Andy I love this post, especially the cost comparisons; however, networks are only as good as their state and county #stroad crossings allow. We’ve got plenty of slow, low volume streets that are good candidates for N’Hood Greenways, but those crossings are deal-breakers for many people in the interested-but-concerned category. Appreciate your additional perspective on that.
Seattle has done all this and is doubling down to do more and more. Meanwhile, our car accidents and our pedestrian fatalities and our bicycle accidents and fatalities continue to rise. Meanwhile, our congestion and our pollution also continue to rise because, partly because cars are spending far longer in traffic due to the changes.
High traffic calming bumps have been applied to a major two-lane thoroughfare that runs about 2 miles from the shopping neighborhood (with a major grocery store) to where I live. I am now seeing traffic backed up a mile at rush-hour and I sometimes end up going 10 mph because the bumps are so steep and so close to each other. Bicycles almost never used this road because there are speed bumps and a dedicated bike lane one block over. When they insist on using this road, it adds another 20 minutes to the commute because there is no shoulder and so you must either go at the speed of the cyclist or go into the left lane to pass them.
If you put a bus on a road like this with only two lanes each time the bus stops it also backs up traffic. On the one major north end east west thoroughfare, which was four lanes, we now have a 3-lane road with a center turn lane and bike lanes and the commute is 25 minutes longer. No one has seen a bicycle on this street in 20 years. Bike lanes were put in on a portion of this road well over 10 years ago and and it was already clear that bicycles don’t want to go on the street as they were always empty. But the bike lane fanaticism prevailed.
A piece that has been left out of the traffic accident story is the public safety element. During pandemic, we lost 400 state patrol and 300+ police within the city limits who used to enforce traffic laws. It has been well known in Seattle since 2020 that you can do anything you want and you will not get a ticket. I think cities are unique and that one size fits all solutions are not the one size fits all solution!
This makes so much sense to me! But. Having sat through a bunch of local debates on exactly this type of thing (which I've been reporting on icymi), I know what our engineers will say: "Dilineators are bad because have to maintain them, and our snowplows willl hit them, which is annoying and expensive for us. But people will *feel* safer using dilineator-protected lanes and will bicycle more, which is bad, because posts aren't real protection, so if someone hits them, we get sued. Whereas if we do nothing at all nobody sues us even though it's dangerous as hell. Because the danger keeps everyone from even trying. So everyone stays in their cars, the way we like it." (OK, they'd put it a little differently, I am peering into their brains. I have been listening to them a lot.)
As I've been writing increasingly about how CYA dominates road safety (fear of lawsuits is the guiding principle, not fear of death/injury) I wonder how we get past this. Any ideas?
Great post Andy. These kinds of upgrades may not be the most pretty but they are lighting fast and they work. I recently posted about my neighborhood facing this trade off and getting lost in the pursuit of perfection. In the meantime we are stuck with the status quo. Sometimes good enough is good enough!
The use of cast-in-place concrete increases costs and especially construction time. Do you understand why the USA avoids using it for traffic control?
I understand the Dutch precast companies have roundabout fixtures in stock and can bolt them in place in a short time (and in contrast to month-long disruption to use cast concrete). Granted, precast might be more fragile, but then it’s easy to bolt in a replacement.
With protected bike lane dividers, could parking bump stops be used to quickly and cheaply separate the vehicles from people bicycling?
Precast is just as strong as CIP. Same exact material, just made off site. Difference is you get manufacturing efficiencies and economies of scale, etc. It js the perfect application for these kind of road improvements: bike lane dividers, daylighting bollards, etc. We can complete transform a full street in a single shift!
Thanks. I agree it should work as well. Its ability to withstand impact should just be a function of the reinforcement, which we can control. A traffic engineer (whom I respect) told me federal requirements don’t allow precast on streets. But I have no stronger evidence.
Is precast used in the applications you list? With federal funding?
I have never heard of that restriction either. Perhaps it has to do with anchoring structures to the ground, but that can be solved by mechanically anchoring or closure pours. Again, functionally there is no difference.
The majority of street “accessories” are already precast: utility manholes, light and signal pole foundation, catch basins, crowd control bollards used by most police departments. To Andy’s point, we don’t have to wait to rebuild the whole street. We can make expensive foundational changes with simple street level upgrades. This is not an engineering problem.
***Shameless Plug* **I have used precast for all sorts of non traditional ways and have written about it. Happy to go down that rabbit hole with you.
Andy I love this post, especially the cost comparisons; however, networks are only as good as their state and county #stroad crossings allow. We’ve got plenty of slow, low volume streets that are good candidates for N’Hood Greenways, but those crossings are deal-breakers for many people in the interested-but-concerned category. Appreciate your additional perspective on that.
