Stand by:

The future is coming…

 Marty Paul
Earl
Jon

Dale

Dan’s

Arm
The Pedestrian in America has been marginalized
compromised to Death
What is the Purpose of Cities?
 Reframing Key Transportation Conventions
DESIGN TRAFFIC - Interpreting the Results

Capacity of Streets
Sustainable Transportation is about meeting present
transportation needs without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their needs.”

The concept of sustainable transportation is a reaction to things

that have gone radically and visibly wrong with current
transportation and land use policy, practice and performance
over the last half of the twentieth century. In particular
unsustainable transportation consumes more energy and creates
pollution and declining service levels despite increasing
investments.

It delivers poor service for specific social and economic groups.

It reduces happiness. It raises the cost of personal transportation
to 20% of a family budget and takes time away from family time
and ties. Indirectly, it increases health care to 15-20%
The World Has Changed.
Former Highway Agencies that see their
job as moving cars and tonnage …
cannot build the next economy. The
next economy requires that “place” be
emphasized over speed and volume.
The streets of our cities and towns ought to be for everyone, whether young or
old, motorist or bicyclist, walker or wheelchair user, bus rider or shopkeeper.
But too many of our streets are designed only for speeding cars, or worse,
creeping traffic jams. They’re unsafe for people on foot or bike — and
unpleasant for everybody.

With disincentives like

this, is there any reason
to expect people to
switch from driving to
walking, bicycling or
transit?

Seamless, integrated,
balanced transportation
systems requires equal
consideration for every
mode.
 More
More Lanes

Pavement
Conventional Approach

More Roads
More Cars

System
Management

More ITS

Capacity
Car-Carrying
 A Balanced Transportation Approach

More Roads
More Lanes

Management
Transit

System
Bicycling

ITS
Walking
HOV/HOT Lanes

More Car- User View and Comfort

More
Carrying Context-Sensitive Design
Pavement

e l
Capacity

av
Traffic Calming

Tr
s Personal Security

of
ar

y
tC

lit
ua
Intensify land use densities
No
Conventional Approach

Promote Mixed Use Development

le,

es
as
More Cars

il Transit Supportive Development

op

rM
e

e
cr

ew
Pe

Demand Management – Pricing,

In

,F e-commerce, telecommuting,
ple
ve

o etc…
Pe
Mo

es s
v eL
Mo
Shift Policy Lane Limits
Change Standards
Lateral Approach
Why do we
need public
places?
Not Walkable Walkable

High Car Dependency Low Car Dependency

Serious Congestion Moderate Congestion
Smart Streets
form highly-connected
networks of complete
streets.

Street connectivity and

sidewalk completeness
are correlated with
lower average vehicle
use per
person as well as
dispersed vehicle loads
that decrease
congestion and
improve safety.
Smart Streets
are right sized for their place an
mission, and not built to a model that
does not take in the values of the people
who will live, work and shop there.

Narrow streets help create comfortable

settings for walking, gathering, and
lingering, especially in neighborhoods
and shopping districts. They often work
within a larger network that provides a
framework of higher-speed streets that
offer connectivity to regional
destinations.

With regard to ecological aims, right-

sizing means limiting impervious
surfaces and potentially “freeing” right
of way space that can do double duty by
functioning to buffer roadside activity
and travel lanes while also introducing
ecological functions in the street space.
Smart Streets
are designed and managed
with speeds and intersections
appropriate to context. To
advance walkability and
compact development
patterns, smart
growth street designs manage Grandview Drive, University Place, Washington

speed and intersection

operations to advance overall
community objectives. “A” Avenue, Lake Oswego, Oregon

Grandview Drive (Collector) above, and “A”

Avenue (Arterial) below are examples of
Complete Streets that greatly improved land
values, safety. Changes helped stabilize tax
revenues to keep streets well maintained and
attractive. In both examples walking and
bicycling increased over 1200%
Above Where would you rather walk? Where would you rather bike? Which is the safest place to bike?
Or
Below Where would you rather drive? Where would you rather live? Which is the safest place to drive?
MAIN STREET DEVELOPMENT

30 mph
speed zone

25 mph
speed zone

45 mph
speed zone
Every blizzard proves motorists prefer two lane roads
Indeed they place medians and edge buffers on 4-lane roads when they get to design them (before
snow plows arrive). So why not convert to 2-3 lanes, when conditions allow?
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Former 4-Lane Road

