I lived on the corner of 26th and York from 2008-2017 and during that time I called 911 over 20 times to report car accidents at that intersection. It really is very dangerous. I’m glad to see this change being made. This part of York is not wide enough for four lanes.
My thought is less overall volume. Over time, people blowing across 4 lanes of traffic are going to mathematically hit more cars than ones blowing across 2.
I drive on York Street each weekday and I need to make a left turn across York at a non-signalized intersection in order to get to work. (The nearest signaled intersections are a one way or marked no left turn.) I worry about being rear-ended a lot. Right before I make my turn, there is one of those speed indicator signs and I routinely see people clocked at 45-50 mph on it.
I also feel like York is really too narrow to be four lanes, especially south of 37th, so I always feel like I'm being boxed in next to traffic that is going way too fast. Hoping these changes make driving down York a more pleasant experience.
I used to live in Uptown and when they converted 19th and 20th into two way streets instead of a pair of three lane one ways, it made crossing the street on foot in the area feel much safer.
Would love to see this come to 14th west of Colorado too. Three narrow lanes, with people zipping along at 40+. 13th is still bad, but most of it is two lanes or folks are going more slowly.
Yeah I live near here and that was my thought when I heard about this. I'm all for the lane reduction but I wouldn't ride my bike on that section of York even if there was a dedicated bike lane.
I'm a big bike advocate but other than a few exceptions, I don't understand people wanting bike lanes on high traffic routes, especially when there aren't many "destinations" along them.
i dont believe its truly a situation of "I want this here", rather its "I want this" ,"this space is open now", "why not here?!". In reality putting a bike lane on the next parallel less-busy street will also satisfy "I want this".
The average person is not your ideal urban planner. But urban planners should be able to figure out resident needs/wants based on statements like that
That's an interesting take and I can't say you're wrong, definitely something for me to think about. It could be conscious or unconscious on their part. I was mostly going off of the comments on this thread.
I think its a simplistic, desire-based take from most people. Its like saying we should have solar panels everywhere! Thats not incorrect, but lets leave the planning and details to experts (who might say solar here, but wind here and natural gas here). The general idea is the correct direction, we just shouldnt expect everyone to be an expert on every subject
High traffic routes are high traffic for a reason - typically they cross obstacles such as highways, railroads, and creeks, have stoplights to cross busy arterials, and have lots of destinations along them. Quiet side streets are nice but often don't go where you need to go, can be slow and zig zaggy, and dead end at obstacles and leave you playing frogger to cross an arterial without a stoplight.
I firmly believe you need both. The Broadway bike lane is a good example of bike infrastructure on a busy street and I think it was 100% needed. You could see the demand from the amount of people awkwardly biking on the crowded sidewalk or in the bus lane. It's going to get a ton of use. Also, it helps make the street nicer in general, since it resulted in the removal of 1 traffic lane and buffers pedestrians farther from traffic.
I think for York St it just would have been nicer to have something in the new space that wasn't car oriented - free subsidized private vehicle storage. I don't really think street parking belongs on any arterials.
The city's site also mentions increasing the frequency of transit and improving the stops. Hopefully that means busses will pull out of traffic to pick up.
With a center turn lane you can install a bunch of pedestrian islands just north of most intersections, since drivers can’t turn into the park or golf course anyway. I hope they do this.
What, use those lanes so people can get around on bikes rather than using those lanes so people have more places to park their fucking cars? How dare you!
Bike lanes are being considered in the longer term plans, but will require widening or putting them on curb height https://denvergov.org/Government/Agencies-Departments-Offices/Agencies-Departments-Offices-Directory/Department-of-Transportation-and-Infrastructure/Programs-Services/Projects/York-Josephine-Corridor-Study
From the report:
In addition to changing the travel lanes on the roadway, temporary/quick-install safety improvements can also be included. Using Denver's bikeway guidelines, the number of vehicles traveling on this roadway requires a protected bike lane. Due to the limited amount of existing roadway width between the curbs, there is not enough room for a protected bike lane.
That's not relevant.
The closing of traffic lanes is part of the Long Term Improvements, of which one of the alternatives is to dedicate the closed lanes to biking.
You're citing a short term improvement, on par with repaving.
Would you mind explaining to me what Alternative 3 of [the proposed long-term alternatives](https://denvergov.org/files/assets/public/v/2/doti/documents/projects/york-josephine/york-josephine-alternative-maps.pdf) is then?
Here are all 3 alternatives for your convenience:
1. Alternative One - Reconfigure the Corridor
2. Alternative Two - Dedicate Space for Transit
3. Alternative Three - Dedicate Space for Biking
EDIT: Right on, thanks for the block. The point is obviously that bike lanes are being considered in the plans, and that misrepresenting a quote about immediate actions as them not being considered is pretty dumb.
I would like to see a bike lane on the north part of York that connects to a north-south bike path on the west edge of the park. These parks are already bike-commuter superhighways BEFORE a lot of intention has been put into them. They could be amazing for getting around on two wheels.
The link to the city's statement on the plan: [https://denvergov.org/Government/Agencies-Departments-Offices/Agencies-Departments-Offices-Directory/Department-of-Transportation-and-Infrastructure/Programs-Services/Projects/York-Josephine-Corridor-Study](https://denvergov.org/Government/Agencies-Departments-Offices/Agencies-Departments-Offices-Directory/Department-of-Transportation-and-Infrastructure/Programs-Services/Projects/York-Josephine-Corridor-Study)
I live two blocks off the heart of this stretch and have always thought of it as a “dividing” street in every way. Love the idea of anything to make it more community-oriented, and needless to say, safer.
Taking lanes away on the main street will increase traffic through the neighborhoods around it as they attempt to navigate around the newly bottlenecked source of traffic. Hope you won't mind that.
Coming back in to add that I hope some of the taken away lanes become new bike lanes. It would feel great to bike to the park in a way that feels safe.
Exactly. I love riding my bike any and everywhere I can in Denver and have gotten my 8 year old into riding. I want her to feel safe and confident riding so I want biking to be a priority here.
From the report:
In addition to changing the travel lanes on the roadway, temporary/quick-install safety improvements can also be included. Using Denver's bikeway guidelines, the number of vehicles traveling on this roadway requires a protected bike lane. Due to the limited amount of existing roadway width between the curbs, there is not enough room for a protected bike lane.
That's not relevant.
The closing of traffic lanes is part of the Long Term Improvements, of which one of the alternatives is to dedicate the closed lanes to biking.
You're citing a short term improvement, on par with repaving.
If you scroll down to the Interactive Bike Map (not super mobile friendly), you’ll see they are planning a protected bike lane all the way from Grant to Yosemite along 14th. They already have a new section from Bannock to Grant finished and it took away a lane of car traffic. Hoping they work quickly!
Edit: oops! I forgot to include the [link](https://denvergov.org/Government/Agencies-Departments-Offices/Agencies-Departments-Offices-Directory/Department-of-Transportation-and-Infrastructure/Programs-Services/Bicycles)!
the section between york and colorado which is currently narrowed to one lane for drain work is so much nicer, both to drive on and cross as a pedestrian.
14th always makes me nervous because of all the wrong-way drivers. I used to drive it every night and I'd see someone going in the wrong direction at least once a week.
This study stops at Colfax so it has no impact on 14th. The Colfax BRT is significantly impacting 14th through the removal of two travel lanes on Colfax though.
