Planning Commissioners Journal

The End of the Strip?

Why the era of strip commercial development may be nearing an end. by Edward McMahon; from PCJ #82 (Spring 2011); 4 pages Read excerpts below; to order & download the full article use Shopping Cart button at bottom of this post. For more on dealing with commercial strips, see Ross Moldoff's Controlling Strip Development.

Read excerpt from start of article: Two Best Buy stores. The old paradigm: single use, only accessible by car. The new paradigm: mixed uses also accessible by transit or on foot. For more than 50 years retailers have favored the commercial strip: a linear pattern of retail businesses strung along major roadways, characterized by massive parking lots, a plethora of big signs, box-like buildings, and a total dependence on automobiles for access and circulation. For years urban planners and public officials have tried to contain, control, and improve the strip. Now they are getting some help from an unexpected quarter: consumers and the marketplace. Today the era of strip development is coming to an end. Evolving consumer behavior, changing demographics, high priced gasoline, internet shopping, the economy, and other factors are all combining to create a new paradigm for commercial development. Commercial strips are not going to disappear overnight, but it is becoming increasingly clear that strip retail is retail for the last century. The future belongs to town centers, main streets, and mixed-use development. Among the reasons for this transformation: 1. We're Overbuilt on the Strip From 1960 to 2000 there was an almost ten-fold increase in U.S. retail space, from 4 to 38 square feet per person. For many years retail space was growing 5 to 6 times faster than retail sales. Most of this space came in the form of discount superstores on the suburban strip. The recession made clear that we have too much retail. Strip centers are now littered with vacant stores. By some estimates, there is currently over one billion square feet of vacant retail space. Much of this space is going to have to re-purposed or demolished. In fact, one retail analyst estimates that we need to demolish 300 million square feet of retail space. On the other hand, the only places left with more spending power than stores to spend it in are our cities. 2. Retail is Rediscovering the City In 2010, Target announced plans to remodel the century-old Carson Pirie Scott department store in Chicago. This landmark building designed by architect Louis Sullivan will be just one of a number of new, so-called big box retailers planned for urban neighborhoods. Similarly, in late 2010, Wal-Mart announced plans to open its first ever stores in Washington, D.C. To make the four new stores fit an urban environment, the company has agreed to consider an array of layouts, designs, and parking arrangements, a reflection of the chain's willingness to adapt its prototype to enter lucrative urban markets. The D.C. store planned for New Jersey Avenue illustrates Wal-Mart's new approach to store design. The company plans a store of 75,000 to 80,000 square feet (much smaller than usual) on the ground floor of a five story mixed-use building featuring 315 apartments, underground parking, and space for smaller retail stores. Home Depot already has a new urban store in Toronto with 90 units of housing on top. At the same time that Wal-Mart, Target, and other big box stores are planning dozens of new urban stores in cities all over America, as many as 400 former Wal-Mart stores and other big boxes sit vacant on commercial strips across the country. Most analysts agree that cities and urban neighborhoods are the new land of opportunity for retail. ... McMahon's article then continues with sections on: 3. The Suburbs are Being Redesigned 4. Traffic Congestion, Fuel Prices, and Poor Design are Hurting the Strip 5. The Economy is Restructuring the Retail Landscape 6. Consumers Favor Walkability and Places With Character 7. E-Commerce and New Technologies Mean Fewer and Smaller Stores plus: Where Do We Go From Here? -- what can planning commissions do to help reshape the strip; some recommendations culled from leading experts. ... the full article is available to order & download immediately below.

order & download full article $4.00 (single copy license)
order & download full article $16.00 (license to print/store up to 20 copies of article)

What Size Is Your Street?

Note from PCJ Editor Wayne Senville: We're pleased that over the coming year we'll be exchanging monthly blog postings with our partner, Project for Public Spaces.

---

Right-Sizing the Street: Not Just for the DOT Anymore
by Staff from Project for Public Spaces

It used to be that only transportation professionals decided how wide a street should be. Not anymore. Communities of all shapes and sizes are beginning to play a larger part in determining the design and network of their street system.

This new, active role helps ensure that transportation projects contribute to broad community outcomes, including local social, economic, and environmental well-being.

One primary way in which communities are playing an active role in the planning process is through grassroots efforts to “right-size” local streets. These right-sizing efforts take the form of low-cost experiments that are intended to demonstrate potential benefits of place-based transportation and informing long-term decision-making.

What is Right-Sizing?

Right-sizing is a technique to re-design streets to make them context sensitive. Through right-sizing, streets can be transformed so they are safer, sustainable, and more functional from a mobility and a community perspective.

For more detail on some examples of right-sizing techniques, read this recent post on Safer, More Livable Streets through Bike Lanes, featuring PPS Transportation Initiatives Director, Gary Toth.

Community-led and Action-Oriented Approaches to Right Sizing

When it comes to right-sizing a street, there are several approaches that range in cost, time commitment, and impact. Of all these approaches, community-led and action-oriented tactics are consistently lighter, quicker, and cheaper than traditional, capital-heavy alternatives.

Around the country, and with a little help from organizations such as PPS, The Street Plans Collaborative, and Go Oak Cliff, community members are realizing that the network of streets permeating their neighborhoods are not sacrosanct territory, but are public space that they can play an active role in planning and shaping.

Interview with Mary Tracy of Scenic America about Billboards

Note from PCJ Editor Wayne Senville: To round out our coverage of the impacts of billboards, we thought it important to also hear from Scenic America, an organization that focuses -- as their President notes below -- on “preserving and enhancing the visual character of our nation’s roadways, communities, and countryside.” 

Again, I encourage you to weigh in with your own views about billboards on our Linkedin group page (you need to be registered on Linkedin to access this). There have already been a wide range of interesting comments posted there. 

