#41 Times Change, People Change, Transportation Needs Change - LaPlante

Committing a Lifetime to Active TransportationProWalk/ProBike Presentation Long Beach, California September 12, 2013 John LaPlante, PE, PTOE Director of Traffic Engineering T.Y. Lin International, Inc. jlaplante@tylin.com

In the beginning… There were bikes … and people walking

So how did we end up here?

Common Traffic Engineering Myths• Slower speeds reduce mobility and increase costs for all vehicles• Speed limits should be set at the 85th percentile speed• Required to design to Level of Service C for the peak half hour 20 years hence• Federal highway standards and guidelines require wide lanes• Spending for Complete Streets is a luxury we cannot afford

Defining Mobility • Typical experience: – 45 mph speed – 2 min wait at signal

Defining Mobility• Viable alternative: – 2-way progression set for 30 mph

Benefit/Cost Analysis• Reducing speed from 45 mph to 30 mph – For a 5-mile trip, a 3.33-minute delay – Assume 30,000 ADT and $20/hr driver cost – $12.154 million in loss to economy, right?• Wrong! – Delay for each person is still 3.33 minutes – Less time than their daily stop for Starbucks• Community benefit – Slower operating speeds – Safer and more comfortable ped crossings

Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context Sensitive Approach ITE New Recommended PracticeSets target speed (desirable operating speed) as the most important design element

Speed Affects Crash Avoidance High speeds equate to greater reaction and stopping distance How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan – Engineering 7-12

Speed Affects Crash Severity High speeds lead to greater chance of serious injury & death

What about the 85th Percentile?• The 85th percentile is the speed at which 85% of the drivers feel most comfortable driving• It has nothing to do with the comfort of pedestrians or bicyclists• It has nothing to do with safety• It is only based on the ease of writing tickets However, posting a lower speed limit does not slow cars down Only designing the street for the target speed can achieve that goal

Roadway Capacity Analysis• Designing to LOS C for peak hour means: – Unnecessary pavement, waste of tax dollars – Increased ped crossing times, thus reducing vehicular movement times – Increased operating speeds for other 22 hours ALWAYS design urban roadways to LOS D

Will traffic volumes always increase? Maybe not 3,300Annual Vehicle-Miles (Billions) 3,100 2,900 2,700 2,500 2,300 2,100 1,900 1,700 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Since 2005 US VMT has been flat 17

Nothing in Complete StreetsConflicts with National Guidelines AASHTO: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ITE: Institute of Transportation Engineers

Costs of Retrofitting Urban Arterials to Complete Streets• Requires arterial traffic calming/taming: 1. Controlling operating speeds 2. Ped-friendly street crossings • Geometric issues • Signal considerations

Costs to Control Operating Speeds• Design to D LOS• Signal progression• Narrower travel lanes• Road diets• Raised medians and landscaping• Retain curb parking

Costs to Control Operating Speeds• Design to D LOS – Less pavement = less cost

Costs to Control Operating Speeds• Design to D LOS – Less pavement = less cost• Signal progression – Cost to interconnect

Narrower Travel LanesNews Flash! 10 and 11-foot lanes are just as safe as 12-foot lanes on urban arterials with posted speeds less than 45 mph

Costs to Control Operating Speeds• Design to D LOS – Less pavement = less cost• Signal progression – Cost to interconnect• Narrower travel lanes – Less pavement = less cost

Effect of Converting 4-LaneRoads to 3-Lane and TWLTL “Classic Road Diet” 29% reduction in total crashes/mile

Handles 20,000 ADT25000200001500010000 5000 0 Dolores Guerrero Valencia Mission S. Van Ness 1998 – before Valencia Road Diet 2000 - after Valencia Road Diet Mission District, San Francisco North-South ADT 29

Costs to Control Operating Speeds• Design to D LOS – Less pavement = less cost• Signal progression – Cost to interconnect• Narrower travel lanes – Less pavement = less cost• Road diets – Install with resurfacing, no additional cost

Raised Medians Continuous raised median40% reduction in pedestrian crashes

Median/Parkway Landscaping

Costs to Control Operating Speeds• Design to D LOS – Less pavement = less cost• Signal progression – Cost to interconnect• Narrower travel lanes – Less pavement = less cost• Road diets – Install with resurfacing, no additional cost• Raised medians and landscaping – With roadway reconstruction

Retain Curb Parking Eliminating on-street parking encourages cars to go faster anddiscourages neighborhood business

Costs to Control Operating Speeds• Design to D LOS – Less pavement = less cost• Signal progression – Cost to interconnect• Narrower travel lanes – Less pavement = less cost• Road diets – Install with resurfacing, no additional cost• Raised medians and landscaping – With roadway reconstruction• Retain curb parking – No cost, parking meter revenue