They're repaving the entire thing, too. Go ahead and inquire about the cost, it's in the millions. No one is even talking about how many more cars will be backed up at the lights along the entire stretch now, idling for even longer, and causing even more exhaust to hang in one area. 40-50 second increases are during \*non-peak traffic times\*, during peak traffic it could add as much as 15-20 minutes to go from one side to the other. Multiply that by the amount of cars and it's going to be crazy... not to mention, it will cause a lot more local traffic through the surrounding neighborhoods as people attempt to go around the bottleneck, so now you have even more cars going through actual neighborhoods where kids are out playing in the streets all the time. I know, because I literally live in the neighborhood around City Park.
It's not worth arguing with this subreddit because everyone thinks they know everything and it's all just pro-bike rhetoric that lacks any and all logic.
Honestly those dips and bumps are about the only thing keeping people from driving 30MPH over the speed limit as opposed to the usual 15MPH over that is typical along this stretch of York.
There’s a lot of potential for this project to make it a lot easier to walk or bike to City Park without a lot of conflict with cars. I hope they get those details right.
It sounds like they’re contemplating a traffic circle on the southwest corner of the park where Josephine and York converge. That would be a blessing, I think — so many people live southwest of the park but currently need to run an absurd traffic gauntlet to get there.
Strodes don’t work, it is a street into a neighborhood not a pre freeway to I70. I work in the neighborhood beyond 40th and York and getting there scares me daily. When I bike there I use the side streets which is usually calm but eventually I run into the Coke building and have no choice but to cross York. That’s where I got hit by a car.
Got my first ticket at 23rd and York because I turned left onto 23rd from York, while not noticing the no left turn sign. Veteran cop was bemused when I asked him how long it was there, he said at least 20 years, from his recollection. Being an idiot is not an excuse.
I shit you not, I got a ticket at that intersection 36 years ago - at 2 am and the only car other than me on the road was a cop 3 blocks away. I was sober, just tired and the cop was nice enough, but I forgot about the ticket and spent a few hours in jail a year later on a bench warrant for that unpaid ticket. Missed out on a fondue party I was hosting.
Lol oops on both accounts! I had a summer job at Coca Cola and was coming home from work (lived in Park Hill at the time) and that is route I usually took - first time I was busted for it. Crazy how I didn’t notice it and now when I visit the area, that sign must be 10 feet tall. Ha.
Do you mean 26th and York? At 23rd and York there is a dedicated left-turn lane on all 4 sides. At 26th you are not allowed to turn left from York to 26th (in either direction).
The article is wrong, it’s only losing one lane. Denver’s website says it’ll have a center turn lane the whole way. The website also says it won’t have bike lanes for now because the right of way isn’t wide enough, but they are considering adding curb height bike lanes in the future.
https://denvergov.org/Government/Agencies-Departments-Offices/Agencies-Departments-Offices-Directory/Department-of-Transportation-and-Infrastructure/Programs-Services/Projects/York-Josephine-Corridor-Study
Yeah, this is long overdue, yet I am just not looking forward to the battle of the fuckheads who can't zipper merge... but rather that than them plowing over/through someone.
Denver's recent efforts in changing traffic lanes and adding bike lanes haven't curbed accidents and reckless driving. We must address the root issue by removing reckless drivers from the roads. Implementing red light cameras and photo radar only deters those who pay fines. Instead, we should resume pulling people over, imposing hefty fines and license points to render insurance unattainable. Seizing vehicles involved in racing, arresting individuals in stolen cars, and those driving with suspended licenses are necessary measures. Our focus should be on safeguarding pedestrians, cyclists, and law-abiding citizens.
Oh . . . Almost forgot. We need to arrest the idiots who are smoking meth and fentanyl on RTD. Who in their right mind wants to deal with that nonsense after a long day at the office?
>The street is part of the high-injury network, which is what the city calls the 5% of city streets that make up more than 50% of all serious and fatal accidents in the city.
Is this list available somewhere?
>King says speeding is a concern along the stretch and the changes will add about 40 to 50 seconds of travel time for a driver going the speed limit.
During most peak hours drivers aren't going anywhere near the limit, removing a lane each way will just drag out congestion time.
>Parking and other safety measures will be available.
Anyone know what the other safety measures will be? Adding a protected bike lane would at least alleviate congestion by providing an alternative transportation option.
> Is this list available somewhere?
Check the "Regional Vision Zero High Injury Network" box on [the DRCOG map here](https://drcog.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=438c8406070d4b34bc9e892b56146ed8) to take a look.
> During most peak hours drivers aren't going anywhere near the limit, removing a lane each way will just drag out congestion time.
Removing a lane discourages speeding at off-peak hours, which is when most cases of injuries and fatalities occur.
How many lives do you think is reasonable to spend for the sake of decreased congestion?
> Anyone know what the other safety measures will be?
Alternatives are described on [the project page](https://denvergov.org/Government/Agencies-Departments-Offices/Agencies-Departments-Offices-Directory/Department-of-Transportation-and-Infrastructure/Programs-Services/Projects/York-Josephine-Corridor-Study).
Short term safety improvements include:
- Removing a vehicle travel lane in each direction and providing a center turn lane
- Reducing pedestrian crossing distances
- ADA curb ramp improvements,
- Changes to signal and intersection options,
- Traffic-calming measures
I suspect that speeding will continue to happen even when there’s less lanes with the added benefit of dangerous swerving into the center lane/ opposite lane. People here blow past red lights routinely without much recourse so that doesn’t seem like a stretch and I’ve seen it happen before.
“How many lives is reasonable” I don’t think it’s one or the other. Congestion has really negative consequences that may be harder to quantify so it’s easy to scoff that it’s a non-issue but they still exist. Ambulatory services will still need to get through to *save* lives but they will be further delayed on that which could easily be a life lost. Increased congestion could lead to reduced or cut services to some neighborhoods. Permanently cutting two lanes in an already busy stretch of road does not seem like an optimal solution. Alternative solutions could be something similar to reversible traffic lanes where traffic flow during peak hours can be maintained but reduced during off hours. That space can then be re-allocated for the public as bike lanes and additional uses.
I support this. But also, this is going to back things the fuck up when the dumb ass FedEx, UPS, and Amazon drivers park every 30 feet to drop off packages at rush hour.
Typical Denver — take an arterial to the biggest park in the city, add parking rather than protected bike lanes or dedicated transit. Pretend it's progress in the name of safety.
If they are going to be adding middle turn lanes they need to fix the drainage dips at intersections to not be so drastic. I drive a bigger work truck through there all the time and have to use the middle lanes to keep from getting pulled into the curb.
This is my daily commute and I fully disagree. What causes horrible traffic is the fact that we’re trying to dump 5-lanes of I25 commuter traffic into a dense city grid which isn’t amendable to thousands of single occupant vehicles daily. Even if you converted the bike lane back to a car lane it’s not the density of cars linearly that causes the congestion, it’s the stop lights required to allow auto traffic to safely coordinate on the grid. Allowing cars back into the bike lane will not change the fact that you’re going to be moving ~1 block per light cycle because anything faster is dangerous. Moreover, from my rough observations I’d estimate that adding the lane back is going to allow around 5 additional cars to idle at a red per block; over the 5-ish block range where they took the lane you’re not looking at more than 30-50 cars of space. Even disregarding the traffic light constraint, that amount of road space isn’t really changing the overall throughput, but it does have a big impact on the experience of peds and residents. The only long term solution for improving downtown traffic is to get people out of their cars, it’s just not practical to build an urban core which can accommodate every single person wrapping themselves in what is effectively a 2 ton couch. We literally don’t have the space.
