Our city hosted Dan Burden from Walkable Communities Inc last week. He did a short audit with our Parks & Rec people, the city engineer, and the "healthy Communities" group of our local hospital, then gave a debrief in the early afternoon followed by a public session in the evening.
Since on occasion I'm involved with our Parks and Rec, I got an invitation to the afternoon debrief, and was interested enough that I requested a kitchen pass of Mrs RedSHED so I could attend the evening session as well.
It was really interesting, and he presented some things that seem counterintuitive at first.
For example, you can flow more cars through a road at 30mph than you can at 40mph. In fact, at 40mph and 10mph average speeds you get the same number of cars through a section of road per hour (because at 40mph you need a lot more space between cars).
Another bit of data... In every case where lanes have widened past 11 feet for a non-freeway road, fatalities increase.
Also, for many roads, you can flow more cars through a 2 lane with an occasional center turn lane than you can a 4 lane. Part of that is that the limitations are at intersections, and stoplights have to be timed to allow people to walk across the intersection. It takes half as long to cross two lanes as it does 4, and only 60% as long to cross 3 as 5 - meaning a greater percentage of green light for the motorist. I pondered this for a while, but thought about it as a queueing theory problem and concluded this was perfectly logical, mathematically.
Phrased in another context, mowing the lawn isn't a big deal, trimming around the bushes actually takes longer. So instead of buying ever bigger lawnmowers, optimize the landscaping for trimming.
The other thing that was striking was some of the data on roundabouts vs conventional intersections. He described one intersection - in Florida I believe - where they had something like 700 accidents & 200 injuries a year - and a fatality every 14 months. They replaced it with a roundabout and the number of collisions and injuries were cut to less than half, and in the eight years since replacement, they've yet to have a fatality. And yes, with the same daily volume.
There were a number of other points - the value of trees, 22 benefits of bike lanes (only two are for cyclists, by the way), economic impacts of boulevards vs typical 4 lane streets, and much more.
I don't normally get too wound up about this sort of thing, but Parks & Rec is hosting a follow up meeting next month, and I'm looking forward to being involved.
After all, our city should be a place, a place where we want to be, where we want to walk around, where we want our kids to be and have a sense of ownership. Cool stuff.
I just rented a thought provoking documentary from Netflix, The End of Suburbia. It paints a dire picture of what is going to happen to many people who live in suburbs, where a car is needed to get to work and to shop, when oil supplies become depleted in the not to distant future.
I just rented a thought provoking documentary (snip)
I didn't intend to provoke doom; enough prophets of that already. Surely, however, in every suburb a McHouse or two could be razed to make room for a grocer, a barber, a shoestore and a connecting street, threading things together into a better, more livable place.
What I am interested in, and excited about, is thinking about how to take what we have, and not just make it better, but make it good.
Our city hosted Dan Burden from Walkable Communities Inc last week. He did a short audit with our Parks & Rec people, the city engineer, and the "healthy Communities" group of our local hospital, then gave a debrief in the early afternoon followed by a public session in the evening.
Since on occasion I'm involved with our Parks and Rec, I got an invitation to the afternoon debrief, and was interested enough that I requested a kitchen pass of Mrs RedSHED so I could attend the evening session as well.
It was really interesting, and he presented some things that seem counterintuitive at first.
For example, you can flow more cars through a road at 30mph than you can at 40mph. In fact, at 40mph and 10mph average speeds you get the same number of cars through a section of road per hour (because at 40mph you need a lot more space between cars).
Another bit of data... In every case where lanes have widened past 11 feet for a non-freeway road, fatalities increase.
Also, for many roads, you can flow more cars through a 2 lane with an occasional center turn lane than you can a 4 lane. Part of that is that the limitations are at intersections, and stoplights have to be timed to allow people to walk across the intersection. It takes half as long to cross two lanes as it does 4, and only 60% as long to cross 3 as 5 - meaning a greater percentage of green light for the motorist. I pondered this for a while, but thought about it as a queueing theory problem and concluded this was perfectly logical, mathematically.
Phrased in another context, mowing the lawn isn't a big deal, trimming around the bushes actually takes longer. So instead of buying ever bigger lawnmowers, optimize the landscaping for trimming.
The other thing that was striking was some of the data on roundabouts vs conventional intersections. He described one intersection - in Florida I believe - where they had something like 700 accidents & 200 injuries a year - and a fatality every 14 months. They replaced it with a roundabout and the number of collisions and injuries were cut to less than half, and in the eight years since replacement, they've yet to have a fatality. And yes, with the same daily volume.
There were a number of other points - the value of trees, 22 benefits of bike lanes (only two are for cyclists, by the way), economic impacts of boulevards vs typical 4 lane streets, and much more.
I don't normally get too wound up about this sort of thing, but Parks & Rec is hosting a follow up meeting next month, and I'm looking forward to being involved.
After all, our city should be a place, a place where we want to be, where we want to walk around, where we want our kids to be and have a sense of ownership. Cool stuff.
Good stuff, it all makes good sense, but I am not so big on the round abouts after watching a snow plow trying to clear one this last winter.
If oil runs out and folks can't drive to work (long distances) perhaps we will all become stronger smaller communities of beings who are interested in each other......just like the old days.
__________________
Steve "Centennial Man"
1966 Airstream Safari - Her name is "Aunt Bee"
Again, that wasn't the point of his presentations.
For the city, it's about building a tax base, lowering expenses, and reducing crime and accidents.
For the citizens, its about quality of life, plus all that other stuff.
For example, less than a mile from our house is a triangle roughly 1/2 mile on a side, containing a variety of stores - grocery, pharmacy, restaurants, barber shops, department store, a Starbucks (but that's hardly a surprise, is it), and more - a good plumbing store a couple of banks etc. It is bounded by a US highway on one side, a four lane road and a 5 lane road on the other sides. The stores are set in it as little islands with their own parking areas. The crosswalks, where present, are inadequate. It is, of course, surrounded by neighborhoods - maybe a couple thousand people within a half mile radius, and an office building with several hundred people - all of whom are strongly discouraged from accessing these things on foot or bike. (I do both, but only with extreme caution). What an opportunity this is!
Quick Links
Linear Mode
