Traffic Calming - CivicWeb
Transcript of Traffic Calming - CivicWeb
Traffic CalmingRoadway Design to Reduce Traffic Speeds and Volumes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~TDM Encyclopedia
Victoria Transport Policy Institute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Updated 15 April 2015
ThischapterdescribestheconceptofTrafficCalming,whichreferstovariousroadwaydesignfeaturesintendedtoreducetrafficspeedsandvolumes.DescriptionTrafficCalming(alsocalledTrafficManagement)referstovariousdesignfeaturesandstrategiesintendedtoreducevehicletrafficspeedsandvolumesonapar8cularroadway.Table1describessomeofthesestrategies.TrafficCalmingprojectscanrangefromminormodifica8onsofanindividualstreettocomprehensiveredesignofaroadnetwork.HomeZonesreferstoanareawithextensiveTrafficCalming.TrafficCalmingisbecomingincreasinglyacceptedbytransporta8onprofessionalsandurbanplanners.Table 1 Traffic Calming Strategies and Devices
Type DescriptionCurbextensions“pinchpoints”
Curbextensions,planters,orcenterlinetrafficislandsthatnarrowtrafficlanestocontroltrafficandreducepedestriancrossingdistances.Alsocalled“chokers.”
Speedtables,raisedcrosswalks
Rampedsurfaceaboveroadway,7-10cmhigh,3-6mlong.
Mini-circles Smalltrafficcirclesatintersec8ons.Medianisland
Raisedislandintheroadcenter(median)narrowslanesandprovidespedestrianwithasafeplacetostop.
Channeliza8onislands Araisedislandthatforcestrafficinapar8culardirec8on,suchasright-turn-only.Tightercornerradii Theradiusofstreetcornersaffectstrafficturningspeeds.A8ghterradiusforces
driverstoreducespeed.Itispar8cularlyhelpfulforintersec8onswithnumerouspedestrians.
Speedhumps Curved7-10cmhigh,3-4mlonghump.Speedlumps Twoormorespeedhumpswithgapsspacedtoallowfire-rescuevehiclestopass
withoutslowing.RumbleStrips Lowbumpsacrossroadmakenoisewhendrivenover.Chicanes
Curbbulgesorplanters(usually3)onalterna8ngsides,forcingmotoriststoslowdown.
Roundabouts Mediumtolargecirclesatintersec8ons(KiVelson,2000).Pavementtreatments
Specialpavementtextures(cobbles,bricks,etc.)andmarkingstodesignatespecialareas.
Bikelanes Markingbikelanesnarrowstrafficlanes.“Roaddiets” Reducingthenumberandwidthoftrafficlanes,par8cularlyonarterials.Horizontalshi[s Lanecenterlinethatcurvesorshi[s.2-lanesnarrowto1-lane Curbbulgeorcenterislandnarrows2-laneroaddownto1-lane,forcingtraffic
foreachdirec8ontotaketurns.Semi-diverters,par8alclosures
Restrictentry/exitto/fromneighborhood.Limittrafficflowatintersec8ons.
Streetclosures Closingoffstreetstothroughvehicletrafficatintersec8onsormidblock“Neotradi8onal”streetdesign
Streetswithnarrowerlanes,shorterblocks,T-intersec8ons,andotherdesignfeaturestocontroltrafficspeedandvolumes.
PerceptualDesignFeatures PaVernspaintedintoroadsurfacesandotherperceptualdesignfeaturesthatencouragedriverstoreducetheirspeeds.
Plan8ngtreesalongastreettocreateasenseofenclosureandimprovethe
StreetTrees pedestrianenvironment.Woonerf Streetswithmixedvehicleandpedestriantraffic,wheremotoristsarerequired
todriveatverylowspeeds.SpeedReduc8ons Trafficspeedreduc8onprograms.Increasedenforcementofspeedingviola8ons.Roadwaystriping Pain8ngroadwaymarkingsthatnarrowtrafficlanesandencouragelowertraffic
speeds.ThistablesummarizesvariousTrafficCalmingdevicesandstrategies.ForillustraAonsseewww.pedbikeimages.organdDKSAssociates,2002.TrafficCalminginvolvesContextSensi8veDesignprac8ces,whichmeansthatroadwayplannersandengineershaveflexiblestandardsthatcanaccommodatecommunityvaluesandbalancedobjec8ves.NewUrbanismincorporatesTrafficCalmingfeaturesintothedesignofnewdevelopmentsandurbanredevelopment.Itcanmakeurbanstreetssaferandquieter.Itcanincreaseresiden8alpropertyvaluesandlocaleconomicac8vity.Figure 1 Speed Table
ThisillustratesaspeedtableusedtolimittrafficspeedsonaresidenAalstreet.(PhotocurtseyofUrbanEngineers)TrafficCalmingisonecomponentofAreaTrafficManagement,whichincludesvariousstrategiestocontroltrafficvolumes,controltrafficspeeds,managetransporta8ondemand,educateandenforcetrafficandpedestrianfacilityrules,improvetheStreetscapedesign,andimprovestreetenvironments(CityofOVawa2004).TrafficCalmingchangesStreetscapedesigntogivegreateremphasistopedestrians,cyclistsandresidents.It