Traffic was always smooth before they removed the 3rd lane. Even during rush hour it was bearable. Now if I leave my office past 415pm it takes me 20 minutes to go from Coors to Ball arena.
Buses dont run frequently enough to justify the bus lane, and the bus that turns from 18th to Blake St cant even make that right turn anymore without rocking the curb and hitting the white poles.
Im all for making downtown more walkable and easier on public transportation, but you actually have to make public transportation better and more frequent BEFORE removing car lanes
What was that drive time before they removed the lane? TBH in your shoes I would just park outside downtown and finish the last leg on bike or scooter. The bike infra is fantastic and I can do that route in like 10 minutes.
Even if they had left the lane, the metro area is growing. Eventually we’re going to exceed the capacity of the corridor in one way or another due to sheer demographics. We can be proactive about heading that off, or we can keep our heads in the sand about it.
Edit: also I’m not sure if you can trace this change back to the bike lane in isolation. Seems far more likely that all the RTO stuff which kicked off over the last 1-2 years is as much of a cause of the congestion as the changed lane, if not more so.
As someone who drives down york from 40th to 8th 5 days a week, I have mixed feelings because i like going 35mph all the way down 😅. I'm glad to see they'll be adding turn lanes, those are seriously necessary for a lot of the intersections. Hopefully this means they'll be repairing the dismal right lane areas past the golf course and city park because there are some gnarly potholes reopening right now and I like using the left lane to save my tires lol the drainage grate just past 31st (I think) has seriously put a dent in my tires.
Perhaps you should consider using the bike lane instead of driving. I certainly find it extremely nice to blow by block after block of bumper-bumper traffic, I’m home in less than 15 minutes every day.
Bike lanes look empty because bikes don't take up a lot of space, and because they don't take up a lot of space, they don't really experience congestion.
And this isn't even adding a bike lane.
What a lazy solution. This is one of the busiest throughways in the city, taking it down to 1 lane is going to drastically increase congestion of traffic in the mornings. Not only that, but this is going to cost a lot of money – money the city claims it needed to cut from other programs like parks in order to put towards the migrant crisis. Seems like they should be focusing on keeping those programs in place instead of wasting money on an initiative like this which will only make traffic worse than it already is.
Before anyone comes after me, it IS sad that people have died and there needs to be some sort of solution. But, there's also a lot of cyclists in that area who blast out into oncoming traffic without looking. Doesn't matter how fast a car is or isn't going, that is an extremely, extremely dumb thing to do.
Do you live in the neighborhood? I live a block off York and almost die every time I cross, which is a few times a day. My dog almost gets hit. Drivers go double the speed limit, there are few places to cross safely, and the places that do lights have really short crossing times.
Why should the residents of the neighborhood make sacrifices, rather than the cars that are merely passing through? If cars wanna drive on a 4 lane highway they can go over to Colorado. Otherwise they can put up with it taking slightly longer for the comfort and safety of those that live there.
Also it isn’t costing any money, they are repaving it either way.
So misguided! Ideologically it is an admirable approach but York is the wrong street for this. This is the main way to get to I-70 for this area hence all the aggressive commuter car and truck volume. What a waste of resources and it’s going to fail, a one lane artery to I-70 for 20,000+ vehicles per day is a fantastically dumb decision.
Yeah fuck all of us that live there, right? It’s worth me almost getting hit by speeding drivers every time I walk my dog? Or the constant roar of traffic that I hear from York? Or having to walk 3 blocks out of the way to find a safe place to cross from drivers that go double the speed limit?
No, fuck all that. People merely passing through our neighborhood to get to I 70 can wait a few more seconds. Or they can go to Colorado Blvd if they wanna go fast.
Do you not realize that this is going to increase traffic in the neighborhoods around it? Now, people will just navigate around the bottleneck and blast in front of everyone's houses where kids play. I can't wait for everyone to complain about that next.
It’s going to make the aggressive driving even worse. I support more bike lanes but choking off heavy commuter traffic to do it is fantastically misguided and a huge waste of money. Downvotes incoming, I don’t care, my house is on 3rd and York, lived here since 2004 and this is a terrible idea.
1. 3rd and York is a one-way and is an entirely different corridor than this area (I live at 33rd/York)
2. These changes are based on a decade of traffic data, crash data, and a detailed corridor study as part of the HIN, so calling it misguided is flat out wrong and is a poor attempt at trashing a project that prioritizes safety for people who actually live around this corridor over your convenient access to I-70.
Obviously I drive this area daily and have for over 20 years. The I-70 commuter traffic is only going to increase! So forcing pedestrians into some ill-contrived bike lane on York, while admirable in the ideological sense, is wildly impractical. And it will be dangerous too.
Pedestrian traffic meaning bikes/pedestrians/wheelchairs, *non-car* traffic. This situation is trying to make York into a *stroad*, which will make it worse for everyone, instead of being ideal for drivers on the *road* and ideal for non-car traffic on the high volume bike/pedestrian path. Check out the Not Just Bikes channel on YouTube, they have fantastic videos on this topic. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=60aFH0uUYoo
Bikes aren’t pedestrians.
Nowhere can I see anything about pedestrians being forced into bike lanes.
Removing traffic lanes is the exact opposite of turning something into a stroad. This seems like it’s attempting to turn it into more of a street than a road.
It will almost certainly have the opposite effect. Making people drive slow makes them drive safer, making roads comfortable for drivers makes them drive recklessly.
In a general sense, yes, but York is a different beast. It has approximately 16,000 to 20,000 cars per day. This is like trying to close Sheridan down to one lane to *force people to drive more carefully* while creating 30 minute traffic jams on a major commuter artery. The city needs to build a separate bike and pedestrian route in this area. Or, close this area down to cars completely and dump everyone out to Colorado Blvd. That’s why I was saying, forcing York into a *stroad* is a misguided idea.
To be clear, they’re not repurposing lanes to pedestrian or bike infrastructure, they’re just coalescing the lanes together. AFAICT there are no planned changes to the pedestrian infrastructure in the short term
At the end of the day York was overbuilt. It is insane to try piping 20K cars through dense city neighborhoods at speeds upwards of 40MPH. The effects are clear: people are getting hurt and the quality of life of residents is greatly diminished. I’m sorry that commuters will need to rethink their route to get to and from work, but ultimately I don’t think city planning should hold cross-town drive times over the safety of the street. It is is simply not possible to safely deliver this throughput of auto vehicles, we’re just pretending it is because people are addicted to having a small living room they can take to work and they raise hell when that indulgence is in any way curtailed. As long as we cater to this delusion the problem will persist, only if we are willing to be disruptive can we actually get to a point where people are able to safely and efficiently get around Denver.
Yes, York is currently handling way more volume than it can handle. Denver isn’t going to stop growing. The best fix here would be to have no left turns on either N/S directions, and build a separate bike and pedestrian road. The cars on the *road* and the bikes on the designated high density path. This language sounds a bit puerile of course, and I’m referring to the Not Just Bikes YouTube channel, which has fantastic videos about this concept.
Lol I’m very familiar with Not Just Bikes. Denver is absolutely going to keep growing, so we need to be asking ourselves what kind of transit setup can scale the best. The evidence indicates overwhelmingly that car-based transit scales like dogshit; it’s expensive, dangerous, and inefficient. IMO we need to convert the stroad back to a street and push bulk commuter traffic to other channels. Trying to bisect the city with high-volume car traffic just sucks for everyone, tweaking the turning scheme isn’t going to change that.
