Lanes of Peachtree Road to close for months as crews move utility poles (Commerce: how much, houses)

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Safety is not some subjective thing. We can count the deaths and injuries. High-speed cars (>25mph) and other modes (walking / biking / scooters) do not mix.

That render above is of Peachtree is the design direction Peachtree inside the city limits should go in my opinion. However, yes, faster streets with separate pedestrian / bike facilities, divided lanes, and minimal intersections is a valid alternative if they really get the support to make that happen. But as you point out, you need 200' + RoW for roads like that, and that is simply not a viable.

Spending finite funds to take Peachtree in Buckhead towards a road diet and the "multi-use arterial" you layout is a fine intermediary step to improve safety in the near-term. However, as you point out, that layout does not require moving utility poles.

My original point still stands: Spending millions of tax payer dollars relocating these utility poles is a terrible idea regardless of your vision of what Peachtree in Buckhead should become.

Are they using taxpayer funds for this project or is Georgia Power paying for it

[DJDeadParrot]

Originally Posted by cqholt

Are they using taxpayer funds for this project or is Georgia Power paying for it

Georgia Power, since they own the poles. They're moving them at their own expense [surely, to be offset by a subtle rate increase]. So, yeah; the cost will be passed on to us, either way.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by DJDeadParrot

Georgia Power, since they own the poles. They're moving them at their own expense [surely, to be offset by a subtle rate increase]. So, yeah; the cost will be passed on to us, either way.

Still jvsh needs to be posting correct information if the poster wants to be taken seriously. Spreading false info does not help the posters position.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by DJDeadParrot

Georgia Power, since they own the poles. They're moving them at their own expense [surely, to be offset by a subtle rate increase]. So, yeah; the cost will be passed on to us, either way.

Do you have a source that Georgia Power is paying for it? It is GDOT that is wanting it relocated. Assumption is they would be responsible for costs.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Do you have a source that Georgia Power is paying for it? It is GDOT that is wanting it relocated. Assumption is they would be responsible for costs.

Do you have a source saying that GDOT is the one who wanted it? The article in the OP doesn't state that.

Even if it is GDOT, they are vastly funded my motor fuel tax, so car drivers would be mostly paying for it.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

The utility poles are not being moved to help increase road speed or get people to drive faster. They're being moved to lessen the possibility that a vehicle can hit a pole that is inches from the travel lane and take out the utilities.

Motivations of individuals are subject to debate. But why they are being relocated is less of an issue as the effect of them being relocated.

But having things like trees / poles close to the roadway have a measurable effect of slowing the design speed and making it measurably safer:

...46% decrease in crash rates across urban arterial and highway sites after landscape improvements were installed.

...

... it was found that 83% of tree and utility-pole crashes and 65% of the total crashes were located at the back edge of driveways and intersections.28 The majority of urban tree- and pole-related roadside crashes occurred when a driver attempted to negotiate a turn from the arterial roadway onto an intersecting driveway or side street (Figure 2). The crashes appear to be attributable to a combination of two factors: an arterial roadway designed to accommodate high operating speeds, and the presence of driveways and lower-speed side streets intersecting the arterial. Thus, tree crashes may not be due to random error, as currently assumed, but may be the consequence of designing roads for higher traffic speeds and situations that exceed some drivers’ capacity for vehicle control.

...

Not only were trees not associated with crash increases, but the presence of trees was associated with a decrease in the probability that a run-off-roadway crash would occur. Generally, wide traffic lanes and wide shoulders were positively associated with a greater frequency of run-off-roadway accidents.

...

While not completely understood, the presence of street trees may provide an “edge effect” or psychological cue to drive more slowly. Fewer crash incidents, and less severe injury outcomes, are associated with slower vehicle speeds.

https://depts.washington.edu/hhwb/Thm_SafeStreets.html

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Motivations of individuals are subject to debate. But why they are being relocated is less of an issue as the effect of them being relocated.

But having things like trees / poles close to the roadway have a measurable effect of slowing the design speed and making it measurably safer:

Cool, so move the poles and plant some damn trees, although, trees 6" from the edge of the road will hang into the road and be even worse than poles. Utility poles 6" off the side of the road is a measurably stupid idea in every way. The fact that you support it, notwithstanding.

Your position in a bottle: make the road more dangerous so people will feel unsafe and drive slower. Any of that untrue?

Oh well, doesn't matter. The poles are getting moved, you'll still have your sidewalks, and there won't be an obstacle 6" off the side of the road for a bus to careen into. The average transit bus is between 8' and 9' wide. The lanes on Peachtree are 8.5' wide. This means that a bus touching the curb will still likely hang into the lane next to it, while traveling mere inches from a huge utility pole on the side. Maybe its mirror will clear, maybe it won't. Ah, well, doesn't matter...at least the "design speed" is lower.

Why don't we just ban pedestrians from Peachtree? Problem solved.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by samiwas1

Cool, so move the poles and plant some damn trees, although, trees 6" from the edge of the road will hang into the road and be even worse than poles. Utility poles 6" off the side of the road is a measurably stupid idea in every way. The fact that you support it, notwithstanding.

Your position in a bottle: make the road more dangerous so people will feel unsafe and drive slower. Any of that untrue?

Oh well, doesn't matter. The poles are getting moved, you'll still have your sidewalks, and there won't be an obstacle 6" off the side of the road for a bus to careen into. The average transit bus is between 8' and 9' wide. The lanes on Peachtree are 8.5' wide. This means that a bus touching the curb will still likely hang into the lane next to it, while traveling mere inches from a huge utility pole on the side. Maybe its mirror will clear, maybe it won't. Ah, well, doesn't matter...at least the "design speed" is lower.

Why don't we just ban pedestrians from Peachtree? Problem solved.

Hardly anybody walks on Peachtree now.

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by bu2

Hardly anybody walks on Peachtree now.

Well, I know that. And you know that. Because it's generally low-density residential with a strip of random shops down the middle. But of course the response is going to be "if you took away the lanes and put 10' wide sidewalks and 10' wide bike lanes, it would suddenly become inundated with walkers and bikers".

[jsvh]

Yes, any road with a car-first high-speed design should be closed to pedestrians and bikes.

But as y'all have pointed out, good luck getting the money and support to make that happen. You will need additional RoW to widen it and close off the driveways, storefronts, adding barriers and re-configuring the road.

But please, go on and detail how you think a pedestrian ban on Peachtree will work.

In the mean time, we need to real options to make that road safer for all users. One fair incremental improvement is the road diet with protected bike and pedestrian facilities that you were suggesting earlier.

And yes, making a road feel less safe so people drive slower which in fact makes it more safe as a result is exactly right. Is that really that mind blowing?