appliesCompleteStreetsprinciples,whichrecognizethatroadwayso[enservediversefunc8ons,andRealloca8ngRoadSpacetoincreasethepor8onofright-of-waydevotedtobicyclelanes,sidewalksandgreenspace.Somefeatures,suchaswidersidewalksandimprovedcrosswalks,supportUniversalDesignobjec8ves(makingtransporta8onsystemsaccommodatepeoplewithdisabili8esandotherspecialneeds).StreetReclaimingemphasizesac8onbyneighborhoodresidentstochangethewaytheirstreetsareperceivedandusedtobeVeraccommodatenonmotorizedac8vi8es.Trafficcalmingsome8mesinvolvechangingtrafficflowpaVerns,par8cularlyconver8ngone-wayintotwo-waystreets.AnalysisbyGilderbloomandRiggs(2015)inseveralU.S.ci8esindicatesthatsuchconversions:· Reducetrafficspeeds.· Increasewalkingandcyclingac8vity.· Significantlyreducetrafficaccidents.· Reducelocalcrimerates.· Increaselocalbusinessac8vity.· Increasepropertyvaluesandtaxrevenues.Someresearchindicatesthatimprovedroadwaylandscapingandtreeplan8ngencourageswalkingandreducesaccidentrates(Naderi2002;Dumbaugh2005).Treescanbepar8cularlybeneficialinhotareaswheretheyprovideshade.MostTrafficCalmingprojectsareimplementedonurbanstreetswithlowtomoderatetrafficvolumes,butsomestrategiescanreducetrafficspeedsandimprovepedestriancondi8onsonsuburbanstreets,arterialsandhighways.PonnaluriandGroce(2005)describehowspeedhumpsaresuccessfullyimplementedonmoderatevolumesuburbanroads,significantlyreducingtrafficspeeds.Highwaytrafficspeedcontrolstrategiescanincludevisualmessages(Fildes,etal.,1999;Meyer,2001),gatewaysandroundabouts(Hass-Klau,etal,1992;KiVelson,2000),andspecialdesigntreatmentsforhighwaysthatbisecttowns(DEA&Associates,1999).RoadDietsandEnvironmentallyAdoptedThroughRoadsreferstoTrafficCalmingappliedtohigher-volumearterials(BurdenandLagerway1999;CORDIS1999;CTRE2006;Rosales,2007).Roaddietstypicallyinvolveconver8ngfourtrafficlanestothreetrafficlanes,withacenterturnlaneandbicyclelanes,andvariouspedestrianandaesthe8cimprovements.Thisissuitableforroadswithupto20,000averagemotorvehiclesperday.Stout,etal(2006)foundthatconversionoffour-laneundividedroadwaystothree-lanecross-sec8onsintypicalIowatownsreducedcrashfrequencyby25%andcrashinjuriesby34%.Thetablebelowsummarizesthecrashreduc8onbenefitsfromsomerecentRoadDietprojects.HighwaySafetyInforma8onSystem(HSIS2010)concludesthatroaddietstypicallyreducecrashratesby47%onmajorhighwaysthroughsmallurbanareas,by19%oncorridorsinlargercitysuburbanareas,and29%overall.Table 2 Road Diet Crash Reduction Impacts (Seattle DOT)
Roadway Location Date Change ADT Before ADT After Collision ReductionGreenwoodAveN,N80thSttoN50th
April1995
11,872 12,427 24to10(58%)
N45thStreet,WallingfordArea
December1972 19,421 20,274 45to23(49%)
8thAveNW,BallardArea
January1994 10,549 11,858 18to7(61%)
Mar8nLutherKingJrWay,NorthofI90
January1994 12,336 13,161 15to6(60%)
DexterAveN,QueenAnnArea
June1991
13,606 14,949 19to16(59%)
24thAveNW,NW85thtoNW65th
October1995 9,727 9,754 14to10(28%)
ThistablesummariesthecrashreducAoneffectsofroaddietsonmajorarterialsinSeaQle,Washington.(ADT=AverageDailyTraffic)Inpreviousdecadesmanyurbanarterialswereconvertedtoone-waytraffictomaximizetrafficspeedsandvolumes.Someofthesearenowbeingconvertedbacktotwo-waytrafficinordertoreducetrafficspeedsandcreatemorepedestrian-friendlystreets.Onestudyofsuchconversionsin22U.S.ci8esfoundthatalmostallareconsideredsuccessful(HMSBID2000).Conver8ngtotwo-waytrafficimprovedbusinessac8vity,increasedinvestmentonthestreet,improvedtrafficdistribu8on(morechoicesonhowtogetaround),helpedcreateamorepedestrian-friendlyenvironment,andproducedageneralfeelingofimproved“livability,”“quaintness”and“senseofcommunity.”Nonereportedsignificantnega8veeffectsorplanstoconvertbacktoone-waytraffic.Ivan,GarrickandHanson(2009)observedtrafficatabout300loca8onsinurban,suburbanandruralareasacrossConnec8cut,atloca8onswithouthorizontalcurvesortrafficcontroldevices.Theyfoundstrongsta8s8calrela8onshipsbetweentrafficspeedsandvariousroadwaydesignfactors.Higheraveragetrafficspeedsareassociatedwithwideshoulders,largebuildingsetbacksandaresiden8alloca8on.Loweraveragetrafficspeedsareassociatedwithon-streetparking,sidewalksandadowntownorcommercialloca8on.Thesefindingssuggestthatdriversslowdownwheretheroadfeels“hemmed-in”orthereisno8ceablestreetac8vity,andtheyspeedupwheretheroadfeels“wideopen”orstreetac8vityislessno8ceable.ModernRoundaboutsAroundaboutisanintersec8onbuiltwithacircularislandaroundwhichtrafficrotatesinonedirec8on.Manyolderroundabouts(whichwerealsocalledtrafficcirclesorrotaries)werebuiltprimarilyasaloca8onforafountainorstatue,withliVleregardtotrafficprinciples.Asaresult,therehasbeenconsiderablevaria8onindesignfeaturesandtrafficregula8on,causingconfusionandaccidents.Formanyyearsroundaboutswereunpopularwiththepublicandtrafficprofessionals.DuringthelateTwen8ethCentury,trafficengineeringorganiza8onsdevelopedroundaboutdesignstandardsandmanagementprac8cestomaximizetrafficefficiencyandsafety.Thesearecalled“ModernRoundabouts.”Theyhavethefollowingfeatures.