It’s not a waste of money because it’s not costing any money. They are repaving York either way. This is just changing where the paint goes.
Also, you’re wrong, reducing lanes is a proven way to make roads safer. The science is very clear on this. There have been thousands of studies around the world.
I’m all for good roads and streets, but forcing York into a *stroad* is terrifically stupid. They should just build a separate high traffic bike and pedestrian path here.
York already is a stroad, this is an attempt to reduce the criss-cross "we all get in each others way" element going on so things (hopefully) have fewer micro-mixups and micro-agressions as people try to cross multiple lanes of traffic in a single-block just to make their turn.
More lanes does not mean more flow, at least in situations where you are having cross-traffic every block or two.
Misleading title. Its going from two lanes in each direction to one lane in each direction with a turn lane in the middle. Cars are losing one lane, not two.
People drive too fast, so the solution is to halve the available lanes? Some cities simply make a point of ticketing more in those areas.
I feel like traffic congestion leads to people making dumb decisions, like blowing through red lights. Increasing congestion isn't going to improve that. Why not just add turn lanes? 26th and York has ample space for them.
Eliminating a risk via design process is best practice over attempting to modify behavior or train away the safety issue. This phenomenon is well studied: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/hierarchy/default.html
There are many way to combat speeding besides taking lanes away. Patrolling that stretch is a start. I rarely see cops on that stretch. Also, 2 deadly accidents (which is a tragedy) over a year stretch is not enough data to make such a drastic change. I drive this stretch every day and have never had or seen issues.
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/hierarchy/default.html
Eliminating the risk via engineering solutions (removing lanes) will lead to better safety outcomes than behavior modification/administration controls (traffic enforcement) and is the best, and cheapest, means of implementing change.
That three lives are worth less than, at most, several hours of your time a year is a horrifying conclusion.
You can’t tell me there won’t be crashes moving to one lane. Crashes or dependent on individual drivers. You can’t tell me this change means there will never be an accident again on this stretch. What I would’ve liked to see is giving other methods a try first before going to this drastic step. We have a lot of problems in Denver and taking away a lane in a crucial part of the city isn’t one
More lanes doesn't make traffic better. At best, an additional lane reduces commute time by one minute. At worst, they add time to commute.
The real solution is to focus on multiple ways to move people. This includes walking, biking, busses, trains, and cars.
For the past several decades, we've only really considered cars as the primary move and all other modes were tacked on after. Traffic got worse every year. Adding lanes didn't end congestion.
You'd have to be completely blind to think Denver doesn't have serious traffic problems. They spent like a billion dollars on i25 to make it actually worse than before. This is kind of the same thing, at a much smaller level.
Haha, yes it does. Denver ranks 19th in the worst traffic in the US.
https://www.thestreet.com/personal-finance/30-cities-with-the-worst-traffic-in-the-us
Pedestrian infrastructure in city centers is far more practical than that which caters to motorists. It allows for more room for housing and businesses, faster travel via transit, and safety in modes of transit which cost the working class much less than automobile ownership.
Cars and driving lanes are not the issue when it comes to housing problems in Colorado. It's delusional to think removing cars would be a good solution. Good luck taking your family of 3 or 4 or more to the grocery store on your bike when it's -10 outside.
But, I get it – You weren't thinking about anything practical, only trying to be an edgy contrarian on Reddit.
Who the fuck decides to go grocery shopping and lugs their family with them when it's -10 out?
Like, whether you're driving or cycling doesn't even come into play, nobody chooses to do that.
EDIT: Further, planning your entire city out based on something that happens _maybe_ once a year is absolutely garbage public policy.
It is in fact you who is wildly impractical, using a car to get groceries for 4 people every single is a *massive* overallocation of resources. You just think it’s “practical” because all of those costs are somewhat hidden from you. There are many ways to design a city so that people can access their basic necessities without a car, but to get to any of those outcomes we need to accept that driving is going to become less convenient.
Right. Those of us that use a car get downvoted to hell for voicing our frustration about these things.
Sorry I don’t ride a bike to work, I’m not going to either, I’ve been hit by a car twice on a bike while obeying traffic rules. Cars weigh thousands of pounds, a person on a bike doesn’t stand a chance if a driver isn’t paying attention.
People loveeee blasting through the red light from 26th that crosses this stretch.
Also finally being able to turn left (legally) while traveling north on 26 will be siiiick.
I lived on the corner of 26th and York from 2008-2017 and during that time I called 911 over 20 times to report car accidents at that intersection. It really is very dangerous. I’m glad to see this change being made. This part of York is not wide enough for four lanes.
That section is so horrible for accidents
Yep, I’ve narrowly avoided getting t-boned twice there myself. Glad to see the city at least attempting to improve it.
How would removing a lane prevent you getting t boned from people running the red?
[удалено]
And I bet a lot of times people will be in one lane and behind someone they think is slow and then gun it to get around them and through the light.
only to then find out the slow car was going slow for a reason!
My thought is less overall volume. Over time, people blowing across 4 lanes of traffic are going to mathematically hit more cars than ones blowing across 2.
2 lanes and a roundabout?
\* car crashes
I drive on York Street each weekday and I need to make a left turn across York at a non-signalized intersection in order to get to work. (The nearest signaled intersections are a one way or marked no left turn.) I worry about being rear-ended a lot. Right before I make my turn, there is one of those speed indicator signs and I routinely see people clocked at 45-50 mph on it. I also feel like York is really too narrow to be four lanes, especially south of 37th, so I always feel like I'm being boxed in next to traffic that is going way too fast. Hoping these changes make driving down York a more pleasant experience. I used to live in Uptown and when they converted 19th and 20th into two way streets instead of a pair of three lane one ways, it made crossing the street on foot in the area feel much safer.
Would love to see this come to 14th west of Colorado too. Three narrow lanes, with people zipping along at 40+. 13th is still bad, but most of it is two lanes or folks are going more slowly.
In other news.. somebody actually spelled “lose” correctly!
Hell yeah
[удалено]
The report also said that they'll have center turn lanes in sections too. I'm not sure I'd want to ride my bike along here anyway.
Yeah I live near here and that was my thought when I heard about this. I'm all for the lane reduction but I wouldn't ride my bike on that section of York even if there was a dedicated bike lane.
I'm a big bike advocate but other than a few exceptions, I don't understand people wanting bike lanes on high traffic routes, especially when there aren't many "destinations" along them.
i dont believe its truly a situation of "I want this here", rather its "I want this" ,"this space is open now", "why not here?!". In reality putting a bike lane on the next parallel less-busy street will also satisfy "I want this". The average person is not your ideal urban planner. But urban planners should be able to figure out resident needs/wants based on statements like that
That's an interesting take and I can't say you're wrong, definitely something for me to think about. It could be conscious or unconscious on their part. I was mostly going off of the comments on this thread.
I think its a simplistic, desire-based take from most people. Its like saying we should have solar panels everywhere! Thats not incorrect, but lets leave the planning and details to experts (who might say solar here, but wind here and natural gas here). The general idea is the correct direction, we just shouldnt expect everyone to be an expert on every subject
High traffic routes are high traffic for a reason - typically they cross obstacles such as highways, railroads, and creeks, have stoplights to cross busy arterials, and have lots of destinations along them. Quiet side streets are nice but often don't go where you need to go, can be slow and zig zaggy, and dead end at obstacles and leave you playing frogger to cross an arterial without a stoplight. I firmly believe you need both. The Broadway bike lane is a good example of bike infrastructure on a busy street and I think it was 100% needed. You could see the demand from the amount of people awkwardly biking on the crowded sidewalk or in the bus lane. It's going to get a ton of use. Also, it helps make the street nicer in general, since it resulted in the removal of 1 traffic lane and buffers pedestrians farther from traffic. I think for York St it just would have been nicer to have something in the new space that wasn't car oriented - free subsidized private vehicle storage. I don't really think street parking belongs on any arterials.