Multiple Benefits: More green Higher property values

Lower speeds Reduced crashes More bike lanes

Lower noise Safer crossings Increased beauty

Lower pollution More parking More friendly

 Road Diets and Road Sizing

Pedestrian crash risk increases with number of

travel lanes and speed.
• Reducing the number of travel lanes reduces
risk, and makes it easier to cross the street
• Reducing non-essential lanes frees space for
higher & better use
• Streets exist 24/7; peak traffic may be a
concern for as little as 30 minutes a day

Designing for
Pedestrian Safety –
California Street, Mountain View, California
 
Motorist: Safety 25- 40% improvement
Traffic moves with greater uniformity
Compact intersections more efficient
Greater cost savings
Turns are easier
Senior friendly (as motorists)

Others:
Senior friendly (as pedestrians)
Supports transit, walking and bicycling
Emergency response friendly
Increased property values (and tax base)
Community economic develeopment
Speed reductions of 3-
Hartford,
7 mph are common
Orlando, Florida
 Before After

 Most speeds dropped to 20 mph

 Motorists do not drive in gutter pan

 75% of costs charged to adjacent property owners

 Increased property values

As we age our walking speed will slow
This woman took twice as long to get into the street as the younger people. Once in
the street it took her three times as long to get to the far side.
Olympia, Washington (School Crossing) – Former 4-lane
A Quality Crossing
D
C Quality
Quality Crossing
Crossing

20, 000 ADT

77 feet 25 feet
6 seconds
22 seconds 10-12 feet
3 seconds

If the Beatles would have tried to

cross this road, rather than Abby
Road, would we have been able to
hear their music?
Valley Boulevard at Monterey El InIn3622 seconds
seconds at at
3030
mphmph a motorist
a motorist travels
travels 264
132968 feet
feet (.9
(.4
Monte, California (3.1 football
football fields) fields)
 1800 vehicles
per hour
per lane
1 vehicles per hour
Per lane

Road
Diets
 10 Feet

Olive Avenue, West Palm Beach, Florida – Former 3-lane, One-Way Ten foot travel lanes
 20 Feet

Olive Avenue, West Palm Beach, Florida – Former 3-lane, One-Way Ten foot travel lanes
Greenville, South Carolina
Art Walk Master

Doug Rice
With
Median adopter, Arnie
University Avenue
 



Designing for
Pedestrian Safety –
      
 
    

Designing for
Pedestrian Safety –
3 crash types can be reduced by going
from 4 to 3 lanes: 1 – rear enders

Designing for
Pedestrian Safety –
3 crash types can be reduced by going
from 4 to 3 lanes: 2 – side swipes

Designing for
Pedestrian Safety –
3 crash types can be reduced by going
from 4 to 3 lanes: 3 – left turn/broadside

Designing for
Pedestrian Safety –
     
  
• $589,000 project scheduled in FDOT 5-year work plan
• FDOT open to 3-lane option if City takes over jurisdiction
• Changes must be accepted by neighborhood and business associations;
before/after studies

Before Concept
Designing for
Pedestrian Safety –
    
14.0
12.6
12.0
34% Reduction
Crash Rate (per MVM)

10.0
8.4
8.0

6.0
1 crash every 1 crash every
4.0 2.5 days 4.2 days
(146 per yr) (87 per yr)
2.0

0.0
Before After

Designing for
Pedestrian Safety –
Before/after studies: 2. Injury rate
4.0
3.6
3.5

3.0
Injury Rate (per MVM)

68% Reduction
2.5

2.0
1 injury every
1.5
9 days 1.2
1.0
(41 per yr) 1 injury every
30 days
0.5
(12 per yr)
0.0
Before After

Designing for
Pedestrian Safety –
Before/after studies: 3. Speeding analysis
Percent of Vehicles Traveling over 36 MPH 35.0%
29.5%
30.0%

25.0%
19.6%
20.0%
15.7%
15.0%
9.8% 8.9%
10.0% 7.5%
5.0%

0.0%
Before After Before After Before After
North End Middle South End

Designing for
Pedestrian Safety –
    

25,000
20,500
20,000 18,100
Vehicles per Day

15,000

10,000 Now
21,000+
5,000

0
Before After

Designing for
Pedestrian Safety –
Before/after studies: 5. On-street parking utilization