· YieldatEntry.Trafficenteringtheroundaboutyieldstheright-of-waytothecircula8ngtraffic.
Thispreventstrafficfromlocking-upandallowsfreeflowmovement.· DeflecAon.Theentrylaneisdesignedwithasmalldeflectorislandtoreinforcetheyielding
processandslowtraffic.· Limitedsize.Modernroundaboutsusuallyhavejustone,andnevermorethantwo,rota8ng
lanes.Inaddi8on,therearemini-roundabouts,whicharesmalltrafficcircleslocatedwithinlocalintersec8ons.Theys8llrequireyield-at-entrybutdonothaveadeflectorisland.Researchhasshownthatroundaboutscanimprovereducevehiclestopsanddelays,reducetrafficspeeds,andincreasesafetycomparedwithotherintersec8ondesigns.Theyarealsousedtoprovideagatewayoraesthe8cfeature.Asaresult,roundaboutsareonceagainbeingpromotedbytrafficengineersandplanners,andareanimportantTrafficCalmingtool.Theyare
increasinglycommonthroughouttheworld.Tomaximizesafetyandestablishconsistencyitisveryimportantthatallroundaboutsbedesigned(andexis8ngonesredesigned)toreflectModernRoundaboutprinciples.ResourcesAlaskaRoundabouts(www.alaskaroundabouts.com/index.html)providesinforma8ononroundaboutplanning,includinginstalla8onsinAlaska.AlexAriniello,AreRoundaboutsGoodforBusiness?,TRB(hVp://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=775405),CasestudyBellingham,Washington(www.reidmiddleton.com/roundabout/rb_cs%20Cordata.htm)FHWA,RoundaboutSafetyComestoAmerica,FederalHighwayAdministra8on(www.shrc.gov/pubrds/fall95/p95a41.htm),1995.Ar8cleaboutthehistoryofthemodernroundabout,itscharacteris8csandsafetyimprovementrecord.FHWA,Roundabouts:AnInformaAonalGuide,USDepartmentofTransporta8onFederalHighwayAdministra8on(www.shrc.gov/safety/00068.htm)GeorgeJacquemart,ModernRoundaboutPracAceintheUnitedStates,NCHRPSynthesis264,Transporta8onResearchBoard(www.trb.org),1998.KiVelsonandAssociates,Roundabouts:AnInformaAonalGuide,TurnerFairbankHighwayResearchCenter,FederalHighwayAdministra8on,FHWA-RD-00-67(www.shrc.gov/safety/00068.htm),June2000.NYDOT,ModernRoundabouts:GuidanceforDesignEngineersandUsers,NewYorkStateDepartmentofTransporta8on(www.dot.state.ny.us/roundabouts/howto.html).Detailedinstruc8onforvehicle,pedestrian,andbicycleroundaboutuserswithanimatedgraphics.RoundaboutsandTrafficCircles,ABNAEngineering(www.abnaengineering.com/abna),2000.Informa8ononroundaboutsbyleadingdesigners,MichaelWallworkandRichardM.BarneVJr.Roundabouts,anInformaAonalGuide,Turner-FairbanksHighwayResearchCenter,FederalHighwayAdministra8on(www.shrc.gov/safety/00068.htm),2000.Includesanoutlineofthebook,adatabaseofbuiltandplannedU.S.roundabouts,andanextensivebibliographyofroundaboutresources.RoundaboutUSA(www.roundaboutsusa.com)isacomprehensiveroundaboutwebsitewithinforma8onformotorists,roaddesigners,publicofficialswithmanyphotosofroundaboutsinusethroughoutthecountry.SIDRADesign(www.akcelik.com.au/SIDRA/roundabouts.htm),providesroundaboutplanninganddesigntools.WSDOT,RoundaboutInformaAonandBenefits(www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/SR539/I5_Access/Tenmile_Border/Roundabouts.htm#13)
WSDOT,WhatisaRoundabout?WashingtonStateDepartmentofTransporta8on(www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/roundabouts),