Our previous postings related to billboards include:

• Interview with Ed McMahon about his article, "Billboards: The Case for Control"
• Article: "Billboards: The Case for Control" (available to download)
• Response from Outdoor Advertising Association of America to McMahon article
• "So You're From Vermont" -- perspectives of PCJ Editor Wayne Senville

---

Note: the photos included below were provided by Scenic America

Wayne Senville: Mary, you’re President of an organization called Scenic America. Can you tell us a little about what Scenic America does?

Mary Tracy: Two years ago, I became the president of Scenic America, an organization that I have been deeply committed to for the past twenty years. It is the only national nonprofit organization dedicated to preserving and enhancing the visual character of our nation’s roadways, communities, and countryside. We accomplish this mission through outreach and advocacy efforts, and with the help of over twenty state and local affiliates.

We are the sole national counterweight to the multi-billion dollar outdoor advertising industry, yet we are mostly a network of volunteer organizations whose financial resources are dwarfed by the industry’s. We focus our efforts where we can be most effective: helping citizens make their voices heard. When the public is allowed to speak, they voice a preference for beauty over blight.

Wayne Senville: I want to ask you a couple of questions about billboards. First of all, aren’t most billboards used by local businesses, and aren't billboards also important in promoting tourism?

Mary Tracy: According to a fact sheet prepared by the Outdoor Advertising Association of America, the three biggest users of billboards are McDonald’s, Verizon, and AT&T. All of the top 20 billboard users are large corporations, such as Coca-Cola, Anheuser-Busch, and US Cellular, who use billboards simply as a form of “brand reinforcement” among the traveling public. We’ve spoken with many business owners who say they’d prefer not to use billboards at all; they only use them because their competition does. They’ve told us they’d prefer a level playing field where no one is using billboards.

Additionally, the inference that billboards are essential tools for tourism agencies is just plain wrong. The four states that ban billboards all have economies highly dependent on tourism. In fact, tourism spending in Vermont rose 50 percent in the two years after the state removed its last billboard. [Source: "Vermont Travel Estimates Out-of-State Visitors." 1982. Vermont Division of Research and Statistics]. Celebrating the 30th anniversary of Maine’s billboard ban, Dana Connors, president of the Maine State Chamber of Commerce, said “It's become part of our quality of place.”

Wayne Senville: If the removal of billboards in these four states has proven to be a success, why haven’t more states joined in banning billboards?

Mary Tracy: Billboard companies and their various trade associations spend millions of dollars annually aggressively lobbying all levels of government, but in particular the industry works to influence regulation at the state level. Part of the reason for this is they receive the least amount of public scrutiny at this level; when called before city councils or local planning commissions to speak on sign ordinances, they are met with a public who is passionately anti-blight and eager to protect their neighborhoods.

Last year the industry was unsuccessful in its attempts to overturn Durham, North Carolina’s longstanding billboard ban and erect digital billboards. Since they lost that fight, they are now working on legislation that will remove local control.

In fact, there is currently a concerted effort by the billboard industry to eliminate local control over sign regulation. Bills have been introduced in four states -- Missouri, North Carolina, Florida, and Texas -- that would take control of billboards away from localities and give it to the state. 

The federal government has also made it difficult for states to remove billboards. Congress has prevented states from using amortization as a tool to remove the thousands of nonconforming billboards along interstate and federal-aid primary highways, instead requiring cash compensation, the funds for which simply no longer exist.

Wayne Senville: Assuming local hands are not tied by state legislation, are there things communities can do to reduce the number of billboards?

Mary Tracy: The first and most important step to reducing sign blight is to prohibit the construction of new billboards, like thousands of communities across the country have already done. This will ultimately result in fewer billboards as some are lost to attrition, some to Mother Nature and others to development. When Houston banned new billboards in 1980, there were some 10,000 signs in the city; today, there are fewer than 3,000.

Planning Comm'rs Journal to Partner with Project for Public Spaces

We're pleased to announce that the Planning Commissioners Journal will be partnering with Project for Public Spaces. This partnership is an important step toward increasing "Placemaking" capacity and knowledge among PCJ readers who include members of local planning commissions and zoning boards, elected officials, and others involved in decision-making about the built environment.

Planning Commissioners Journal readers share many of the same interests and values as PPS members: a desire to strengthen downtowns; a deep interest in promoting civic values; and an understanding of the critical importance of involving local residents and businesses in decision-making.

As part of this partnership, PPS will share articles about the core concepts of Placemaking as well as our many resources and stories on strengthening public markets and local economies, creating public multi-use destinations, and many other topics. PPS’ resources will be featured in a “centerfold” in the Planning Commissioners Journal (starting with our Winter issue) and will also appear here on the PlannersWeb.

In return, PPS.org will feature PCJ articles on topics like transportation, livability, and helpful how-to’s for overcoming challenges citizen planners frequently encounter including tips on how to deal with the media, put together a comprehensive plan, run an effective meeting, and develop good staff-commissioner relations.

More About PPS

Project for Public Spaces is a nonprofit planning, design, and educational organization dedicated to helping people create and sustain public spaces that build stronger communities. Their pioneering Placemaking approach helps citizens transform their public spaces into vital places that highlight local assets, spur rejuvenation and serve common needs.

PPS was founded in 1975 to expand on the work of William (Holly) Whyte, the author of The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Since then, PPS has completed projects in over 2,500 communities in 40 countries and all 50 U.S. states. Partnering with public and private organizations; federal, state and municipal agencies; business improvement districts; and neighborhood associations and other civic groups, PPS works to improve communities by fostering successful public spaces.

PPS has become an internationally recognized center for resources, tools, and inspiration about Placemaking.

Additional Note from PCJ Editor Wayne Senville

While I've followed the work of PPS for many years, I got to know their staff this past Spring while attending a PPS "Streets as Places" workshop. I was impressed by their skills, knowledge, and commitment to values I believe most planning commissioners and citizen planners share. Foremost among these is a belief in the critical importance of citizen involvement in planning for the future of our cities and towns.

You can read my reports from the Streets as Places workshop:

-- Can a Street Be a Place? 

-- Circling the Square  

-- Breaking Our Addiction to Highway Level of Service Standards  

-- The Other Half of the "Deadly Duo"

-- Please Be Seated

-- There's a Good Story Here!

