The residents of Tampa have clearly expressed an interest in improving the "walkability" of certain areas in their community and there is a good level of support for bicycle paths. However, I do not believe that the citizens of Tampa have been appropriately informed of the trade-off that city planners are making.
The city seems to be operating under the premise that in order to create a pedestrian and bicycle friendly city, it must be done at the expense of vehicle transportation ---by slowing down traffic and reducing capacity. This premise is simply incorrect. There is often tension between the two objectives, but impairing traffic doesn't create better walking and biking environments, and mixing bike lanes into very busy, critical thoroughfares certainly won't "enhance safety."
In cities that boast great pedestrian environments, many great walking corridors (Park Avenue, Michigan Avenue, Hollywood Bouelvard, etc.) have a robust traffic flow. Admittedly, some do not. However, the one thing that all great walking corridors have in common are great things to walk by - shops, restaurants, etc. Not parking garages, parking lots or storage facilities.
While the intentions may be positive, impairing traffic flow on traffic corridors will always generate negative consequences. One readily observable example is the reduction in capacity and lower speed limit on Bayshore Boulevard, coupled with the reduction of traffic flow on Swann Avenue. These "improvements" have increased cut-through traffic on Hyde Park residential streets by well over 100 percent.
Frustrated drivers with no attachment to the neighborhood drive fast, run stop signs, clip parked cars and put pedestrians at risk, especially children. In addition, slowing down traffic increases traffic count on the road at any given time. Simple math says that if a trip that takes an average of five minutes now takes six minutes, you have increased traffic on the road by 20 percent.
Proposed modifications on Bay to Bay will clearly push drivers to look for more satisfying routes through Bayshore Gardens, Palma Ceia Park, Bayshore Beautiful and Virginia Park. Notwithstanding all of the disparate statistics cited in the city's presentation, these changes fall short on some key assumptions about traffic flow on Bay to Bay.
The city uses the words "improve safety and traffic flow" in proposing to reduce the number of east- and west-bound lanes by half. The proposal cites certain "enhancements" that are designed to improve flow, primarily left turn lanes. While adding left turn lanes is a benefit if all things are equal, they simply cannot compensate for cutting the street down to a single lane, or statistically speaking, reducing the degrees of freedom for drivers.
A broken-down car, a city bus, a double-parked delivery truck, an unnaturally slow driver, etc., all create substantial traffic impairment if there is no way to go around. Traffic backs up mercilessly at the CSX and Lee Roy Selmon Expressway underpass because it drops to a single lane with a left turn lane. Westbound, traffic does not begin to flow acceptably until it expands to two westbound lanes. How does it make sense to emulate the biggest trouble spot on the entire corridor?
I applaud the desire to create more opportunities for cyclists. Most of the improvements that have avoided integrating bike lanes with busy thoroughfares have been very successful, for example, the Riverwalk and the Courtney Campbell Trail. But many of the past attempts, in particular those that try to integrate traffic flow into bike lanes, have not been successful, resulting in confusion, safety concerns and very little utilization.
For example, I have yet to see more bicycle riders on the Platt bike lanes than are on the sidewalk. The bike lanes on Bayshore are only used by a few intrepid cycling enthusiasts. I would encourage the city planners to take 10 minutes and just stand (never mind ride a bicycle) in the bike lane on Bayshore and see how safe they feel.
The commuters, casual riders and family bikers still understandably utilize the sidewalk. The ratio of sidewalk to bike lane users was about 10:1 on the Sunday afternoon that I observed, not a great payback for eliminating a full lane of traffic and impacting thousands of daily drivers.
Bay to Bay is an extremely busy road and a valuable east-west corridor. The proposed bicycle lanes will be dangerous, rarely used and most definitely not worth negatively impacting hundreds of drivers' daily commute.
Bryan L. Crino is a former member of the Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority board and is managing director of Skyway Group Private Equity Funds, 2909 W Bay to Bay Blvd, Suite 300.