TrafficCalmingmeasuresmustbecarefullydesignedandmanagedtoavoiddegradingtravelcondi8onsforcyclistsandvisuallyimpairedpedestrians.Unnecessarystopsignsareahindrancetocycling.Onarterials,curbextensionsandchicanesshouldnotintrudeintobicycletravellanes(regardlessofwhethertheyareofficiallydesignatedasbikelanes)andforcecycliststocompeteforroadspacewithhigherspeedtraffic.Streetclosuresshouldallowaccesstononmotorizedmodes.Whilesmall,slowspeed,singlelanetrafficcirclesareeasilynego8atedbycyclistsandpeoplewithvisualdisabili8es,largerdouble-laneroundaboutswith20km/horhighertrafficspeedscanbedifficulttonego8ate.How It Is ImplementedTrafficCalmingimplementa8ono[enbeginswithCompleteStreetspolicieswhichrecognizethatroadwayso[enservediversefunc8onswhichmustbeconsideredandbalancedinroadwaydesignandmanagement.TrafficCalmingprogramsareusuallyimplementedbylocalengineeringdepartments.Theseprogramsinvolveeduca8ngplannersandtrafficengineersaboutTrafficCalmingstrategies,establishingpoliciesandguidelinesforimplemen8ngTrafficCalmingprojects,anddevelopingfundingsources.SpecificTrafficCalmingprojectsmaybeini8atedbyneighborhoodrequests,trafficsafetyprograms,oraspartofcommunityredevelopment.StreetReclaimingisini8atedandorganizedbyneighborhoodresidents.Travel ImpactsTrafficCalmingreducesvehicletrafficspeedsandsome8mesvolumes.ThetablebelowsummarizesthetrafficspeedimpactsofvariousTrafficCalmingdevices.Evenwherespeedreduc8onsaresmall,TrafficCalmingtendstoreducethehighesttrafficspeeds(i.e.,thefastest5-15%ofvehicles),whichprovidesgreatersafetyandnoisereduc8onbenefitsthanindicatedbyaveragereduc8ons.Trafficstudiesfindthatforevery1meterincreaseinstreetwidththe85thpercen8levehicletrafficspeedincreases1.6kph,andthenumberofvehiclestraveling8to16kph[5or10mph]ormoreabovethespeedlimitincreasesgeometrically(“Appendix,”DKSAssociates2002).Thatstudyalsofoundthatasresiden8alstreettrafficspeedsincrease,neighborhoodlivabilityra8ngsdecline.Table 3 Speed Impacts of Traffic Calming Measures (Ewing 1999)
Sample Size
Avg. SpeedAfterward (mph)
Avg. SpeedChange
Avg. %Change
12'Humps 179 27.4 -7.6 -2214'Humps 15 25.6 -7.7 -2322'Tables 58 30.1 -6.6 -18LongerTables 10 31.6 -3.2 -9RaisedIntersec8ons 3 34.3 -0.3 -1Circles 45 30.2 -3.9 -11Narrowings 7 32.3 -2.6 -4One-LaneSlowPoints 5 28.6 -4.8 -14HalfClosures 16 26.3 -6.0 -19DiagonalDiverters 7 27.9 -1.4 -0.5
Fromwww.trafficcalming.org.
TrafficCalmingtendstoreducetotalvehiclemileageinanareabyreducingtravelspeedsandimprovingcondi8onsforwalking,cyclingandtransituse(Morrison,ThomsonandPeycrew2004).Residentsinneighborhoodswithsuitablestreetenvironmentstendtowalkandbicyclemore,ridetransitmore,anddrivelessthancomparablehouseholdsinotherareas.Onestudyfoundthatresidentsinapedestrianfriendlycommunitywalked,bicycled,orrodetransitfor49%ofworktripsand15%oftheirnon-worktrips,18-and11-percentagepointsmorethanresidentsofacomparableautomobileorientedcommunity(CerveroandRadisch1995).Anotherstudyfoundthatwalkingisthree8mesmorecommoninacommunitywithpedestrianfriendlystreetsthaninotherwisecomparablecommuni8esthatarelessconducivetofoottravel(Moudon,etal,1996).WhereRoadDietsincludetheaddi8onofcyclinglanes,bicycletraveltypicallyincreases20-30%.Formoreinforma8onseeLandUseImpactsonTransportandEvalua8ngNonmotorizedTransport.Variousstudiesindicateanelas8cityofvehicletravelwithrespecttotravel8meof–0.5intheshortrunand–1.0overthelongrun,meaningthata20%reduc8oninaveragetrafficspeedswillreducetotalvehicletravelby10%duringthefirstfewyears,andupto20%overalonger8meperiod(formoreinforma8onseeTransportElas8ci8es).Ofcourse,mostTrafficCalmingprojectsonlyaffectasmallpor8onoftotalvehicletravel,sotheirimpactontotalvehicletravelissmall.However,acomprehensiveTrafficCalmingprogramcombinedwithotherTDMstrategiesmayhaveasignificanteffectontotalvehicletravel.FrankandHawkins(2007)es8matethatinatypicalurbanneighborhood,achangefromapuresmall-blockgridtoamodifiedgrid(aFusedGrid,inwhichpedestrianandcyclingtravelisallowed,butautomobiletrafficisblockedatasignificantpor8onofintersec8ons)thatincreasestherela8veconnec8vityforpedestriansby10%wouldtypicallyincreasehome-basedwalkingtripsby11.3%,increasetheoddsapersonwillmeettherecommendedlevelofphysicalac8vitythroughwalkingintheirlocaltravelby26%,anddecreasevehiclesmilesoflocaltravelby23%.ThefollowingfactorsinfluencehowmuchaTrafficCalmingprojectaffectstravel:· Magnitudeofchange.ThemoreTrafficCalmingreducestrafficspeedsandimproveswalkingandcycling
condi8ons,themoreitwillaffecttotaltravel.TrafficCalmingthatsignificantlyreducesabarriertonon-motorizedtravel(forexample,bymakingiteasiertowalkacrossanarterialfromonemajorac8vitycentertoanotherorcrea8ngapleasantbicycletravelcorridorwherenoneotherwiseexists)mayhavesignificanttravelimpactsinanarea.