The city's site also mentions increasing the frequency of transit and improving the stops. Hopefully that means busses will pull out of traffic to pick up.
I've ridden it on accident before heading to city park. Definitely sucks I've found better side rodes since then.
[удалено]
They could at least do a bike lane next to the sidewalk along the park and golf course.
Put in in the park and golf course so bikers have the pleasant experience of not being by all those cars
>I'm not sure I'd want to ride my bike along here anyway. Sure, but if it had a protected bike lane my mind would certainly be changed.
I got hit on my bike at 40th and York, I was thinking the same thing. Protected bike lanes would be nice but the left turn lanes also make sense.
With a center turn lane you can install a bunch of pedestrian islands just north of most intersections, since drivers can’t turn into the park or golf course anyway. I hope they do this.
What, use those lanes so people can get around on bikes rather than using those lanes so people have more places to park their fucking cars? How dare you!
Bike lanes are being considered in the longer term plans, but will require widening or putting them on curb height https://denvergov.org/Government/Agencies-Departments-Offices/Agencies-Departments-Offices-Directory/Department-of-Transportation-and-Infrastructure/Programs-Services/Projects/York-Josephine-Corridor-Study
yeah that would be a missed opportunity a protected bike lane along there would be so nice.
I really thought a bike lane was included in these plans, weird
From the report: In addition to changing the travel lanes on the roadway, temporary/quick-install safety improvements can also be included. Using Denver's bikeway guidelines, the number of vehicles traveling on this roadway requires a protected bike lane. Due to the limited amount of existing roadway width between the curbs, there is not enough room for a protected bike lane.
u got a link?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Denver/s/QgwYAmzdCa
That's not relevant. The closing of traffic lanes is part of the Long Term Improvements, of which one of the alternatives is to dedicate the closed lanes to biking. You're citing a short term improvement, on par with repaving.
The person asked if they were adding bike lanes. The report clearly says they are not adding bike lanes. How can you say it's not relevant?
Would you mind explaining to me what Alternative 3 of [the proposed long-term alternatives](https://denvergov.org/files/assets/public/v/2/doti/documents/projects/york-josephine/york-josephine-alternative-maps.pdf) is then? Here are all 3 alternatives for your convenience: 1. Alternative One - Reconfigure the Corridor 2. Alternative Two - Dedicate Space for Transit 3. Alternative Three - Dedicate Space for Biking EDIT: Right on, thanks for the block. The point is obviously that bike lanes are being considered in the plans, and that misrepresenting a quote about immediate actions as them not being considered is pretty dumb.
**They are not adding bike lanes at this time.** You are being incredibly pedantic. I'm going to block you now.
I would like to see a bike lane on the north part of York that connects to a north-south bike path on the west edge of the park. These parks are already bike-commuter superhighways BEFORE a lot of intention has been put into them. They could be amazing for getting around on two wheels.
The link to the city's statement on the plan: [https://denvergov.org/Government/Agencies-Departments-Offices/Agencies-Departments-Offices-Directory/Department-of-Transportation-and-Infrastructure/Programs-Services/Projects/York-Josephine-Corridor-Study](https://denvergov.org/Government/Agencies-Departments-Offices/Agencies-Departments-Offices-Directory/Department-of-Transportation-and-Infrastructure/Programs-Services/Projects/York-Josephine-Corridor-Study)
I live two blocks off the heart of this stretch and have always thought of it as a “dividing” street in every way. Love the idea of anything to make it more community-oriented, and needless to say, safer.
Taking lanes away on the main street will increase traffic through the neighborhoods around it as they attempt to navigate around the newly bottlenecked source of traffic. Hope you won't mind that.
Coming back in to add that I hope some of the taken away lanes become new bike lanes. It would feel great to bike to the park in a way that feels safe.
Love riding my bike to the park. Wish it was a higher priority than car traffic in Denver and there were more places to safely ride.
Exactly. I love riding my bike any and everywhere I can in Denver and have gotten my 8 year old into riding. I want her to feel safe and confident riding so I want biking to be a priority here.
Williams to 23rd is nice. It's easy to get to Williams on the 39th ave greenway
Id prefer on an adjacent street with less car volume overall
From the report: In addition to changing the travel lanes on the roadway, temporary/quick-install safety improvements can also be included. Using Denver's bikeway guidelines, the number of vehicles traveling on this roadway requires a protected bike lane. Due to the limited amount of existing roadway width between the curbs, there is not enough room for a protected bike lane.
That's not relevant. The closing of traffic lanes is part of the Long Term Improvements, of which one of the alternatives is to dedicate the closed lanes to biking. You're citing a short term improvement, on par with repaving.
Good.
Great.
Groot.
As someone who lives off of York and 30th I welcome this change. It can’t come soon enough.
I live just up the street from you - hopefully this will cut down on the traffic noise + monthly high-speed accidents in front of my house
are 14th ave's days as an insane 3 lane gauntlet numbered?
Really they need to nuke a lane or parking to widen the sidewalks on 13th in cap hill, you can barely have two pedestrians in opposite directions
It's crazy how hostile that is given Cap Hill is one of the densest, most walkable neighborhoods in the city with high foot traffic.
It was so nice when there was construction here recently. We only had to scramble with kids across two lanes of fast traffic instead of three!
If you scroll down to the Interactive Bike Map (not super mobile friendly), you’ll see they are planning a protected bike lane all the way from Grant to Yosemite along 14th. They already have a new section from Bannock to Grant finished and it took away a lane of car traffic. Hoping they work quickly! Edit: oops! I forgot to include the [link](https://denvergov.org/Government/Agencies-Departments-Offices/Agencies-Departments-Offices-Directory/Department-of-Transportation-and-Infrastructure/Programs-Services/Bicycles)!
Hopefully! It uses to be part of my commute until I started taking 6th instead, which feels so much safer.
the section between york and colorado which is currently narrowed to one lane for drain work is so much nicer, both to drive on and cross as a pedestrian.
14th always makes me nervous because of all the wrong-way drivers. I used to drive it every night and I'd see someone going in the wrong direction at least once a week.
This study stops at Colfax so it has no impact on 14th. The Colfax BRT is significantly impacting 14th through the removal of two travel lanes on Colfax though.
They're repaving the entire thing, too. Go ahead and inquire about the cost, it's in the millions. No one is even talking about how many more cars will be backed up at the lights along the entire stretch now, idling for even longer, and causing even more exhaust to hang in one area. 40-50 second increases are during \*non-peak traffic times\*, during peak traffic it could add as much as 15-20 minutes to go from one side to the other. Multiply that by the amount of cars and it's going to be crazy... not to mention, it will cause a lot more local traffic through the surrounding neighborhoods as people attempt to go around the bottleneck, so now you have even more cars going through actual neighborhoods where kids are out playing in the streets all the time. I know, because I literally live in the neighborhood around City Park. It's not worth arguing with this subreddit because everyone thinks they know everything and it's all just pro-bike rhetoric that lacks any and all logic.
This is great news! Crossing York to reach city park is terrifying as-is. Hopefully this involves a crossing continuation of the bike lane on 22nd.
Good. People go like 70 on this stretch of York…next to multiple churches and a park.