Measuring What Matters

There’s a growing recognition that transportation systems need to foster livable, sustainable communities -- and focus on more than just mobility. Hannah Twaddell & Gary Toth explore the relationship in transportation planning between: mobility, accessibility, livability, and sustainability. Plus: Gary Toth takes a closer look at the use of “level of service” standards and traffic projections -- as reported by PCJ Editor Wayne Senville in "Getting Good Grades Isn't Always the Answer." See also our discussion with Hannah & Gary about their article. Two articles: Transportation Planning for Livable Communities, by Hannah Twaddell & Gary Toth; and Getting Good Grades Isn't Always the Answer, by Wayne Senville -- from PCJ #80 (Fall 2010). Read excerpt from Transportation Planning for Livable Communities below; to order & download both articles use Shopping Cart button at bottom of this post. See other articles by Hannah Twaddell.

Let's pay a visit to the imaginary planet HemoGlobe. The people of this world have bodies just like ours, but they measure their physical health by only one indicator: the speed at which their blood moves. If blood is traveling too slowly through a certain area, a surgeon widens the problematic vein. Or if a patient is starting to gain weight, the surgeon expands more veins to make room for anticipated fat deposits. This practice has gone on so long that few doctors ever "think outside the vein." No one questions the assumption that faster blood flow is always better, or considers the adverse impacts of widening the veins on other bodily functions. Alternative treatments, such as losing weight, are considered by only a few "radical fringe" practitioners. Most of us on Earth would probably agree that the single-minded, HemoGlobian approach to managing health makes little sense. Yet in our world, to draw an analogy, transportation planners tend to rely on a similar method to manage the "health" of our transportation systems. We put a great deal of emphasis on a single indicator of travel speed -- roadway Level of Service (LOS) -- and our strategies to deal with congestion usually involve widening highways. This narrowly focused approach doesn't help us address the really important question: Is our collective life-blood (people and goods) flowing properly in ways that nourish our vital organs: the places where we live, work, learn, and play? In order to get a more complete picture of how well our transportation systems are really serving us, we need to assess their impacts and performance from several perspectives. In this article, I'll explore ways to measure four aspects of community life that depend upon well-functioning transportation systems: (1) mobility -- our need to drive; (2) accessibility -- our need to arrive; (3) livability -- our need to thrive; and (4) sustainability -- our need to survive. Mobility -- Our Need To Drive Can people and goods move quickly and safely along our corridors, in any type of vehicle -- cars, buses, bikes, wheelchairs -- and on foot? Mobility is, quite simply, the ability to move. We measure it by calculating the speed at which people can travel along a given route. Level of Service (LOS) indicators for highway mobility are the most commonly used measures in transportation planning. If drivers can travel as fast as they desire along a given corridor during the most congested time of day (the "peak hour"), the LOS score is an "A." The slower the traffic moves, the lower the grade. An "F" means gridlock. The thresholds for acceptable LOS are, in most communities, based upon long-held transportation agency rules of thumb -- such as maintaining a minimum LOS level of C for all suburban arterials and D for all city streets, regardless of urban context or local land use policies. Agency traffic forecasts for future LOS usually assume the highest possible level of potential development over a 20- or 30-year period. Relying heavily on highway LOS as the dominant indicator for transportation planning tends to encourage ham-fisted solutions to complex problems. As the old saying goes, "to a man with only a hammer, everything looks like a nail." Roadways with poor LOS show up on traffic model maps as red lines. The easiest way to deal with them in the model is to keep adding roadway links and lanes until you "get the red out." But LOS models don't help us consider the adverse impacts that can result from roadway expansion, such as destroying natural areas, bisecting neighborhoods, or affecting pedestrians, bicyclists, or transit riders. In many communities, major arterials have been widened extensively in order to maintain the highest possible LOS at rush hour. But they may sit unused much of the time. Those wide, empty lanes tempt drivers to zoom well above posted speeds most of the day and night. The resulting conditions are dangerous for motorists and downright hostile to bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit riders. Congestion problems can often be solved by simpler, less expensive, and more environmentally sound methods than highway expansion. For example, instead of widening a single congested artery, a community can make the existing system more efficient. Operational improvements such as coordinated signal timing and turning lanes can often go a long way towards clearing up rush hour bottlenecks. Networks of local connector streets can enable travelers to avoid using major arterials, and thus provide more opportunities for pedestrian, bicycle, and transit options. Local community leaders can -- and should -- engage with transportation agencies to customize LOS expectations for different contexts along a given corridor. More importantly, communities need to expand the types of indicators and tools they use for transportation planning. ... article continues with discussion of Accessibility, Livability, and Sustainability -- to order & download the complete article, select Shopping Cart button below.

order & download both articles -- "Transportation Planning For Livable Communities" & "Getting Goods Grades Isn't Always the Answer" $5.00 (single copy license)
order & download both articles $20.00 (license to print/store up to 20 copies of articles)

Give My Regards to Broadway

One of the most remarkable sights in New York City these days is the transformation of Broadway in the Times Square district from a traffic-jammed artery to a car-free zone, where pedestrians reign. I touched on this briefly in my last post -- in how movable chairs are one key element in this changeover.

One of the advocates behind New York City's growing embrace of pedestrian and bicycle-oriented policies is Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan. Listen to her in the following two short video clips. In the first she talks about the changes to Broadway, and how they can serve as a model for New York's other boroughs. In the second video, she responds to questioners in Los Angeles about how to shape city transportation policies.

The Other Half of the "Deadly Duo"

In a post last week, I reported on the first half of the "deadly duo" -- and, no, I wasn't referring to rapper Jay-Z. What I was talking about something more important, at least to planners and local officials: level of service standards and travel projections. They're what transportation engineer Gary Toth calls the "deadly duo," since unthinking reliance on them can kill efforts to build strong, vibrant communities.