· WalkingandCyclingDemand.ATrafficCalmingprojectwillhavethemosttravelimpactsifimplementednear
majorpedestrianandcyclinggenerators:residen8alneighborhoods,commercialcenters,schools,andrecrea8oncenters.
· IntegraAonwithotherimprovements.TrafficCalmingcomplementsotherdemandmanagementefforts.Traffic
Calmingcanincreasetheeffec8venessofPedestrianandCyclingImprovements,ParkingManagement,TransitImprovements,NewUrbanismandmanyotherTDMstrategies.
· Landuseeffects.TrafficCalmingsupportsClustered,mixed-use,infill,pedestrian-orientedlanduse
developmentthatfurtherreduceautomobileuseandautomobiledependencyoverthelongrun.Table 4 Travel Impact Summary
Objec1ve Ra1ng CommentsReducestotaltraffic. 2 Discouragesautomobiletrafficandincreases
travelalterna8ves.Reducespeakperiodtraffic. 0 Shi[speaktooff-peakperiods. 0 Shi[sautomobiletraveltoalterna8vemodes.
2 Improveswalkingandcyclingcondi8onsanddiscouragesautomobileuse.
Improvesaccess,reducestheneedfortravel.
1 Encourageshigher-density,mixedlanduse.
Increasedridesharing. 0 Increasedpublictransit. 1 Improvesaccesstotransit.Increasedcycling. 2 Improvescyclingcondi8ons.Increasedwalking. 3 Improveswalkingcondi8ons.IncreasedTelework. 0 Reducedfreighttraffic. 0
Ra8ngfrom3(verybeneficial)to–3(veryharmful).A0indicatesnoimpactormixedimpacts.Benefits And CostsTrafficCalmingbenefitsandcostsaresummarizedinthetablebelow.Table 5 Traffic Calming Impacts (Litman, 1999)
DescriptionBenefits IncreasedRoadSafety.
Reducedtrafficaccidentfrequencyandseverity,par8cularlyforcrashesinvolvingpedestriansandcyclists.
Increasedcomfortandmobilityfornon-motorizedtravel.
Increasedcomfortandmobilityforpedestriansandcyclists.
Reducedautomobileimpacts.
Increasednon-motorizedtravelsubs8tutesforautomobiletrips,reducingconges8on,expensesandpollu8on.
IncreasedCommunityLivability Reducednoiseandairpollu8on,andimprovedaesthe8cs.Increasedneighborhoodinterac8on.
Morehospitablestreetsencouragestreetac8vi8esandcommunityinterac8on.
Increasedpropertyvalues.
Reducedtrafficspeedandvolumesincreaseresiden8alpropertyvalues.
PublicHealth Moreopportuni8esforwalkingandotherphysicalac8vity.Costs Projectexpenses.
Financialcostsassociatedwithimplemen8ngandmaintainingTrafficCalmingfacili8es.
Liabilityclaims IncreasedliabilityclaimscausedbyTrafficCalming.Vehicledelay.
Reducedtrafficspeeds.Motoristseitherincreasetheirtravel8meorreducetraveldistance.
Trafficspilloveronotherstreets. TrafficCalmingononestreetcanshi[traffictootherstreets.Problemsforemergencyandservicevehicles.
Delaytofiretrucks,andproblemsforbuses,garbagetrucksandsnowplows.
Increaseddrivers’effortandfrustra8on. Increasedeffortrequiredfordrivingontrafficcalmedroadsandtheresul8ngfrustra8on.
Problemsforbicyclistsandvisuallyimpairedpedestrians.
SomeTrafficCalmingstrategiescauseproblemstobicyclistsorvisuallyimpairedpedestrians.
