutes to travel from Stadium Blvd to Carpenter Rd during the evening rush hour. Cannot lights be better coordinated or other traffic flow measures be implemented?” “I think maintaining traffic flow (5 lanes) and speed (45 mph) are imperative. People have places to go, and things to do. Walking and biking are fine, but the vast majority of people (read: taxpayers) travel by car, and will continue to do so.” p. 103: “The best improvement would be to find a way to move traffic (at) Washtenaw and the parkway intersection much more quickly. Right now no one wants to travel it but . . . must because of the freeway. People may want to stop and shop more often if it could be travelled better.” “It is a corridor, so try to improve signaling so that traffic flows smoothly.”

* * *

Clearly, many users of Washtenaw Avenue in Ann Arbor place high priority on improving the traffic flow on the avenue. They are not condemning it as “auto-centric” but want to make it more auto-friendly without necessarily disparaging the need to improve conditions for other users. Many suggest better coordination of lights as one answer. There is no comparable priority indicated anywhere in the “ReImagine Washtenaw” plan itself.

13

Conclusion

Council members may ask: what is the harm in endorsing the report? After all, it took $3 million to produce and represented the work of a lot of nice people. The short answer is: to endorse the report would be to endorse its basic premise—that the modes of transportation used by a minority of users of Business I-94 should take priority over the modes employed by the vast majority of its users. Many of these users are the life-blood of the businesses along the avenue, and many others use it as an artery to connect with destinations throughout southeast Michigan. Any statement by City Council that their needs have no priority is to invite the implementation of policies that could add further to the heavy congestion of traffic on Business I-94. Endorsement and support of the report—and a call “to implement all of its provisions”--would also be to accept an ultimate goal for Business I-94 that is totally unrealistic. It would empower the planners to pursue steps toward that goal regardless of its realism or the consistency of those steps. At the very least, the City Council should require that an improved flow of traffic be one of the prime goals of any plan for Business I-94. It should also require that, before any more provisions of the ReImagine Washtenaw plan are implemented here, independent professional traffic engineers should be asked to evaluate the plan as a whole and any particular phases of it. Their evaluations should be based on experience on comparably busy thoroughfares in cold climates. They should be asked to determine whether the proposed changes will facilitate rather than impede the flow of vehicular traffic along Business I-94 and will enhance rather than reduce the ability of shoppers to patronize its many businesses.