The first half of the deadly duo, according to Toth, is LOS (that's "level of service" standards for those not familiar with the acronym). Today I want to go over some of his basic arguments about the other half of Toth's deadly duo: travel projections. 

As Toth made clear during a recent Project for Public Spaces workshop, travel projections -- and the models that generate them -- are of critical importance because they set the table for how we plan and design our roadways ... and communities.  

We all know the expression, "garbage in," "garbage out," that shorthand reminder that the quality of the results we get from using data depends on the quality of the data we're relying on. That's also true when thinking about traffic models. So what are some of the warning signs?

For Toth, the first thing to watch out for is growth projections, both for population (which he says often result in overestimations) and for traffic. As Toth explains: "Most [traffic models] ignore changing demographics such as the aging of our population, rising energy prices, ... and societal changes. Most assume that our economy will continue to grow at the same rate as it has over the last 30 years."

But there's an even more important thing to watch out for, Toth warns, models have a built-in bias towards continuation of the status quo. "Without direction or a reason to do otherwise, modelers will likely assume that future growth will occur ... as usual segregated and spread out (sprawl) patterns." Why is this critical? "Because research shows that compact mixed use development can reduce travel by 25% or more." Traffic models, Toth continues, don't consider how we can reshape the direction our communities are heading. 

What's more, by relying on the projections of traffic models that overestimate our need for more or wider roadways, we're making it more difficult to achieve the goal of more walkable, less auto-dependent, communities.

In an article for the Planning Commissioners Journal (available on our web site), noted planning historian Laurence C. Gerckens wrote about the tyranny of projections driven by over-reliance on past trends: 

"The second 'flaw' -- or built in bias -- in the 'classic' planning process lay in the fact that it was premised on the projection or continuation of past trends. In other words, past trends became the policy-bases for the comprehensive plan. As a result, plans rarely reflected any vision for positive change. Instead, they reinforced historic patterns. ... 'Modern' planning processes began not with the acquisition of immense amounts of data, but with the creative visioning of alternative futures -– establishing community goals, alternative patterns of development, and the means of their attainment. ... Responsible planning is a creative art using data from the past and knowledge of interrelationships to create new and better communities for the future."

But what can you as a planner or local official do when faced with traffic projections you believe overestimate future travel demand and fail to take into account the community's vision of its future? Ask hard questions, was Toth's reply. "Challenge growth and buildout numbers, and ask if they adjust for walkability and for increased mixed-use ... listen to the answers, and then ask more questions." 

"Don't let the model tell you how wide your streets should be," Toth continued, "you tell modelers how wide you want your streets to be, and then have them tell you what that will mean in terms of congestion." In other words, remember that you are the policy makers, and the traffic modelers are there to help you understand the impacts of what you want. It's up to you then "to decide what you want to do about any projected congestion" given your community's vision and goals. 

What's more, Toth concludes, if the model is cheap or faulty, just don't use it.

[Note: in putting together this post I drew on both my notes of Gary Toth's comments during the workshop and material in a handout he prepared, "Traffic projections and levels of service targets."]

Note from PCJ Editor Wayne Senville: Are you interested in transportation planning topics? This June, we have a terrific special offer -- you can download 15 articles that transportation planner Hannah Twaddell has written for the Planning Commissioners Journal -- all for a substantially discounted price. Gary Toth calls Hannah one of the top progressive transportation planners in the United States. She's a Project Manager with the Renaissance Planning Group -- and also an outstanding writer who does a great job in boiling down sometimes complex topics so that they can be readily understood by citizen planners. For more about Hannah. Go to our Special Offer page and find out about the 15 articles included in this pdf download.

Pavement into Parks

While the Project for Public Spaces (which I've been reporting on in recent posts) works with communities across the globe, it hasn't forgotten its roots in New York City. In fact, the Big Apple is brewing with pedestrian and bicycle-oriented projects and organizations. This really kicked into high gear in 2006, when the New York City Streets Renaissance (NYCSR) was formed. As described on the StreetFilms blog, the NYCSR was initiated as "a collective effort of non-profit advocacy organizations Transporation Alternatives, the Project for Public Spaces, and The Open Planning Project, the primary goal was to encourage a citywide enlightenment in planning our streets for people and places, not cars and traffic."

One early offshoot was StreetsBlog, followed soon after by StreetFilms. These are two web sites every planner, local official, and community activist should be familiar with. Streetsblog now operates in New York, San Francisco, and Los Angeles, and as Streetsblog New York editor Ben Fried told us at the PPS workshop, the number of blogs covering similar issues has dramatically expanded in the past few years. This has been fostered by the creation of the StreetsBlog network, a collection of nearly 400 independent web blogs that cover pedestrian and bike issues in communities big and small. 

Taking a look at the StreetsBlog network home page right now as I'm writing this, I see that reports are posted from Newton, Massachusetts (We Can Prevent Bicyclists From Being Run Over); Virginia Beach, Virginia (Virginia Beach to Lower Shore Drive Speed Limit), along with other cities. 

In fact, you may have noticed on our own web blog that we include the StreetsBlog network widget, where you can view recent stories posted by organizations that have joined the network. See what's happening right now -- just scroll towards the bottom of the right hand column on this page and you'll spot the widget.

But I don't want to forget that today is Friday, the day we've been posting short video clips we think you'll enjoy. StreetFilms offers over 300 great videos to choose from -- a collection that's constantly growing. For this post, I want to highlight a new video they've posted that ties in (at least to me) to what I wrote about Petrosino Square earlier this week. The video shows the creative way new public space (often called "parklets") is being created in San Francisco out of portions of streets. Turning pavement into parks -- perhaps something to think about for your community.

For more details about the Pavement to Parks program.

Breaking Our Addiction to Highway Level of Service Standards

Note from PCJ Editor Wayne Senville: this is the third in a series of postings about a recent two-day workshop I attended. Sponsored by the Project for Public Spaces, it focused on "streets as places."  