KahnandKahnGoedecke(2011)comparevarioustrafficcalmingdevicesandhighlighttherela8veadvantagesofroadstripingasapar8cularlyinexpensivewaytoreducetrafficspeedsonsomeroadways,assummarizedinTable6.Table 6 Comparison of Traffic Calming Devices (Kahn and Kahn Goedecke 2011)
Traffic Calming Pros Cons Speed Typical Cost
Technique ReductionSpeedhump •Effec8velyreducesspeed
byapproximately8mph.•Cancausesomediversionofexcesstrafficvolumes.
•Notacceptedbymanylocaljurisdic8onsandemergencyserviceagencies.•Improperdrivingcancausevehicledamageandcancausevehiclestogooutofcontrol.•Moderatecostconsidera8ons.•Canimpactbicycles/motorcycles.•Difficulttoremove.
8mph $1,500to$3,000
Speedcushion •Effec8veinreducingspeedsupto5milesperhour.•Moreacceptabletopublicagencies/emergencyserviceagencies,becausecanslownormalsizevehiclesbutallowslargeremergencyvehiclestopasswithoutspeedreduc8ons.
•Someagenciesandemergencyserviceagenciesdonotsupportthesedevices.•Costforconstruc8onismoderate.•Difficulttoremove.•Mayimpactbicycles/motorcycles.
5mph $2,500to$3,500
Chokersandchicanes •Effec8velyreducestrafficspeedsapproximately3milesperhour.•Canreduceroadwaywidthtoreducewalkingdistanceforpedestrian(whichisasafetybenefit).•Canbeenhancedwithlandscapingtoimproveaesthe8cs.
•Expensivetoimplement.•Cancausedrainageissues.•Difficulttoremoveinthefutureifnoteffec8ve.•Somelossofparking.•Canimpactbicycles.
3–6mph $7,000–$15,000perpair
Medians •Canreducespeedstosomedegree.•Canprovideaesthe8cbenefitstothecommunity.
•Costlytoimplement.•Difficulttoremoveifnotsuccessful.•Cancauseaddi8onalmaintenancecosts.•Wateroverallonpavement.•Mayloseparking.
2-3mph $5,000–$15,000
Pavementtexture •Cancauseminorreduc8oninspeed.•Canbeaesthe8callypleasing.•Canbe8edintocrosswalksorintersec8onstodefinechannelizedareasforpedestrians.
•Costlytoimplement.•Difficulttoremove.•Caneffectsometypesofpedestrianscrossingthestreet.•Cancausenoiseimpacts.
Limiteddata $5–$16persq.[.
Minitrafficcircles •Minorreduc8oninspeed.•Improvesaesthe8cs.•Slowstrafficthroughtheintersec8on.
•Costlytoimplement.•Canconfusedriversregardingwhichwaytotravelthroughanintersec8on.•Mayaffectbicyclesandpedestrians.•Canimpactle[turnsforlargevehicles.•Canslowemergencyservicevehicles.
4-6mph $10,000–$60,000
Trafficcalmingstriping •Effec8veinreducingspeedsfrom1to7+milesperhour.
•Somelimita8onsinspeedreduc8on.•Lesseffec8vewhenspeeds
1-7+mph $500–$1,000per500-feet
•Acceptedbymanypublicagenciesandemergencyserviceagenciesbecausetheyarestandardtrafficcontrol.•Easytochangeifrequiredinthefuture.•Lesscostlyop8ontoinstall•Installa8oncanbeimplementedquickly.•Canberemovedmoreeasilythanotherop8ons(sandblast).
arealreadylow.
