The URL is http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/090606/opl_4787662.shtml
(I added brackets because there are a couple of places where I think there may have been typos- ML)
A recent article [in a neighborhood newspaper] praised the widening of Riverside Avenue just south of downtown to six lanes.
Says one local executive, the widening will make Riverside "the new gateway to Jacksonville."
Similarly, a local economic development official speculates that Brooklyn, a nearby residential area, might soon have "people who work in the area, live in the area, and take pride in the area."
In other words, our local businesspeople and planners seem to think that turning Riverside Avenue into a six-lane speedway will help developers turn Brooklyn into a walkable, mixed-use neighborhood.
But does anyone really want to walk across a six-lane street?
I certainly don't. When I have visited the six-lane part of Riverside Avenue, I don't feel particularly comfortable.
I feel like I am in a place that is made for cars rather than for people, and I feel like I have to be very careful before crossing the street. By contrast, I feel much more comfortable walking on the narrower streets in residential areas.
Narrower streets are more pedestrian-friendly for two reasons. First, a wide street takes longer for pedestrians to cross, thus increasing pedestrian commutes and increasing the amount of time a pedestrian is exposed to traffic.
Second, wide streets encourage cars to drive faster, thus increasing the frequency and severity of pedestrian injuries.
A motorist driving at high speeds has more difficulty paying attention to the surrounding environment: The faster you drive, the harder it is for you to slow down in time if you see a pedestrian in front of you.
And car crashes are more lethal as cars go faster:
So what? Why should anyone care if Riverside Avenue is pedestrian-friendly, as long as traffic flows more quickly? Hasn't the growth of suburbia proved that most people would rather be surrounded by speeding cars?
Avondale and San Marco, two of Jacksonville's most walkable neighborhoods, are also two of its most expensive - evidence that some people are willing to pay more for the privilege of being able to walk across narrow streets rather than sprinting across six-lane boulevards.
Clearly, the demand for walkable neighborhoods outstrips the supply. By contrast, Jacksonville's supply of six-lane and eight-lane speedways is virtually unlimited, so we don't need any more of them.
It logically follows that by widening Riverside Avenue, the city may have actually made the surrounding neighborhood less appealing to would-be residents - bad news for the new residential developments slated for Brooklyn.
It could be argued that even if walkability will spur residential growth, traffic flow should be the city's first priority in commercial areas such as the northern part of Riverside Avenue. Since most commuters drive to work, anything that makes commuting faster for business.
But a look near downtown Jacksonville [shows that] vehicle-first street design and prosperity do not always go together.
The relatively narrow streets near City Hall and the new library have begun to attract residential development and are also thriving during work hours, while the wider, more auto-oriented streets further west are wastelands 24 hours a day.
[It follows that] Maybe a downtown neighborhood unfriendly to pedestrians will, in the long run, have difficulty competing for businesses.
So the next time the city wants to promote a downtown neighborhood, maybe it should make the streets narrower instead of wider, perhaps by widening sidewalks and medians, and by planting more trees to create additional shade for pedestrians.
Michael Lewyn teaches at Florida Coastal School of Law.