In this post I'm passing along some of what I learned from transportation engineer Gary Toth. Toth, who is now Senior Director of Transporation Initiatives for the Project for Public Spaces, worked for 34 years for the New Jersey Dept. of Transportation, where he served as Director of Project Planning & Development. He has been one of the leading national advocates for integrating land use and community considerations into transportation planning.

Why Getting Good Grades Isn't Always the Answer

It's a constant source of amazement to me how much we're addicted to report cards. Many of us strove in elementary school, high school, and then in college to get those A's (OK, sometimes a B or C was acceptable). But the idea of receiving an F for flunking/failure, or even a D, was something to dread.

I think -- and I'm not kidding about this -- this is part of what embues highway "Levels of Service" ratings with such power. Most local elected officials and citizens I've encountered seem to view good LOS grades as a sign of success, and D's (or even C's) as evidence of failure. Our built-in aversion to receiving a "failing" LOS report card is reinforced by the fact that there is some truth to the ratings: D does indicate congestion problems, while A or B means we can zip along our roadways with nary a stop.

You noticed that I highlighted the word "some." The problem, according to transportation engineer Gary Toth, is that LOS ratings tell you only part of the story -- and sometimes not the most important part. As Toth explains, "design decisions based on LOS performance measures end up serving only the through motorist at the expense of the very communities that the road is also supposed to serve."

How's that? According to Toth, LOS simply does not take into account other considerations -- such as impacts on pedestrians, on businesses served by the roadway, or on other community or neighborhood interests. It simply focuses on the motor vehicle. "The fact is," Toth said, "improving levels of service for cars can degrade it for pedestrians, shops, and others."

What's more, Toth adds, LOS calculations are typically made "using peak hour travel projections, generally 20 years into the future." This means our roads are intentionally "over designed" to handle capacity that only occurs at the very heaviest travel period. The problem with over-designed roadways, Toth notes, is that they can "take major bites out of the community's fabric," while -- especially during off peak hours -- turning the roadway into a speedway.

Are we bound by Level of Service standards contained in the Transportation Research Board's Highway Capacity Manual and AASHTO's Green Book? No, we're not, says Toth. As he points out, "while often used as a bible by traffic modelers, in reality the Highway Capacity Manual neither constitutes nor attempts to establish legal standards for highway construction." 

As Toth explains, "the Green Book and most DOTs provide guidelines for selection of LOS, but these are guidelines only ... selection of a target LOS is a policy decision and is based on a particular jurisdiction's philosophy on whether or not to accept congestion." Indeed, the Federal Highway Administration notes that "while the Highway Capacity Manual provides the analytical basis for design calculations and decisions, judgment must be used in the selection of the appropriate level of service for the facility under study."  

That was my key take away from Gary Toth's remarks: communities have a choice -- and these choices have major ramifications. They can decide on wider, straighter roadways to eliminate congestion (and receive better grades on their LOS report card), or they can balance traffic needs against other community goals, such as encouraging more pedestrian activity and street life. 

A community, if it wants to, can actually aim for having drivers slow down so they can smell the coffee -- and pull over to stop at that tempting coffee house. 

For a growing number of cities and towns, living with some congestion is a trade-off worth making.

It's also worth noting that major highway planning organizations such as AASHTO and the Institute for Transportation Engineers have been moving towards more flexible guidelines that take a roadway's surrounding context into account. [For more on this, see an excellent article we published by transportation planner Hannah Twaddell, "Fitting Roadways to Community Needs: A Look at the ITE Urban Thoroughfares Report."]

During the PPS workshop, Toth called level of service standards one of the "deadly duo" -- the other being traffic projections. More on the misuse of traffic projections in next Monday's post.

[Note: in putting together this post I drew on both my notes of Gary Toth's comments during the workshop and material in a handout he prepared, "Traffic projections and levels of service targets."]

Can a Street Be a Place?

From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville: 

This post's title is the question that was at the heart of a fascinating two-day workshop I attended in April. Sponsored by the Project for Public Spaces, the workshop's description as covering "Streets as Places" intrigued me. But PPS Executive Vice President Kathy Madden told me to only come if I was also willing to be an active participant. Sounded like fun, and it was. Indeed, the PPS workshop centered around active interaction between the thirty or so attendees. (Next week I'll talk about our group "walking audit" exercise).

But why think about streets as places? First, streets constitute a surprisingly large amount of the land area within cities, often 30 percent or more. That's a lot of valuable real estate given over the cars and trucks. Second, what happens on streets directly affects what happens on sidewalks. Third, streets affect quality of life; something most all of us care about.

Here's some of what PPS has to say about streets: "While streets were once a place where we stopped for conversation and children played, they are now the exclusive domain of cars. Even where sidewalks are present along highways and high-speed streets, they feel inhospitable and out of place."

For planners and transportation engineers, dealing with streets has long focused on how to move traffic as efficiently and quickly as possible. Other concerns, if considered at all, were secondary. The not too surprising result of this philosophy, as those at PPS succinctly put it, is that "if you plan cities for cars and traffic, you get cars and traffic. If you plan for people and places, you get people and places."

So how do you plan for streets that work as places where people are comfortable? Among the key things PPS recommends is:

1. using traffic calming strategies, including curb extensions and better intersection design, "to slow down cars, provide more space for walking, and make streets safer to cross;" 
2. simplify circulation patterns for both motorists and pedestrians; 
3. give more emphasis to sidewalks and how they function; and
4. strengthen the relationship of buildings and surrounding land uses to streets.

But there's one even more overriding concept that PPS President Fred Kent pointed out right at the start of the workshop: "It's not just the road and sidewalks, it's the community. Streets are public spaces."

Kent has focused much of his professional life on this theme. A student of William Holly Whyte -- who pioneered in researching how people use and interact in public spaces -- Kent recounted how one of his first research assignments involved filming a day in the life of a wastebasket on one corner of a midtown Manhattan street. Yes, you read that right. There's much that can be learned, he noted, through careful observation of how people actually use streets and sidewalks (and even how they interact with trash receptacles). 

[As a side note, take a look at the short William Whyte video, The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, that we posted on the PlannersWeb last winter].

