Features

I spent four hours at the City Council meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 18, enjoying watching democracy in action. The issue was the reconfiguration of Marin Avenue, which I oppose. 

It seemed generally accepted that about 20,000 cars use Marin each day, that it takes at least two minutes to drive from The Alameda to San Pablo under average conditions, and that under the reconfiguration it would take 30 seconds (or more) longer. The city planners used a longer time for the possible delay, so I will use 36 seconds to make the arithmetic easier. 

Thus, what follows is data provided by Albany on their web site and the figures I heard from the Berkeley city planners, plus simple arithmetic and reasoning. 

If 20,000 drivers are delayed 36 seconds each, that is 12,000 minutes or 200 hours per day. 200 hours per day! 

This will surely increase air pollution significantly, especially to the residents along Marin. We heard a few speakers say that traffic will be smoother, thereby causing less pollution. Is that believable? During peak hours, with some congestion, the pollution and fuel efficiency is at its worst. 

Going hand in hand with the increased pollution is the reduced fuel efficiency of more stop-and-go traffic together with the extra fuel burned with an extra 200 hours of driving per day. 

Early on Tuesday night we heard from the Kyoto group who were praising the City Council for making Berkeley the first U.S. city to endorse the Kyoto agreements. They spoke of global warming as the most serious threat we are facing (amended to one of the most serious threats). I’m pleased to see the City Council endorsement. But those are just words. When it comes to deeds, increasing driving time on Marin by 25 percent is going in the opposite direction to the goals of Kyoto. Imagine how pleased we’d be if the Bush administration mandated a 25 percent increase in fuel efficiency for cars. Well, narrowing Marin goes 25 percent in the opposite direction. How do we have any moral claim to be Kyoto backers when we reduce fuel efficiency on Marin by 25 percent? 

Another point is the cost to drivers. As many speakers said, what’s the big deal if a driver has to spend a minute longer on Marin, if that saves lives. Put that way, who could refuse. 

But the way to understand the cost to drivers is to add them up. 200 hours can be valued in various ways. We can value driver’s time at $20/hour ($40,000/year, not so far from what the average driver earns, many of whom are on their way to or from work). At $20/hour, 200 hours gives $4,000 per day or one million dollars per year! For each driver, it is only $50/year. In one sense, that is not so much. On the other hand, how do the tax payers react to a request for a $50 increase in taxes? What does one million dollars mean in the context of the Berkeley or Albany city budget? 

Well, no speaker at the Tuesday meeting talked in these terms; it all about safety and how things will affect the street on which one lives. So, let’s talk about safety. 

The reconfiguration may or may not make Marin safer. During off peak hours it is not clear why traffic will be slower, but because it is in a single lane rather than two, when a traffic light turns green there will be a longer group of cars pulling away from the light (rather than doubled up) and hence a pedestrian will be less likely to find a break between cars when trying to cross at a corner without a light. 

During peak hours traffic will be slowed if there is more congestion, and I find it hard to believe things will be safer for pedestrians if there is more congestion. 

But a good idea, often used in England, is to have flashing lights which go on when a pedestrian pushes a button in order to cross the street. The flashing lights may be on posts on both sides of the crossing and in the middle, or they may be flashing lights along the crosswalk.  

We are about to spend tens of thousands of dollars, but why hasn’t an experiment been done first? Traffic cones can be put out to narrow Marin to two lanes. We can get a pretty good idea of what will happen within a few days. 

Summing up, I believe that we have now embarked on a costly decision, contrary to environmental concerns, in the hopes of improving life for Marin residents and pedestrians when there are better ways to achieve those goals. I heard almost none of the issues I have raised discussed by the public or the city planners, who are supposed to be the experts on transportation issues. 

Rob Kirby is a Berkeley resident.o