Seattle has done all this and is doubling down to do more and more. Meanwhile, our car accidents and our pedestrian fatalities and our bicycle accidents and fatalities continue to rise. Meanwhile, our congestion and our pollution also continue to rise because, partly because cars are spending far longer in traffic due to the changes.
High traffic calming bumps have been applied to a major two-lane thoroughfare that runs about 2 miles from the shopping neighborhood (with a major grocery store) to where I live. I am now seeing traffic backed up a mile at rush-hour and I sometimes end up going 10 mph because the bumps are so steep and so close to each other. Bicycles almost never used this road because there are speed bumps and a dedicated bike lane one block over. When they insist on using this road, it adds another 20 minutes to the commute because there is no shoulder and so you must either go at the speed of the cyclist or go into the left lane to pass them.
If you put a bus on a road like this with only two lanes each time the bus stops it also backs up traffic. On the one major north end east west thoroughfare, which was four lanes, we now have a 3-lane road with a center turn lane and bike lanes and the commute is 25 minutes longer. No one has seen a bicycle on this street in 20 years. Bike lanes were put in on a portion of this road well over 10 years ago and and it was already clear that bicycles don’t want to go on the street as they were always empty. But the bike lane fanaticism prevailed.
A piece that has been left out of the traffic accident story is the public safety element. During pandemic, we lost 400 state patrol and 300+ police within the city limits who used to enforce traffic laws. It has been well known in Seattle since 2020 that you can do anything you want and you will not get a ticket. I think cities are unique and that one size fits all solutions are not the one size fits all solution!
https://www.kuow.org/stories/seattle-s-traffic-deaths-are-climbing-one-city-council-member-wants-an-audit-to-find-out-why
This makes so much sense to me! But. Having sat through a bunch of local debates on exactly this type of thing (which I've been reporting on icymi), I know what our engineers will say: "Dilineators are bad because have to maintain them, and our snowplows willl hit them, which is annoying and expensive for us. But people will *feel* safer using dilineator-protected lanes and will bicycle more, which is bad, because posts aren't real protection, so if someone hits them, we get sued. Whereas if we do nothing at all nobody sues us even though it's dangerous as hell. Because the danger keeps everyone from even trying. So everyone stays in their cars, the way we like it." (OK, they'd put it a little differently, I am peering into their brains. I have been listening to them a lot.)
As I've been writing increasingly about how CYA dominates road safety (fear of lawsuits is the guiding principle, not fear of death/injury) I wonder how we get past this. Any ideas?
Great post Andy. These kinds of upgrades may not be the most pretty but they are lighting fast and they work. I recently posted about my neighborhood facing this trade off and getting lost in the pursuit of perfection. In the meantime we are stuck with the status quo. Sometimes good enough is good enough!
https://aaronshavel.substack.com/p/sometimes-good-enough-is-good-enough?r=2lhx1h&utm_medium=ios
The use of cast-in-place concrete increases costs and especially construction time. Do you understand why the USA avoids using it for traffic control?
I understand the Dutch precast companies have roundabout fixtures in stock and can bolt them in place in a short time (and in contrast to month-long disruption to use cast concrete). Granted, precast might be more fragile, but then it’s easy to bolt in a replacement.
With protected bike lane dividers, could parking bump stops be used to quickly and cheaply separate the vehicles from people bicycling?
Precast is just as strong as CIP. Same exact material, just made off site. Difference is you get manufacturing efficiencies and economies of scale, etc. It js the perfect application for these kind of road improvements: bike lane dividers, daylighting bollards, etc. We can complete transform a full street in a single shift!
Thanks. I agree it should work as well. Its ability to withstand impact should just be a function of the reinforcement, which we can control. A traffic engineer (whom I respect) told me federal requirements don’t allow precast on streets. But I have no stronger evidence.
Is precast used in the applications you list? With federal funding?
I have never heard of that restriction either. Perhaps it has to do with anchoring structures to the ground, but that can be solved by mechanically anchoring or closure pours. Again, functionally there is no difference.
The majority of street “accessories” are already precast: utility manholes, light and signal pole foundation, catch basins, crowd control bollards used by most police departments. To Andy’s point, we don’t have to wait to rebuild the whole street. We can make expensive foundational changes with simple street level upgrades. This is not an engineering problem.
***Shameless Plug* **I have used precast for all sorts of non traditional ways and have written about it. Happy to go down that rabbit hole with you.
Budget($) P&F City Blocks $/city block
50,000 15–20 2500 - 3333
200,000 50 4000
1,000,000 300–500 2000 - 3333
That seems a little odd.