Kent went on to found the Project for Public Spaces in 1975. Over the years PPS has grown, and now works with cities not just in the U.S. and Canada, but around the globe.

Kent also spoke about the late Dutch traffic engineer Hans Monderman, who developed the idea of "shared streets" (aka "shared spaces") -- that is, streets without traffic lights, stop signs, or lane markings, but where people can walk freely wherever on the street they want to. According to Kent, one of Monderman's favorite sayings was: "If you want vehicles to behave like they are in a village, build a village." 

Monderman's research on shared streets found that they do slow down car speeds, as motorists take their time to weave their way down the block. Earlier in his career, Monderman originated the "Woonerf" street which some of you may have heard of (see slides of a Woonerf street in Delft), a precursor of the shared street. 

Interestingly, scenes from early 20th century America show that our main streets back then worked, at least in some ways, as shared streets. Take a look at this short video filmed in 1906 of Market Street, San Francisco's main downtown corridor.

While we may not be ready for shared streets in 21st century America (and the concept is still relatively untested and controversial), the underlying point -- that streets should be designed not just for cars, but for people -- is highly relevant to our cities and towns today.

In my next post, I'll tell you how workshop participants spent part of the afternoon circling a square.

Charlotte's Urban Street Design Guidelines

As you've undoubtedly read in a variety of publications (including the Planning Commissioners Journal) there's a growing interest in "complete streets" and the positive impact that better streetscape design and increased connectivity can have. Last year, the City of Charlotte, North Carolina, won a National Smart Growth Award from the EPA for their street design guidelines.

 EPA's web site includes a short video about Charlotte, and videos on the three other award winners. We can't embed the video, but you can access it either by using this link or by clicking on the screenshot on the right.

As the EPA noted: 

"With the Urban Street Design Guidelines, the city of Charlotte is using street design to shape its development patterns and provide residents and visitors with viable choices for how they move about the city. ... The guidelines promote sustainable development patterns and streets that are more pleasant, safe, and walkable. For instance, policies include recommending block lengths for new development that create a more dense, well-connected network of streets that in turn promote more compact building design. Additionally, the city encourages wide planting strips to allow large, mature trees to grow, enhancing Charlotte's tree canopy and making the streets more pleasant for pedestrians and motorists alike. The city also has improved pedestrian crossings by making them more visible and changed traffic signal timing to better accommodate pedestrians.

Since 2004, the Charlotte Department of Transportation has applied the guidelines to more than 20 streets and 10 intersections. Seven of these projects included 'road diets,' which allow more bike lanes and improve sidewalks and crossings for pedestrians. The guidelines have facilitated the increase in the bike lane network from one mile in 2000 to more than 55 miles today."

The Guidelines are available on the City's web site along with a Policy Summary document.

See also:

• the Complete Streets Resource page we've posted on the PlannersWeb.
• an article we published by transportation planner Hannah Twaddell, Fitting Roadways to Community Needs (read excerpts; full article can be ordered & downloaded).

Safe Routes to School

 What can I do to improve my community? That's a question that civic-minded individuals often ask. While there are many possibilities, you'll see one great example in today's two videos. They're part of a series of short videos for school age kids on bike and walking safety. They resulted from the hard work of Kim Arline, a resident of Pueblo, Colorado. Take a look two of the videos, then hear Kim describe how they came about. 

---

"This all started when my daughter was in 1st grade attending a school that just needed a trail connecting it to the neighborhood behind across a drainage area. I talked about it to the principal, teachers and nothing ever happened. I found the community master trail system plan about that time and the trail was shown so I thought I could sit back and progress would happen. Years passed, I learned about the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program and when my daughter was in the 5th grade I pushed the community and school district to work on a SRTS grant. Months passed and nothing. With only 6 weeks before the grant was due, I wrote my first grant, had a rude awakening to local government politics but pushed on to submit the grant after much scrambling and convincing local leaders. I could not have done it without the guidance and encouragement of a planner at the MPO -- a chance meeting at the right time made all the difference!" 

"After my first successful grant, I thought I'd give it another try the following year with a non-infrastructure grant (education and encouragement) to produce an educational video showing people how to navigate our semi-rural roads safely to get to the trail system. The videos were originally created to be shown on the school-wide TV system over several days after the pledge of allegiance. The production crew suggested posting them on You Tube to reach a larger audience and we've promoted the links the past 2 months. People in health promotion and bike safety LOVE the videos and I've received many requests for DVD copies for them to use in classes. I will be using the videos in bike safety/commuter classes as our county tries to promote more healthy and active living with bike month and bike to work days coming up in May."

I asked Kim what lessons she learned from all this, and what advice she has for others. 

 "The advice I would give to anyone wanting to make a change in the world they live in is to start researching, networking locally and regionally and just keep working at it, even when it seems like nobody cares or wants to help. This has been one of the most rewarding and frustrating things I've ever done. The wheels of government turn slowly and people change their behaviors even more slowly -- but someone has to start the change. Don't just talk about it, be the change you want to see in the world!"

Note: Thanks to planner Todd Ahlenius (who I met in Pueblo three years ago) for alerting me to these videos and putting me in touch with Kim. Also, we're setting out a portion of the Pueblo Bicycle & Trails map below -- use this link to download the full map (pdf format).

 

Online Newsletter Highlights Pedestrian Safety Topics

Just a quick note to those of you interested in pedestrian issues. The FHWA (yes, the Federal HIGHWAY Administration) puts out a short -- but informative -- online newsletter called the Pedestrian Forum. It provides useful summaries of various projects, research, and reports dealing with pedestrian safety issues. You can also sign up to receive information about these quarterly updates by email. 

• For a listing of past Pedestrian Forum newsletters, and to subscribe.
• To view the Spring 2010 issue.