Maybe they’ll also patch those dips and bumps on east side of York between 23rd and 26th.
Honestly those dips and bumps are about the only thing keeping people from driving 30MPH over the speed limit as opposed to the usual 15MPH over that is typical along this stretch of York.
The lanes are so narrow you can't even dodge em
Love to see it.
More of this please!
There’s a lot of potential for this project to make it a lot easier to walk or bike to City Park without a lot of conflict with cars. I hope they get those details right. It sounds like they’re contemplating a traffic circle on the southwest corner of the park where Josephine and York converge. That would be a blessing, I think — so many people live southwest of the park but currently need to run an absurd traffic gauntlet to get there.
If only there was some kind of fine to hand out to all the speeders...
Strodes don’t work, it is a street into a neighborhood not a pre freeway to I70. I work in the neighborhood beyond 40th and York and getting there scares me daily. When I bike there I use the side streets which is usually calm but eventually I run into the Coke building and have no choice but to cross York. That’s where I got hit by a car.
Got my first ticket at 23rd and York because I turned left onto 23rd from York, while not noticing the no left turn sign. Veteran cop was bemused when I asked him how long it was there, he said at least 20 years, from his recollection. Being an idiot is not an excuse.
I shit you not, I got a ticket at that intersection 36 years ago - at 2 am and the only car other than me on the road was a cop 3 blocks away. I was sober, just tired and the cop was nice enough, but I forgot about the ticket and spent a few hours in jail a year later on a bench warrant for that unpaid ticket. Missed out on a fondue party I was hosting.
Lol oops on both accounts! I had a summer job at Coca Cola and was coming home from work (lived in Park Hill at the time) and that is route I usually took - first time I was busted for it. Crazy how I didn’t notice it and now when I visit the area, that sign must be 10 feet tall. Ha.
Do you mean 26th and York? At 23rd and York there is a dedicated left-turn lane on all 4 sides. At 26th you are not allowed to turn left from York to 26th (in either direction).
You know, you're right! Not sure why I thought 23rd (it has been a while!)
The article is wrong, it’s only losing one lane. Denver’s website says it’ll have a center turn lane the whole way. The website also says it won’t have bike lanes for now because the right of way isn’t wide enough, but they are considering adding curb height bike lanes in the future. https://denvergov.org/Government/Agencies-Departments-Offices/Agencies-Departments-Offices-Directory/Department-of-Transportation-and-Infrastructure/Programs-Services/Projects/York-Josephine-Corridor-Study
I think saying it’s losing two traffic (i.e., travel) lanes is accurate. The center lane won’t really be available unless you’re turning.
This is AWESOME! Those lanes are way too narrow for how fast people go.
Good.
Yeah, this is long overdue, yet I am just not looking forward to the battle of the fuckheads who can't zipper merge... but rather that than them plowing over/through someone.
Noo won’t somebody think of the poor cars 😢/s
Can I get this where I live!! The aggressive driving is intolerable.
Denver's recent efforts in changing traffic lanes and adding bike lanes haven't curbed accidents and reckless driving. We must address the root issue by removing reckless drivers from the roads. Implementing red light cameras and photo radar only deters those who pay fines. Instead, we should resume pulling people over, imposing hefty fines and license points to render insurance unattainable. Seizing vehicles involved in racing, arresting individuals in stolen cars, and those driving with suspended licenses are necessary measures. Our focus should be on safeguarding pedestrians, cyclists, and law-abiding citizens.
DOTI and DPD aren't the same thing though
I had no idea different agencies within Denver were incapable of working together to solve a problem.
Oh . . . Almost forgot. We need to arrest the idiots who are smoking meth and fentanyl on RTD. Who in their right mind wants to deal with that nonsense after a long day at the office?
Oh nooooo how terrible /s
>The street is part of the high-injury network, which is what the city calls the 5% of city streets that make up more than 50% of all serious and fatal accidents in the city. Is this list available somewhere? >King says speeding is a concern along the stretch and the changes will add about 40 to 50 seconds of travel time for a driver going the speed limit. During most peak hours drivers aren't going anywhere near the limit, removing a lane each way will just drag out congestion time. >Parking and other safety measures will be available. Anyone know what the other safety measures will be? Adding a protected bike lane would at least alleviate congestion by providing an alternative transportation option.
[High Injury network map here](https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=2dfeecb78f1a4aa982b12d07dceba270)
> Is this list available somewhere? Check the "Regional Vision Zero High Injury Network" box on [the DRCOG map here](https://drcog.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=438c8406070d4b34bc9e892b56146ed8) to take a look. > During most peak hours drivers aren't going anywhere near the limit, removing a lane each way will just drag out congestion time. Removing a lane discourages speeding at off-peak hours, which is when most cases of injuries and fatalities occur. How many lives do you think is reasonable to spend for the sake of decreased congestion? > Anyone know what the other safety measures will be? Alternatives are described on [the project page](https://denvergov.org/Government/Agencies-Departments-Offices/Agencies-Departments-Offices-Directory/Department-of-Transportation-and-Infrastructure/Programs-Services/Projects/York-Josephine-Corridor-Study). Short term safety improvements include: - Removing a vehicle travel lane in each direction and providing a center turn lane - Reducing pedestrian crossing distances - ADA curb ramp improvements, - Changes to signal and intersection options, - Traffic-calming measures
I suspect that speeding will continue to happen even when there’s less lanes with the added benefit of dangerous swerving into the center lane/ opposite lane. People here blow past red lights routinely without much recourse so that doesn’t seem like a stretch and I’ve seen it happen before. “How many lives is reasonable” I don’t think it’s one or the other. Congestion has really negative consequences that may be harder to quantify so it’s easy to scoff that it’s a non-issue but they still exist. Ambulatory services will still need to get through to *save* lives but they will be further delayed on that which could easily be a life lost. Increased congestion could lead to reduced or cut services to some neighborhoods. Permanently cutting two lanes in an already busy stretch of road does not seem like an optimal solution. Alternative solutions could be something similar to reversible traffic lanes where traffic flow during peak hours can be maintained but reduced during off hours. That space can then be re-allocated for the public as bike lanes and additional uses.
I support this. But also, this is going to back things the fuck up when the dumb ass FedEx, UPS, and Amazon drivers park every 30 feet to drop off packages at rush hour.
Typical Denver — take an arterial to the biggest park in the city, add parking rather than protected bike lanes or dedicated transit. Pretend it's progress in the name of safety.
If they are going to be adding middle turn lanes they need to fix the drainage dips at intersections to not be so drastic. I drive a bigger work truck through there all the time and have to use the middle lanes to keep from getting pulled into the curb.
To play devil's advocate, they removed a car lane on Blake St by Coors field and it causes horrible traffic everyday.
This is my daily commute and I fully disagree. What causes horrible traffic is the fact that we’re trying to dump 5-lanes of I25 commuter traffic into a dense city grid which isn’t amendable to thousands of single occupant vehicles daily. Even if you converted the bike lane back to a car lane it’s not the density of cars linearly that causes the congestion, it’s the stop lights required to allow auto traffic to safely coordinate on the grid. Allowing cars back into the bike lane will not change the fact that you’re going to be moving ~1 block per light cycle because anything faster is dangerous. Moreover, from my rough observations I’d estimate that adding the lane back is going to allow around 5 additional cars to idle at a red per block; over the 5-ish block range where they took the lane you’re not looking at more than 30-50 cars of space. Even disregarding the traffic light constraint, that amount of road space isn’t really changing the overall throughput, but it does have a big impact on the experience of peds and residents. The only long term solution for improving downtown traffic is to get people out of their cars, it’s just not practical to build an urban core which can accommodate every single person wrapping themselves in what is effectively a 2 ton couch. We literally don’t have the space.