Pedestrian Friendly Geometrics• Tighten corner curb radii• Corner “pork chop” islands• Eliminate free flow right turn lanes• Curb bulb-outs

Effect of large radius on drivers They drive fast, ignoring pedestrians

Tighten Corner Curb RadiiLarge corner radii: •Increase crossing distance •Longer signal time

Pedestrian Friendly Geometrics• Tighten corner curb radii – With roadway reconstruction

Corner “Pork Chop” IslandsBenefits:• Separate conflicts & decision points• Reduce crossing distance• Improve signal timing• Reduce ped crashes (29%)

Pedestrian Friendly Geometrics• Tighten corner curb radii – With roadway reconstruction• Corner “pork chop” islands – With roadway reconstruction

Free Flow Right Turn Lanes Avoid free-flow movements… … they are difficultflow turns across Eliminate free for pedestrians to cross crosswalks/bikewaysAsheville NC Designing Streets for Pedestrian Safety – Interchanges & roundabouts 7-10

Free Flow Right Turn Lanes Eliminate free flow turns across crosswalks/bikeways

Pedestrian Friendly Geometrics• Tighten corner curb radii – With roadway reconstruction• Corner “pork chop” islands – With roadway reconstruction• Eliminate free flow right turn lanes – With ramp reconstruction

Curb Bulb-outs Reduce crossing distance Improve sight distance and sight lines Prevent encroachment by parked cars Create space for curb ramps and landings

Pedestrian Friendly Geometrics• Tighten corner curb radii – With roadway reconstruction• Corner “pork chop” islands – With roadway reconstruction• Eliminate free flow right turn lanes – With ramp reconstruction• Curb bulb-outs – With roadway reconstruction and on-street parking

Pedestrian Signal Considerations• Time signals for 3.5 ft/sec walking speed• Countdown clocks• Ped actuated HAWK signals• Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon

Pedestrian signal timing Recent studies found that previous 4.0 fps walking speed based on average walking speeds (not 15th percentile) 2009 MUTCD now recommends using a pedestrian walking speed of 3.5 fps for FDW and 3.0 fps for overall WALK phase

Pedestrian Signal Considerations• Time signals for 3.5 ft/sec walking speed – Signal maintenance

Effective Communications50% of pedestrians in theU.S. do not understandthat “Flashing Don’t Walk”really means it is OK tocontinue walkingSo we put signs like this to“correct” the problem

Countdown ClocksPedestrian count-down signal tells pedestrians how much crossing time is left

Countdown Clocks Results from San Francisco:25% Crash Reduction Factor after countdown signals installed

Pedestrian Signal Considerations• Time signals for 3.5 ft/sec walking speed – Signal maintenance• Countdown clocks – Can be added for roughly $2,000/intersection

HAWK Pedestrian Hybrid SignalHAWK (High Intensity Activated Crosswalk) Also in 2009 MUTCD

DriversseeBeaconPeds seePedhead

Excerpts from MUTCD Chapter 4F For Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons• The CROSSWALK STOP ON RED sign shall be used• There are Guidelines (similar to signal warrants) for Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons – variables include: – Pedestrian volume 500 – Traffic speeds Major Street - Pedestrians Per Hour Speeds exceeds 35 mph Total of ALL Pedestrian Crossing – Traffic volumes 400 Curves – Crosswalk length 300 based on (PPH) length 200 (see below) Signal warrant 100 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - Vehicles Per Hour (VPH) 34 50 72 100 Signal Warrant Minimum Pedestrian

Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon Effectiveness

Pedestrian Signal Considerations• Time signals for 3.5 ft/sec walking speed – Signal maintenance• Countdown clocks – Can be added for roughly $2,000/intersection• Ped actuated HAWK signals – Half the cost of standard ped signal; lower warrant

Rectangular Rapid Flash LED Beacon►Beacon is yellow, rectangular, and has a rapid “stutter” flash►Beacon located between the warning sign and the arrow plaque►Must be pedestrian activated (pushbutton or passive)►Studies indicate motorist yielding rates increased from 18.2% to 81.2% for 2 beacons and to 87.8% for 4 beacons►Interim approval from FHWA in July 2008

Pedestrian Signal Considerations• Time signals for 3.5 ft/sec walking speed – Signal maintenance• Countdown clocks – Can be added for roughly $2,000/intersection• Ped actuated HAWK signals – Half the cost of standard ped signal; lower warrant• Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon - $20K and no specific warrant

Common Traffic Engineering Myths• Slower speeds reduce mobility and increase costs for all vehicles• Speed limits should be set at the 85th percentile speed• Required to design to Level of Service C for the peak half hour 20 years hence• Federal highway standards and guidelines require wide lanes• Spending for Complete Streets is a luxury we cannot afford ALL MYTHS!