Here's a screenshot of part of the Spring Pedestrian Forum:

 

Origins of the Street Grid

If you walk through most North American cities you'll find yourself on that very familiar grid of streets -- usually intersecting at 90 degree angles. Indeed, until landscape architect Frederick Law Olmsted popularized the more curvilinear pattern of streets in suburban Riverside, Illinois in 1868 (below right), the grid pattern dominated our suburbs as well.

But did you ever think about where the grid street pattern originated? If you want to find out, take a look at an informative blog posting, "A Brief History of Grid Plans, Ancient to Renaissance," by Laurence Aurbach, on the Ped Shed web site. 

Aurbach traces the origins of grid streets back to the Indus Valley:

"By 2600 BC, Mohenjo-daro in the Indus Valley (present-day Pakistan) was built with blocks divided by a grid of straight streets, laid out in perfect right angles, running north-south and east-west. Each block was subdivided by small lanes. Mohenjo-Daro was the largest of many grid-plan towns and villages that existed in the region from 2600-1900 BC. Obeserving the urban planning of the Indus Valley civilization, archeologist B. B. Lal wrote, 'Well-regulated streets [were] oriented almost invariably along with the cardinal directions, thus forming a grid-iron pattern.'"

Aurbach notes that: 

"By and large, ancient grid plans were expressions of military organization, colonial conquest, or political/economic domination. Grids were most often used when there was a large amount of territory to occupy in a short time. They were also used to establish formal order and spatial focus on particular functions of urban life -- civic, religious, governmental, etc."

For a detailed look back at the history of urban streets, see also "A Brief History of Urban Form, Street Layout Through the Ages," by J. H. Crawford, posted on Carfree.com. Crawford is ultimately highly critical of grid patterns, arguing that "straight lines and repetitive shapes, the hallmark of centralized planning, are ultimately dull and unsatisfactory." 

Robert Moses & Jane Jacobs

The first video below is about two individuals who, arguably, have had more of an impact on the course of urban planning than any others -- Robert Moses and Jane Jacobs. In the second half of the 8 minute video, you'll hear how their paths crossed in the battle over the Lower Manhattan Expressway in 1962. This video was produced by John Elias and Peter Baum in 2008. 

The second video features an interview of Jane Jacobs in 2002. As Jacbos remarks, what we most need to do is "study the parts [of our cities] that work and that people use," adding that "the greatest asset a city or city neighborhood can have is something that is different from every other place." And, Jacobs notes, "don't think it can be done by wishful thinking or pretty words." Produced by the Active Living Network.

Valuable Stats on Biking & Walking in U.S.

From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville: In yesterday's post, I reported on Reid Ewing's findings on the growing interest in having walkable communities. Today's post is also about walking -- and bicycling.

The Alliance for Biking & Walking, with funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has released a remarkably useful report for anyone interested in bike, pedestrian, public health, and traffic safety issues. Bicycling and Walking in the United States 2010 Benchmarking Report is available to download as a pdf file; you can also separately download the Executive Summary.

The Report is replete with data. In fact, there's an almost overwhelming amount of data, covering a wide range of topics. But what's most important is how well organized and designed the report is -- and how easy-to-read the charts, maps, and graphics are (several are included below with permission of the Alliance). It's a pleasure to come across a document like this.

Some of the information that caught my eye:

"States where bicycling and walking levels are lowest have the highest levels of obesity." Not surprising, but well-documented in the report. As with most of the data, you can see how your state ranks; rankings are also listed for major U.S. cities.

Related to this, "states with the highest levels of bicycling and walking have a greater percentage of the population meeting the recommended 30-plus minutes a day of physical activity."

 

The Report notes that: "Walking and bicycling have great potential to improve public health. In 2001, 41% of trips in the U.S. were shorter than two miles and 28% were shorter than one mile. Since bicycling can accommodate trips of up to two miles and most people can walk at least one mile, there is a lot of hope to use this form of travel in our communities." -- Amen to that.

 "On average, states spend just 1.2% of their federal transportation dollars on bike/ped projects (based on the 5-year funding period from 2004-2008). This amounts to just $1.29 per capita for bicycling and walking each year." Distressing information. -- But, on the bright side, there's lots of room for improvement.

"The number of people who bicycle to work has increased steadily, rising 29.8% between 1990 and 2007 from 466,856 to 664,859 people who bicycle to work nationwide. During the same time period the number of people who walk to work fell 12% despite population growth of 21% (from roughly 249 million people in 1990 to roughly 301 million people in 2007)." Again, room for improvement.

"Cities plan for roughly 60% more miles of bicycle and pedestrian facilities as the amount they currently have." -- Ah, good news!

 "Cities averaged 22.5 bicycle parking spaces per 10,000 people. Minneapolis has the highest amount of bicycle parking per capita with 430.3 bicycle parking spaces per 10,000 people." -- And it can sure get cold in Minneapolis from November through April (see below).

Finally, something we also think about a lot up here in Vermont where the Planning Commissioners Journal is located: does weather influence the choice to bicycle?

"The Alliance compared average summer and winter temperatures to bicycle share of work trips in 50 states and did not find any compelling evidence that weather is a major influence. Montana and Alaska, for example, are among states with the coldest temperatures, yet are also among the states with the highest levels of bicycling." -- While I'm not totally convinced that weather is irrelevant, it's still good to hear that bicyclists are not easy to deter! See a video about winter bike commuters in Chicago.

Again, those are just some of the highlights. Take a look for yourself, I'll bet there's some interesting information you'll find.

Note: graphics from the Report are reposted here with permission of Alliance for Biking & Walking.

Lessons from Houston's Streets

 Its' always enjoyable to spot an informative web blog dealing with ways to improve a community. In the case of NewUrbanStreets, the community is downtown Houston, Texas, and the blog tells of "lessons learned" and "issues faced." Here's how Tom Davis, the creator of the blog describes it:

"The purpose of this blog is to share things learned by Tom Davis (me) in the public infrastructure and community improvement industry. At this time this blog will address primarily the past 10 years of my 39-year career where I have had the privilege of being part of the revitalization of downtown Houston, Texas. The posts here are articles about features of downtown’s urban streetscape and contain descriptions of the improvements. The hope is these descriptions help others add such amenities to their public space."

