Traffic engineering claims another victim
Another DOT shrugs as another pedestrian is killed on their "technically correct" speedway.
Every parent needs to know Sharon Rearick's story.
One reason I'm so critical about the traffic engineering profession is that it's rare for a traffic engineer to look at this street and suggest (or even think of) traffic calming.
I read a story in The Philadelphia Inquirer that sent me on a Twitter rampage. Here’s the tl;dr recap:
In 2012, a man walking along the shoulder of a typical suburban-style road was killed by a driver. There was no sidewalk.
Sharon Rearick, the victim’s mother, asked the local township for a sidewalk so other pedestrians wouldn’t suffer the same fate as her son.
Township told her to talk to the state DOT. The state DOT sent her back to the Township. The runaround continued to the point where Rearick created a nonprofit to draw attention and raise money for sidewalks.
After two state politicians got involved to apply pressure, the DOT performed a study to see what on earth could be done. Traffic engineering wasn’t sure what to do, and wouldn’t have done anything at all without Rearick’s persistent badgering.
After 4 years, the state DOT agreed to build a sidewalk. But not by right-sizing the corridor. They acquired portions of yards from adjacent property owners, which took another 7 years.
A sidewalk was finally constructed along New Falls Road, which is still designed to encourage reckless driving.
Despite repeated pleas from grieving family members, concerned citizens, and even concrete evidence of the dangers posed by the road, “safety experts” turned a blind eye, ignoring the potential life-saving solution of implementing proven safety measures. “Proven” is a strong word, but that’s how the US Department of Transportation describes the safety benefits of right-sizing a corridor like New Falls Road.
5 car lanes and no pedestrian paths
John Rearick's death was a result of by-the-book traffic engineering and road design, and he wasn’t the first victim on this corridor. It turns out, 18 other pedestrians had been hit by drivers.
The absence of sidewalks forced pedestrians to walk perilously close to speeding vehicles, putting their lives at constant risk. And the presence of five car lanes encourages drivers to floor it. This road is treacherous if you’re not behind the wheel. The land use context is a neighborhood that’s begging for walkable connectivity.
Whose job is it anyway?
Sharon Rearick's tireless efforts to advocate for a sidewalk and traffic calming measures on New Falls Road should have been met with immediate action from the DOT. Instead, her pleas were met with bureaucratic runarounds and empty promises. It’s worse than offering thoughts and prayers, because she expected to the safety team to do safety work. The DOT's dismissive attitude is a blatant disregard for the very people they are meant to serve.
“If you really believe in something, you just can’t give up. There were so many times it was like, ‘Why am I doing this?’ My family was getting really frustrated with me, because this is all I would do. Even at work, I’d be looking up stuff on PennDOT.” Sharon Rearick, victim’s mother.
After enough external pressure was applied, senior management spoke as if safety isn’t the job of the safety division.
“Based on the crash data that we had along the corridor, we thought [installing a sidewalk] was a good safety improvement, since we had a need that needed to be addressed.” DOT senior manager for traffic engineering and safety division.
Statements like this are why I often rant that we should welcome the automation of traffic engineering and road design professions. Software will do what licensed engineers and certified planners refuse to do—develop safer street concepts.
Citizen activism
A grieving mother fought for 10 years to get a sidewalk installed, when the DOT could've right-sized the corridor ages ago. They didn't need to buy up parts of backyards to squeeze in an afterthought strip of concrete. There's plenty of public right-of-way, and it’s currently prioritizing dangerous driving behavior.
Rearick had to form a nonprofit (Sidewalks Are For Everyone) to do the DOT's job. This should infuriate anyone, and it's a familiar story among activists. DOTs don't think of traffic calming features, because those treatments slow down drivers. But that’s the whole point! In order to make neighborhood streets safer for pedestrians, you’ve got to calm down the drivers.
This guy is a former reporter and editor at the Boston University School of Public Health. He periodically jumps in my comments defending traffic engineers.
"Traffic engineers do what they're asked to do." That's a big part of the problem. Their routine is to avoid any curiosity about the problem, wait for orders, then follow orders. This in spite of the industry touting itself as a place for trained professionals who understand travel behavior and safety treatments.
In rare cases when a traffic engineer proposes something like right-sizing a street, it probably does look like magic to observers. “How’d he know a road diet would reduce crashes, that’s amazing!” There are mountains of data supporting traffic calming’s benefits. I, as a former traffic engineer, know it. The status quo doesn't care. As the Twitter commenter rightly said, traffic engineers wait for orders.
Right-sizing the road
New Falls Road is designed for speed, not connection or access. I’m sure you have multiple corridors just like it where you live. A road diet reduces the number of vehicle lanes, expanding the space available for pedestrians and cyclists. It doesn’t just sound like a good idea, it’s been proven effective for decades. The DOT failure to prioritize safety over convenience is status quo in this business. It’s negligence and/or incompetence.
You don't need a degree or license to do better work than many in transportation's expert class. Use free web tools like http://streetmix.net to illustrate what could be. In most state and local agencies, you can't trust the senior managers for traffic engineering and safety (or your local equivalent) to come up with ways to improve public safety. You’re going to have to be a citizen activist like Sharon Rearick.
A traffic engineer doesn't need crash data & volume data to sketch up a safer street design. A traffic engineer needs basic understanding of why this street
encourages speeding
doesn't fit neighborhood context
is hostile for walking
is hostile for cycling
Accountability in the office or in court
DOT negligence is normal, and this story is another that makes me think massive lawsuits are the only thing that'll hold traffic engineering and safety professionals accountable.
I don’t want my friends hauled into court cases, and I don’t love a litigious society. But the NSPE and AICP codes of ethics aren’t being enforced. The profession doesn’t reward intellectual curiosity. If it did, we’d see radical change in neighborhood streets. They wouldn’t be shrugging off 100 Americans dead in car traffic every day of the year.
Until wrongful death lawsuits spread across the country, the typical DOT attitude seems to be:
"If your child is killed on our dangerous road, we might conduct a study if you form a nonprofit, raise thousands of dollars, send hundreds of messages, attend dozens of meetings, and then remind us why we should care."
There are good traffic engineers out there. They exist in hiding or working at boutique firms or as solo artists. They attend events like NACTO’s Designing Cities Conference and the Congress for the New Urbanism. Even the lunatic fringe of traffic engineering will tell you it’s a nonsense profession.
It’s not easy, but we’ve got to be noisy about holding transportation experts accountable. This isn’t hyperbole, it’s a matter of life and death.
In our insulated professional class, no profession ever takes responsibility for its failures. Instead, they blame ordinary people. It’s easier that way, instead of being reflective and asking hard questions of ourselves. Also, it helps people keep good-paying jobs and contracts.
Traffic engineers and planners have designed dangerous environments for nearly 100 years. Instead of owning that, they blame users for reckless driving.
This is why change always comes from outside the professions, a la Jane Jacobs
If traffic engineers can only do what they’ve been asked to do, based on established inputs of data, then sounds like they’re begging to be automated! Look, if my job didn’t actually require any human agency or nuance, I wouldn’t be bragging about it on Twitter.