Common Nonmotorized Myths• Bikes and pedestrians are alternative transportation modes• Bikes should only be on low stress facilities• Bike boxes are an answer• Cycle tracks are the ultimate answer• Cars are the enemy!

Designating peds and bikes as “alternative transportation” is like calling women alternative men Mark Fenton

Auto-oriented street: High stress

Bicyclist CharacteristicsFour Bicyclist Types*• Strong & Fearless <1% • Enthused & Confident 7% • Interested but Concerned 60% (Includes children) • No Way, No How 33% * Roger Geller, Portland, OR

Levels of Traffic Stress (LTS)• LTS 1: Suitable for almost all cyclists, including children trained to safely cross intersections (paths, low volume streets).• LTS 2: Suitable to most adult cyclists but demanding more attention than expected from children (bike lanes, sharrows).• LTS 3: More traffic stress than LTS 2, but less stress than integrating with multilane traffic (bike lanes/sharrows on arterials).• LTS 4: Strong and fearless. Source: Mekuria, Furth & Nixon- “Low-Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity” – Mineta Transportation Institute, May 2012

Sidewalks are Low StressIt’s okay for young kids to ride on sidewalks

An adult bicyclist on a sidewalk is not a good sign

A cyclist on a sidewalk interferes with pedestrians

A cyclist on a sidewalk places himself at risk

Especially when riding against traffic!

RELATIVE DANGER INDEX Of various types of facilities• Major Streets w/o bike lanes 1.28• Minor Streets w/o bike lanes 1.04*• Streets with bike lanes 0.5• Mixed-use paths 0.67• Sidewalks 5.32(* = shared roadway) 1.00 = medianSource: William Moritz, U.W. - “Accident Rates for Various BicycleFacilities” - based on 2374 riders, 4.4 million miles

Provide space on streets …

 Bike lanes most appropriate on urban thoroughfares They get you from one part of town to another efficiently Intersections stop or signal controlled No point in striping local streets with bike lanes

Advantages of Bike Lanes Can be low stress when wide on low speed roads Provide access to major destinations on arterials Guide bicyclists into safer behaviors More visible bicyclists improves motorist behaviors Disadvantages of Bike Lanes Most bike lanes on arterial streets are LTS 3 or 4 Often not enough street width (even with 10-foot travel lanes) May require stripping parking (NEVER a good idea)

Bike Box

Colored Bike Lane & Bike Box

Advantages of Bike Boxes Allows bicyclists to go before motor vehicles at signalized intersections More visible bicyclists improves motorist behaviors Bicyclists think they are wonderful Disadvantages of Bike Boxes Requires lots of bicycles to gain motorist compliance Onset of green can lead to blind right turn hooks of bicyclists approaching from behind Crash record is mixed, no good data available as of this time Not in AASHTO Bike Guide or MUTCD

Merging Bicyclists & RightTurners Still a Better Idea

Cycle TracksMidblock (LTS 1)

Cycle Tracks (LTS 1) Except at intersectionsWhere a bike signal is required

Cycle Tracks (LTS 1) Except at intersectionsOr a combined bike/right turn lane

Cycle Tracks (LTS 1) Except at intersectionsOr special markings through the conflict area

Advantages of Cycle Tracks Very low stress midblock Encourages bike riding, thereby increasing overall conspicuity and crash rate reductions Disadvantages of Cycle Tracks Requires special intersection treatments (signals, prohibit vehicular right turns or merged right turns) Not appropriate on streets with driveways Takes more room (removal of travel or parking lane) More costly than traditional bike lanes Not in AASHTO Bike Guide or MUTCD

Bikes Belong“All roads, streets and highways, except those where bicyclists are legally prohibited, should be designed and constructed under the assumption that they will be used by bicyclists.” AASHTO

Bikes Belong“Therefore, bicyclist’sneeds should beconsidered in allphases oftransportationplanning, design,construction.,maintenance, andoperations.” AASHTO

Cars Also BelongWide Bike Lane/Low Speed (LTS 1)

Cars Also Belong5-foot Bike Lane/30 mph (LTS 2)

Cars Also Belong!

H.G. Wells: “When I see an adult on a bicycle, I realize there is hope for civilization.”

QUESTIONS? COMMENTS?CONCERNS?

#41 Times Change, People Change, Transportation Needs Change - LaPlante

by Project for Public Spaces & National Center for Biking and Walking on Oct 15, 2012

Accessibility

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Statistics

#41 Times Change, People Change, Transportation Needs Change - LaPlante Presentation Transcript