From the postings we've read, there are certainly some good, practical lessons that can be learned from downtown Houston. Just take a look at two recent posts, one on paver inserts in concrete sidewalks (Jan. 9), another on the use of trench fountains (Jan. 7).

Looking forward to learning more from Tom Davis.

Major Study on Effect of 20 mph Traffic Speeds on Injury Rates

 One of the most important issues facing cities and towns is traffic safety. For transportation planners and engineers, this has led to the use of traffic calming strategies designed to reduce vehicle speeds. But the underlying question is the extent to which the reduction in speeds reduces accidents and injuries. A comprehensive study was recently published in the British Medicial Journal that provides an important look at this -- by examining 20 years' worth of data in London on the effect of introducing 20 mph zones. We first heard of this study from a blog posting by the New Haven Safe Streets Coalition. Thanks!

Read the full article: Effect of 20 mph traffic speed zones on road injuries in London, 1986-2006: controlled interrupted time series analysis (British Medical Journal, BMJ, 10 December 2009).

Excerpts:

Road injuries are among the leading causes of loss of life and disability worldwide, and they are projected to make an increasingly important contribution to public health burdens over the coming decades, especially in low and middle income settings. There is good evidence internationally for the effectiveness of reducing the speed and volume of traffic for reducing injury rates.

One strategy for reducing speeds in urban areas is the use of road engineering interventions such as vertical deflections (humps), chicanes, and other physical alterations to prevent motorised traffic travelling at more than 20 miles an hour (32 km an hour). Zones in which traffic is limited to 20 mph are a type of area-wide traffic calming that uses road engineering measures to physically slow traffic. Over the past 15 years or so, 20 mph zones have been established in London and many other areas of the UK.

... By using a geographical information system (GIS), we linked ... casualty data to a detailed road segment database that included the characteristics of all classified and unclassified roads in London. For each financial year (April to March), we classified each segment of road between junctions according to the type of road and whether or not it was in a 20 mph zone or adjacent to a 20 mph zone 

... Results. The introduction of 20 mph zones was associated with a 41.9% (95% confidence interval 36.0% to 47.8%) reduction in road casualties, after adjustment for underlying time trends. The percentage reduction was greatest in younger children and greater for the category of killed or seriously injured casualties than for minor injuries. There was no evidence of casualty migration to areas adjacent to 20 mph zones, where casualties also fell slightly by an average of 8.0% (4.4% to 11.5%).

---

See also the following from the American Association of Pediatrics Policy Statement on Pedestrian Safety (use link to access footnotes for the statistics noted below)

... Vehicle speed is a strong risk factor for pedestrian injuries and is associated with greater injury severity. Pedestrians who are hit by a car traveling 40 mph have a 15% chance of survival, but 85% survive when hit by a car moving at 20 mph. Because a faster-moving vehicle has a longer braking distance, impact with a pedestrian is more likely. Although several factors, such as driver reaction time, vehicle weight, brake quality, and road-surface conditions, play a role, the stopping distance for a vehicle traveling at 30 mph is considerably greater than that of a car traveling at 20 mph (197 vs 112 ft, respectively). In residential neighborhoods, an average vehicle speed of 30 mph, compared with 20 mph, was associated with more than a sevenfold greater risk of children being hospitalized for pedestrian injuries.

Bike Racks Don't Have to Be Bland

It's always good to see examples of creative thinking. For example, do bike racks have to be bland? Apparently not in Nashville, Tennessee. Know of any other examples? Add a comment at the end of this post. Also, take a look at our online resource page: Where's Art in Our Communities?

Fanciful bike racks coming to local landmarks, by Joey Garrison in the Nashville CityPaper

Read a brief excerpt; use above link for full article (also use link for illustration of bike rack):

"Cyclists riding in the urban core of Nashville can park their bikes at a giant padlock, a row of soaring cornstalks or a winding microphone perhaps as soon as late spring.

Those are just three of the seven imaginative bicycle racks approved Thursday by the Metro Nashville Arts Commission out of 139 designs submitted in the open contest, finalizing the first wave of an undertaking billed as a “template” to install more public art in Nashville. 

... The project’s total price tag of less than $100,000 came from funds collected through Metro’s “Percent for the Arts” program, which dedicates 1 percent of all net proceeds of general obligation bonds issued for public construction projects to the funding of public art." 

More on Cul-de-Sacs

Our Monday News, Notes, & Quotes post focused on cul-de-sacs. Today's post is an interesting reply we received from Robert Parry, Director of the Department of Planning & Economic Development of Westlake, Ohio, a Cleveland suburb.

 "The City of Westlake, Ohio has limited the length of cul de sacs since 1995 with a requirement that larger subdivisions must be interconnected and that streets can not exceed 1,000 feet or contain more than 25 houses without two street connections from two different directions.This limited any cul de sac to under 1,000 feet maximum. (previously cul de sacs were limited to 500 feet but could get a modification to be longer with no limit. Now modifications are allowed only between 500 and 1,000 feet). The result has been more interconnected streets and subdivisions, reduction of long isolated streets and more connections creating neighborhoods. This was done to eliminate isolated 'lollypop' developments, provide better neighborhoods and provide safety forces, especially fire, with multiple access. This also was supported by other departments including service and school transportation."

---

Note from Planning Commissioners Journal Editor Wayne Senville: During my cross-country travels on U.S. Route 50 while in Montrose, Colorado, I also heard first hand about the impacts of not requiring street connections between subdivisions. See my post, Connecting in Montrose.

 

When this Montrose subdivision was approved, no connecting street was required to the neighboring development (though space for a future connection was provided). Photo by Wayne Senville.

For two other interesting reports on the cul-de-sac debate listen to John Nielsen's report on National Public Radio: Cul-de-Sacs: Suburban Dream or Dead End? and read Cul-de-sacs are a Dead End, posted on m-bike.org.

Have any thoughts on cul-de-sacs? Use the comment field below.