Safety BenefitsTrafficCalmingcansignificantlyreducecrashrisk,par8cularlyforpedestriansandcyclists(SafetyEvalua8on).Lowervehiclespeedsreducethelikelihoodofcrashesandthedegreeofinjurythatresults(LeafandPreusser1998;NCCHPP2011).Fatalityriskincreaseswithvehiclespeedtothefourthpower;a1%reduc8oninthespeedofavehicleinvolvedinacollisionprovidesa2%reduc8onintheriskofinjuriesanda4%reduc8onintheriskoffatali8es(StusterandCoffman1998).Theseverityofpedestrianinjuriesfromvehiclecrashesincreasewiththesquareofspeed(ITE1997,p.18).Theprobabilityofapedestrianbeingkilledinacrashis3.5%ifthevehicleistravelingat15mph,37%at31mphand83%at44mph(Limpert1994,p.663).FieldstudiesshowsignificantsafetybenefitsfromTrafficCalming,asindicatedinthetablebelow.Adetailedsurvey(meta-analysis)of33studiesbyElvik(2001)foundthatarea-widetrafficcalmingprogramsreduceinjuryaccidentsbyabout15%,withthelargestreduc8onisonresiden8alstreets(25%),andsomewhatsmallerreduc8onsonmainroads(10%).Table 7 Safety Impacts of Traffic Calming Measures, U.S. Experience
Number ofObservations
Average Number ofCollisions
% Change inCollisions
Before After 12'Humps 49 2.7 2.4 -11%14'Humps 5 4.4 2.6 -41%22'Tables 8 6.7 3.7 -45%Circles 130 2.2 0.6 -73%AllMeasures– 192 2.6 1.3 -50%(Ewing1999;www.trafficcalming.org)AstudybytheInsuranceIns8tuteforHighwaySafetyfoundthattrafficroundaboutswhichreplaceconven8onalintersec8onsreducetotalcrashes39%andinjurycrashesby76%,andes8matesthatfatalandincapacita8nginjurycrashescouldbereducedabout90%(Persaud2000).Theseresultsareconsistentwithotherinterna8onalstudies.Narrowerroadswithfewertrafficlanesareassociatedwithsignificantlylowercrashrisktopedestriansthanwiderroads(Zegeer,etal.2002;AARP2009).Landscapinginthecentermedianofurbanarterialswasfoundtosignificantlyreducecrashrates(Mok,LandphairandNaderi2003).Theaddi8onalrisktopedestriansassociatedwithmul8-laneroadscanbereducedwithdesignfeaturessuchasraisedcentermeridians(whichgivepedestriansasaferefugewhentheyarehalfwayacrosstheroad)andSpeedReduc8onstrategies(Gårder2004).Conver8ngfour-laneurbanarterialstotwolanesplusacenterturnlanetendstoreduce
collisionsabout1/3,improvespedestriantravelandcausesonlyminorreduc8onsintrafficvolumes(Welsh2001).WeiandLovegrove(2010)evaluatedtheroadsafetyoffiveneighbourhoodpaVerns–grid,culs-de-sac,andDutchSustainableRoadSafety(SRS,orlimitedaccess),3-wayoffset,andfusedgridnetworks.Analysisusingstandardtransporta8onplanningmethodologyrevealedthatallcanmaintainsimilarlevelsofmobilityandaccessibility.Analysisusingstandardroadsafetyanalysismethodologyfurtherrevealedthatthe3-wayoffset,andfusedgridpaVernssignificantlyimproveroadsafety,byasmuchas60%comparedtoprevalentpaVerns(i.e.gridandculs-de-sac).Theseresultsdonotaccountfortheaddi8onalsafetybenefitsthatresultfromroadwaydesignsthat,byimprovingnon-motorizedtravelcondi8onstendtoshi[travelfromautotonon-automodes.Asaresult,thesecanbeconsideredlower-boundes8matesofsafetybenefits.Annualcrashratesperlane-miletendtoincreasewithlanewidth,andarehighestonwider,lowervolume,straightstreetsthathavethehighestspeeds(Swi[,PainterandGoldstein2006;Zegeer,etal.1994;AARP2009).24-footstreetsappeartohavethelowestaccidentrates.Thissuggeststhatnarrowerstreetdesignsandtrafficcalmingcanincreaseroadsafety.TrafficCalmingprovidesgreateroverallsafetybenefitsthanthecul-de-sacstreetdesignso[enusedtoincreasesafety.LucyandPhillips(2006)findthatcrashratesincreasewiththenumberofcul-de-sacsinanarea,becauseanyincreaseinsafetyoncul-de-sacsisoffsetbytheaddi8onalvehicle-mileageinducedbylessconnectedstreetsystems.Health BenefitsTrafficCalmingtendstoincreasewalkingandcyclingac8vityinanarea,whichtendstoimprovephysicalHealth(Morrison,ThomsonandPeycrew2004;NCCHPP2011).Inadequatephysicalac8vityisamajorcontributortocardiovasculardisease,diabetes,hypertension,obesity,osteoporosisandsomecancers.Economic Development BenefitsTrafficCalmingcanhelpimproveretailenvironmentsandsupportlocalEconomicDevelopment.Inasurveyofbusinessownersinanurbanretaildistrict,Drennen(2003)foundthat65%consideralocalTrafficCalmingprogramtoprovideoveralleconomicbenefits,comparedwith4%thatconsideritoverallnega8ve,and65%supportfurthertrafficcalmingprojectsintheirarea.Thesebenefitscanbepar8cularlyimportantintourist-orientedbusinessdistricts,andaspartofcommunityrevitaliza8on.DrennenalsoarguesthatTrafficCalmingcanprovideeconomicbenefitsbyincreasinguseofalterna8vemodesandreducingautomobileexpenditures,givingconsumersmoremoneytospendonlocallyproducedgoods.Drennendiscussesthefollowingpoten8aleconomicimpactsoftrafficcalming.
1. EconomicRevitalizaAonandPropertyValues.Trafficcalmingcanincreaseresiden8alandcommercialpropertyvalues,whichaVractswealthierresidentstothearea(gentrifica8on)andcanincreaseretailsalesandbringeconomicrevitaliza8ontoacommercialcorridor.
2. AQracAvenessandSafety.TrafficcalmingcreatesmoreaVrac8veenvironments,reducesautospeed,and
increasessafetyforpedestrians,bicyclists,drivers,andotherusersofthestreet,whichisgoodforbusiness.
3. SalesandAQracAngCustomers.Trafficcalmingencourageslocalresidentstobuyintheirownneighborhoods,andalsoaVractscustomersfromawiderareaduetoreducedtravel8me,hassle,andcost.