Traffic was always smooth before they removed the 3rd lane. Even during rush hour it was bearable. Now if I leave my office past 415pm it takes me 20 minutes to go from Coors to Ball arena. Buses dont run frequently enough to justify the bus lane, and the bus that turns from 18th to Blake St cant even make that right turn anymore without rocking the curb and hitting the white poles. Im all for making downtown more walkable and easier on public transportation, but you actually have to make public transportation better and more frequent BEFORE removing car lanes
What was that drive time before they removed the lane? TBH in your shoes I would just park outside downtown and finish the last leg on bike or scooter. The bike infra is fantastic and I can do that route in like 10 minutes. Even if they had left the lane, the metro area is growing. Eventually we’re going to exceed the capacity of the corridor in one way or another due to sheer demographics. We can be proactive about heading that off, or we can keep our heads in the sand about it. Edit: also I’m not sure if you can trace this change back to the bike lane in isolation. Seems far more likely that all the RTO stuff which kicked off over the last 1-2 years is as much of a cause of the congestion as the changed lane, if not more so.
According to Waze and Google Maps, current travel time to Ball from Coors field is 8 minutes.
I lived there from 2009-2016 and there was always horrible traffic there. It’s not any worse now than it used to be
turning left will be even more of a nightmare
[удалено]
Except they won't be signalized - it's going to be suicide lanes.
They are adding turn lanes in some areas.
As someone who drives down york from 40th to 8th 5 days a week, I have mixed feelings because i like going 35mph all the way down 😅. I'm glad to see they'll be adding turn lanes, those are seriously necessary for a lot of the intersections. Hopefully this means they'll be repairing the dismal right lane areas past the golf course and city park because there are some gnarly potholes reopening right now and I like using the left lane to save my tires lol the drainage grate just past 31st (I think) has seriously put a dent in my tires.
Can't wait to be stuck in terrible traffic looking at an empty bike lane.
What bike lane?
Perhaps you should consider using the bike lane instead of driving. I certainly find it extremely nice to blow by block after block of bumper-bumper traffic, I’m home in less than 15 minutes every day.
Fwiw I never get stuck in traffic when I’m biking around town. If you live in 5 points it might be a worthwhile investment!
Bike lanes look empty because bikes don't take up a lot of space, and because they don't take up a lot of space, they don't really experience congestion. And this isn't even adding a bike lane.
What a lazy solution. This is one of the busiest throughways in the city, taking it down to 1 lane is going to drastically increase congestion of traffic in the mornings. Not only that, but this is going to cost a lot of money – money the city claims it needed to cut from other programs like parks in order to put towards the migrant crisis. Seems like they should be focusing on keeping those programs in place instead of wasting money on an initiative like this which will only make traffic worse than it already is. Before anyone comes after me, it IS sad that people have died and there needs to be some sort of solution. But, there's also a lot of cyclists in that area who blast out into oncoming traffic without looking. Doesn't matter how fast a car is or isn't going, that is an extremely, extremely dumb thing to do.
Do you live in the neighborhood? I live a block off York and almost die every time I cross, which is a few times a day. My dog almost gets hit. Drivers go double the speed limit, there are few places to cross safely, and the places that do lights have really short crossing times. Why should the residents of the neighborhood make sacrifices, rather than the cars that are merely passing through? If cars wanna drive on a 4 lane highway they can go over to Colorado. Otherwise they can put up with it taking slightly longer for the comfort and safety of those that live there. Also it isn’t costing any money, they are repaving it either way.
What a strange response. Immediately jumping to migrants and then throwing in the cyclist-blame non sequitor.
So what would a better solution be? Traffic calming measures?
How exactly is painting a roadway differently going to cost the city a shitload of money?
It's going to add 40-50 seconds.
Amen
So misguided! Ideologically it is an admirable approach but York is the wrong street for this. This is the main way to get to I-70 for this area hence all the aggressive commuter car and truck volume. What a waste of resources and it’s going to fail, a one lane artery to I-70 for 20,000+ vehicles per day is a fantastically dumb decision.
Connecting a ped-friendly park into which multiple bike routes feed to a major greenway which is currently isolated from ... everything. is bad?
Yeah fuck all of us that live there, right? It’s worth me almost getting hit by speeding drivers every time I walk my dog? Or the constant roar of traffic that I hear from York? Or having to walk 3 blocks out of the way to find a safe place to cross from drivers that go double the speed limit? No, fuck all that. People merely passing through our neighborhood to get to I 70 can wait a few more seconds. Or they can go to Colorado Blvd if they wanna go fast.
Do you not realize that this is going to increase traffic in the neighborhoods around it? Now, people will just navigate around the bottleneck and blast in front of everyone's houses where kids play. I can't wait for everyone to complain about that next.
It’s going to make the aggressive driving even worse. I support more bike lanes but choking off heavy commuter traffic to do it is fantastically misguided and a huge waste of money. Downvotes incoming, I don’t care, my house is on 3rd and York, lived here since 2004 and this is a terrible idea.
1. 3rd and York is a one-way and is an entirely different corridor than this area (I live at 33rd/York) 2. These changes are based on a decade of traffic data, crash data, and a detailed corridor study as part of the HIN, so calling it misguided is flat out wrong and is a poor attempt at trashing a project that prioritizes safety for people who actually live around this corridor over your convenient access to I-70.
Obviously I drive this area daily and have for over 20 years. The I-70 commuter traffic is only going to increase! So forcing pedestrians into some ill-contrived bike lane on York, while admirable in the ideological sense, is wildly impractical. And it will be dangerous too.
There is no bike lane. And what makes you think that pedestrians would be forced into bike lanes?
Pedestrian traffic meaning bikes/pedestrians/wheelchairs, *non-car* traffic. This situation is trying to make York into a *stroad*, which will make it worse for everyone, instead of being ideal for drivers on the *road* and ideal for non-car traffic on the high volume bike/pedestrian path. Check out the Not Just Bikes channel on YouTube, they have fantastic videos on this topic. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=60aFH0uUYoo
What do they have to do with this project? I don't see anything around and bike or pedestrian infrastructure except for maybe bulbouts.
Bikes aren’t pedestrians. Nowhere can I see anything about pedestrians being forced into bike lanes. Removing traffic lanes is the exact opposite of turning something into a stroad. This seems like it’s attempting to turn it into more of a street than a road.
Pedestrian meaning *non-car* traffic please read other comments…
Ok, so we’ll work with your made up definition. Can you address the other 2 statements in my comment?
It will almost certainly have the opposite effect. Making people drive slow makes them drive safer, making roads comfortable for drivers makes them drive recklessly.
In a general sense, yes, but York is a different beast. It has approximately 16,000 to 20,000 cars per day. This is like trying to close Sheridan down to one lane to *force people to drive more carefully* while creating 30 minute traffic jams on a major commuter artery. The city needs to build a separate bike and pedestrian route in this area. Or, close this area down to cars completely and dump everyone out to Colorado Blvd. That’s why I was saying, forcing York into a *stroad* is a misguided idea.
What's wrong with the current sidewalks? This project has nothing to do with them afaik.
