I’ve often
written about the nonintuitive but ultimately logical method by which speed
limits are set in California. For those
new to the subject, speed limits are established by the speeds at which cars
travel when drivers are unaware of a speed limit. So if most drivers demonstrate by their
actions that a road should be driven at 30 mph, the speed limit under
California law would be 30 mph, with only a few exceptions.
This
standard for setting speed limits has interesting implications for urbanists
and for all who care about traffic safety.
Specifically, drivers will travel at the maximum speed at which they
feel comfortable. Therefore, making drivers
less comfortable would have the effect of reducing both travel speeds and speed
limits.
After
decades of seeking to improve the driving experience and road safety by
widening streets, removing street trees, and requiring off-street parking, we
now understand that the primary result was greater speeds that often reduce
safety. Instead, we should have been
increasing driver discomfort by narrowing streets, planting street trees, and
encouraging on-street parking.
I have a
neighbor who regularly complains about two aspects of the cars on our
street. First, she grumbles that too
many cars speed. Second, she protests
when people she doesn’t know park at the curb in front of her home. Perhaps I’ll find an opportunity over the
holiday season to explain to her that more parked cars, especially badly parked
ones that encroach into the travel lane, would slow traffic, so her two
complaints are inconsistent. Watching
her splutter can be a Christmas gift to myself.
(Another
aspect of our street, which I’ll broach if I really want to mess with the neighbor,
is that the street, like many older streets in Petaluma, has received supplemental
lifts of asphalt over the years without a full depth repaving. The result is road section that is
significantly humped in the middle. Most
of the neighbors complain that the City owes us a full depth repaving. But the humped section reduces driver comfort
and thereby reduces traffic speeds, a point that I’d enjoy making.)
I’ve written
much of this before, but a recent comment by a young North Bay planner cast a
more personal light on speed limits. In
describing the Petaluma home in which he’d grown up, he noted that safety on
his childhood street was quite good.
Because of the narrow width and extensive street parking, the few
drivers who traversed the street did so with caution.
I knew the
exact street segment to which he was referring, although I don’t travel it
often because I don’t find it a friendly street to drive, proving his point.
His comment
induced me to take a short tour of Petaluma, camera in hand, to document a range
of street sections. The top photo is
from the street on which the planner spent his youth. The second is also from the Oakhill Brewster
neighborhood, around the corner from the first street. Although the second street is wider, both
feel confined by parked cars and both have the centerline humps that also slow
speeds.
It was
interesting to note that there are few if any speed limit signs within Oakhill
Brewster. The street geometry keeps
drivers below 25 mph, which is the generally lowest speed limit allowed by
California, so there was no need for the signs.
In contrast,
I then visited the site of an eastside apartment project now under planning
review. At the hearings on the project, the
neighbors complained strenuously about traffic speeds. I’ve written several times about the issue,
most recently here.
The upper photo is in front of the proposed apartment site; the lower is
around the corner on a crossing street.
The different
between the two sets of photos is striking.
The absence of street parking and/or greater street width in the latter
set increases driver comfort and speed.
The absence of a significant centerline hump does the same. It’s not surprising that the neighbors near
the latter two photos have complained about travel speeds.
And I remain
convinced that the reduced lane widths I’ve been pushing for the neighborhood
could be an essential step toward reducing driver comfort and thereby reducing speeds.
Next time
you’re bothered by speeding in a neighborhood, take a look at the street
section, consider it relative to these photos, and conceive ways to make
drivers less comfortable. Then push your
solution at city hall. The city folks
will be so shocked to have someone with answers rather than complaints that
they might be willing to give a good listen.
The past few
days have been rainy, a pleasant change for drought-stricken California. Some will argue that, although it’s still too
early to be sure, the end of the drought may be close. I disagree, for reasons I’ll explain in my
next post.
As always,
your questions or comments will be appreciated.
Please comment below or email me.
And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)
No comments:
Post a Comment