45%
41%
Parking Utilization Percentage

40%
35%
30% 29%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Before After

Designing for
Pedestrian Safety –
Before/after studies: 6. Pedestrian volumes

3000
23% Increase
2,632
2500
Number of Pedestrians

2,136
2000

1500

1000

500

0
Before After

Designing for
Pedestrian Safety –
Before/after studies: 7. Bicyclist volumes

600
30% Increase 486
500
Number of Bicycles

400
375

300

200

100

0
Before After

Designing for
Pedestrian Safety –
Before/after studies: Evaluation matrix

Designing for Also: Noise levels went down…

Pedestrian Safety –
1. Which road carries more traffic?
1. Which road produces the higher speed?
• With a 4-lane road a fast driver can pass others
• With a 2-lane road the slower driver sets the speed
2. Which road produces the higher crash rate?
3. Which is better for bicyclists, pedestrians, businesses?

San Antonio TX
 Road Diet CRF: 29% overall

San Antonio TX
     
   

  
   “  ” 
      
  
    
         

    “    ” 
  

Designing for
Pedestrian Safety –
 
 
3 crash types can be reduced by going
from 4 to 3 lanes: 1 – rear enders

   – 
3 crash types can be reduced by going
from 4 to 3 lanes: 2 – side swipes

   – 
3 crash types can be reduced by going
from 4 to 3 lanes: 3 – left turn/broadside

   – 
This: One less travel lane; bike lanes; parallel to back-
This 5-lane Main Street was converted to…
in diagonal parking on one side; new pavement
Pottstown PA
This area was recaptured from a 4th travel lane;
the street took on a whole new life

Portland OR
On-street parking Median
Bike lanes

Center turn-lane
Reclaimed road space creates room for many uses

Seattle, WA
 78 Feet

La Jolla Boulevard, Bird Rock, San Diego, California (Five to two lane conversion, before). Four
signals and one four-way stop being removed. Back-in Angled parking to be added. (23,000 ADT)
    
 
 
Roadway Date ADT ADT Collision
Location Change Before After Reduction
Greenwood Ave N 24 to 10
Apr-95 11872 12427
N 80th St to N 50th 58%
N 45th Street 45 to 23
Dec-72 19421 20274
Wallingford Area 49%
8th Ave NW 18 to 7
Jan-94 10549 11858
Ballard Area 61%
Martin Luther King Jr W 15 to 6
Jan-94 12336 13161
North of I 90 60%
Dexter Ave N 19 to 16
Jun-91 13606 14949
Queen Ann Area 59%
24th Ave NW 14 to 10
Oct-95 9727 9754
NW 85th to NW 65th 28%
Lake Washington Boulevard
 78
Feet

La Jolla Boulevard, Bird Rock, San Diego, California (Five to two lane conversion, before). Four
signals and one four-way stop being removed. Back-in Angled parking to be added. (23,000 ADT)
 14 Feet

La Jolla Boulevard, Bird Rock, San Diego, California

Olive Avenue, West Palm Beach, Florida Five to Two lane conversion
Olive Avenue, West Palm Beach, Florida
 9 Feet

Olive Avenue, West Palm Beach, Florida

University Place, Washington
Four road diets in place
Atlantic Boulevard, Delray Beach, Florida
Abbott Road, E. Lansing, Michigan
 12 Feet

5 Feet

Curb-to-Curb 17
feet 38 mph Natomas, Sacramento,
Grandview Drive , University Place, WA (33 mph Average Speed)
University Place,
Washington
10
Feet

University Place,
Washington
 The Cycle of Strip Development

INPUTS
•Auto Oriented Business OUTCOMES
•Wider Roads
•Single Use Zoning
•Induced Traffic
•Single Family Residential
•More Traffic

GROWTH

Land Use
Planning

Transportation
Planning
GROWTH

OUTCOMES INPUTS
•Isolated Neighborhoods •Traffic Demand
•Multiple Automobile Trips Forecasting
•Poor Mobility •Congestion
•Difficult Walking
      

INPUTS
•Diversity of Business
•Mixed Use Zoning
•Diversity of Residential Units
•Context Sensitive Solutions
•Community Involvement

Land Use Community Transportation

Planning Planning Planning

OUTCOMES OUTCOMES
•Healthy Neighborhoods •Increased Mobility
•Choices of Transportation •More Walking & Bicycling
•More Open Space •Increased Access
•Sense of Place GROWTH
•Sense of Community
San Diego, California