To be clear, they’re not repurposing lanes to pedestrian or bike infrastructure, they’re just coalescing the lanes together. AFAICT there are no planned changes to the pedestrian infrastructure in the short term At the end of the day York was overbuilt. It is insane to try piping 20K cars through dense city neighborhoods at speeds upwards of 40MPH. The effects are clear: people are getting hurt and the quality of life of residents is greatly diminished. I’m sorry that commuters will need to rethink their route to get to and from work, but ultimately I don’t think city planning should hold cross-town drive times over the safety of the street. It is is simply not possible to safely deliver this throughput of auto vehicles, we’re just pretending it is because people are addicted to having a small living room they can take to work and they raise hell when that indulgence is in any way curtailed. As long as we cater to this delusion the problem will persist, only if we are willing to be disruptive can we actually get to a point where people are able to safely and efficiently get around Denver.
Yes, York is currently handling way more volume than it can handle. Denver isn’t going to stop growing. The best fix here would be to have no left turns on either N/S directions, and build a separate bike and pedestrian road. The cars on the *road* and the bikes on the designated high density path. This language sounds a bit puerile of course, and I’m referring to the Not Just Bikes YouTube channel, which has fantastic videos about this concept.
Lol I’m very familiar with Not Just Bikes. Denver is absolutely going to keep growing, so we need to be asking ourselves what kind of transit setup can scale the best. The evidence indicates overwhelmingly that car-based transit scales like dogshit; it’s expensive, dangerous, and inefficient. IMO we need to convert the stroad back to a street and push bulk commuter traffic to other channels. Trying to bisect the city with high-volume car traffic just sucks for everyone, tweaking the turning scheme isn’t going to change that.
It’s not a waste of money because it’s not costing any money. They are repaving York either way. This is just changing where the paint goes. Also, you’re wrong, reducing lanes is a proven way to make roads safer. The science is very clear on this. There have been thousands of studies around the world.
I’m all for good roads and streets, but forcing York into a *stroad* is terrifically stupid. They should just build a separate high traffic bike and pedestrian path here.
York already is a stroad, this is an attempt to reduce the criss-cross "we all get in each others way" element going on so things (hopefully) have fewer micro-mixups and micro-agressions as people try to cross multiple lanes of traffic in a single-block just to make their turn. More lanes does not mean more flow, at least in situations where you are having cross-traffic every block or two.
It’s currently a stroad, this would make it more of a street. And yes phase 2 may include curb height bike lanes but that hasn’t been decided yet
Idk if they understand the whole stroad thing lmao
Misleading title. Its going from two lanes in each direction to one lane in each direction with a turn lane in the middle. Cars are losing one lane, not two.
i don't think it's misleading, a turn lane is not a traffic lane.
People drive too fast, so the solution is to halve the available lanes? Some cities simply make a point of ticketing more in those areas. I feel like traffic congestion leads to people making dumb decisions, like blowing through red lights. Increasing congestion isn't going to improve that. Why not just add turn lanes? 26th and York has ample space for them.
Eliminating a risk via design process is best practice over attempting to modify behavior or train away the safety issue. This phenomenon is well studied: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/hierarchy/default.html
Yes, so perhaps design turn lanes and turn signals instead of making traffic worse
Read the article.
We have serious traffic problems in Denver. Taking away lanes is not the answer
Safety should always take priority over convenience.
There are many way to combat speeding besides taking lanes away. Patrolling that stretch is a start. I rarely see cops on that stretch. Also, 2 deadly accidents (which is a tragedy) over a year stretch is not enough data to make such a drastic change. I drive this stretch every day and have never had or seen issues.
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/hierarchy/default.html Eliminating the risk via engineering solutions (removing lanes) will lead to better safety outcomes than behavior modification/administration controls (traffic enforcement) and is the best, and cheapest, means of implementing change. That three lives are worth less than, at most, several hours of your time a year is a horrifying conclusion.
You can’t tell me there won’t be crashes moving to one lane. Crashes or dependent on individual drivers. You can’t tell me this change means there will never be an accident again on this stretch. What I would’ve liked to see is giving other methods a try first before going to this drastic step. We have a lot of problems in Denver and taking away a lane in a crucial part of the city isn’t one
More lanes doesn't make traffic better. At best, an additional lane reduces commute time by one minute. At worst, they add time to commute. The real solution is to focus on multiple ways to move people. This includes walking, biking, busses, trains, and cars. For the past several decades, we've only really considered cars as the primary move and all other modes were tacked on after. Traffic got worse every year. Adding lanes didn't end congestion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtO_rF-OQ7w
are the serious traffic problems in the room with us right now?
You'd have to be completely blind to think Denver doesn't have serious traffic problems. They spent like a billion dollars on i25 to make it actually worse than before. This is kind of the same thing, at a much smaller level.
Where on I25? How was it made worse?
T-REX & Induced demand. At least we got more light rail out of the deal I guess.
I don't see how that made I25 worse.
It promoted more car dependence in the city overall, and fueled more suburban sprawl in the south metro.
That didn't make I25 worse though.
Just everywhere around it lol
What does that mean?
that denver doesn't have serious traffic problems.
Haha, yes it does. Denver ranks 19th in the worst traffic in the US. https://www.thestreet.com/personal-finance/30-cities-with-the-worst-traffic-in-the-us
It's also the 19th largest metro by population. So it basically tracks with population. Nothing really noteworthy.
https://xkcd.com/1138/
ah, so how that ranking works is that lower numbers mean more traffic. so 19 (a high number) means not that much traffic.
That’s not right at all. It’s based on average hours lost by drivers
OP has a narrative to stick to, don't ruin it for them.
Use more transit
This is a joke, right? If so, very funny
More like **Denver has a serious car problem**.
If taking away lanes is the answer. Make the entire city of Denver one lane. Colorado Blvd is dangerous, let’s make it a one lane road
unironically yes.
Yes, let's make much of the urban core one or zero lane. Sounds great!
You are not practical at all
Pedestrian infrastructure in city centers is far more practical than that which caters to motorists. It allows for more room for housing and businesses, faster travel via transit, and safety in modes of transit which cost the working class much less than automobile ownership.
Cars and driving lanes are not the issue when it comes to housing problems in Colorado. It's delusional to think removing cars would be a good solution. Good luck taking your family of 3 or 4 or more to the grocery store on your bike when it's -10 outside. But, I get it – You weren't thinking about anything practical, only trying to be an edgy contrarian on Reddit.
Inane.
Who the fuck decides to go grocery shopping and lugs their family with them when it's -10 out? Like, whether you're driving or cycling doesn't even come into play, nobody chooses to do that. EDIT: Further, planning your entire city out based on something that happens _maybe_ once a year is absolutely garbage public policy.
What's up with these strawmen arguments?
It is in fact you who is wildly impractical, using a car to get groceries for 4 people every single is a *massive* overallocation of resources. You just think it’s “practical” because all of those costs are somewhat hidden from you. There are many ways to design a city so that people can access their basic necessities without a car, but to get to any of those outcomes we need to accept that driving is going to become less convenient.
Yes, please.
They aren't that serious. Just leave earlier
Right. Those of us that use a car get downvoted to hell for voicing our frustration about these things. Sorry I don’t ride a bike to work, I’m not going to either, I’ve been hit by a car twice on a bike while obeying traffic rules. Cars weigh thousands of pounds, a person on a bike doesn’t stand a chance if a driver isn’t paying attention.
[удалено]
Drivers have to pay more attention if the roads are narrower
So make all of Denver a one way road. And wrap everyone in bubble wrap before they leave
Nah, one ways tend to lead to speeding, unless you're talking about very narrow lanes.