Trafficcalmingcanalsohelppeoplelivelesscar-dependentlifestyles,whichwillincreasetheamountofdiscre8onaryincometheycanspendonthingsotherthantransporta8on.
4. Parking.Mostbusinessesareconcernedaboutthequalityandquan8tyofcustomerparkingandaccessfor
deliverytrucks.However,toolargeasupplyofsubsidized,on-streetparkingcanharmbusinesses.
5. ImpactonEmployees.Poorbicycle,pedestrian,andtransitcondi8onscanharmbusinessesbylosingworkerproduc8vityand8metogridlock,andbyimpairingemployeerecruitment.Conversely,improvedtransporta8onfacili8escanprovidemoreconvenienceforemployees.
6. ConstrucAonandCosts.Trafficcalmingprojectso[enrequireonlyminimal“down8me”forconstruc8on,and
mostdonotrequireanyinvestmentfrombusinessowners.Property Value ImpactsTrafficCalmingcanimproveCommunityLivability,whichtendstoincreasepropertyvalues.HughesandSirmans(1992)findthatresiden8alproper8eshavehighervaluesiflocatedonastreetwithlowertrafficvolumesandspeeds.Similareffectscanoccuroncommercialstreets.AstudythatcomparedpropertyvaluesinaGrandRapids,Michiganresiden8alneighborhooda[eratrafficmanagementprogramwasimplementedfoundthattrafficvolumereduc8onsofafewhundredmotorvehiclesperdayincreasedadjacentresiden8alpropertyvaluesby5-25%(Bagby,1980).AnotherstudyfoundthathomesinNewUrbanistcommuni8essoldfor$20,189moreonaveragethancomparablehomesinconven8onalcommuni8es,an11%increaseinvalue,whichisprobablypartlyduetoTrafficCalmingthatisintegratedinNewUrbanistcommuni8es(EppliandTu2000).Inseveralcasestudies,reducingtrafficspeedsandmakingstreetsmorepedestrian-friendlysignificantlyincreasedretailsalesandpropertyvalues(LGC2001).CostsCostsincludeprogramexpensesandreducedmotorvehicletrafficspeeds.Thetablebelowprovidesgenericcostes8matesfortypicalTrafficCalmingmeasures.CoulterTransporta8onConsul8ng(2004)iden8fiesvariouspoten8alproblemsassociatedwithtrafficcalming,includinguncertaintyaboutimpactsandinstalla8oncosts.Table 8 Typical Costs of Traffic Calming Measures (Seattle Engineering Dept., 1996; Zegeer, etal 2002; Krizek, et al. 2006)
Measure Typical Costs (U.S. Dollars)Asphaltwalkway $30-40perlinearfootfor5-footwidewalkway.Curbramps $1,500perramp.Bikelanes $10,000-50,000permiletomodifyexis8ngroadway(nonewconstruc8on).Chokers $7,000forlandscapedchokeronasphaltstreet,$13,000onconcretestreet.Curbbulbs $10,000-20,000perbulb.Trafficcircles $4,000forlandscapedcircleonasphaltstreet,$6,000onconcretestreet.Chicanes $8,000forlandscapedchicanesonasphaltstreets,$14,000onconcretestreets.Streetclosures $6,500forlandscapedpar8alclosure,$30,000-100,000forfullclosure.Markedcrosswalk $100-300forpaintedcrosswalks,$3,000forpaVernedconcrete.Pedestrianrefugeisland $6,000-9,000,dependingonmaterialsandcondi8ons.Centermedians $15,000-20,000per100feet.Trafficsignals $15,000-60,000foranewsignal.Raisedintersec8on $70,000+perintersec8onTrafficsigns $75-100persign.Speedhumps $2,000perhump
TrafficCalmingcri8csraisethefollowingconcerns(SecondsCount2000):· Delaytoemergencyvehicles.· Civilrightsviola8ons(iftrafficrestric8onslimitaccesstosomeneighborhoods).· Increasedairpollu8on(fromspeedhumps).· Discomforttopeoplewithdisabili8es(fromspeedhumps).· Problemsforcyclists.· Liabilityandlawsuits.· Neighborhoodconflict.InfieldtestsAtkinsandColeman(1997)foundthatspeedhumpsandtrafficcirclescausevirtuallynodelaytosmallemergencyvehicles,butaddseveralsecondsdelayperdeviceforlargefiretrucks.TheLocalGovernmentCommissionhasproducedafactsheetthatdescribeshowemergencyvehicleaccessneedscanbeaddressedinnarrowstreetdesign(LGC2007).Thepercapitariskofdeathfromresiden8alfiresisfarlowerthanfrompedestriancrashes,whichimpliesthatTrafficCalmingcanprovidenetsafetybenefits,althoughexactimpactsvarydependingoncircumstances.Burden(2000a)describeshowtoincorporateemergencyresponseconcernswhenplanningtrafficcalmingprojects.Speedlumpsaretwoormorespeedhumpswithgapspreciselyspacedtoallowthewheeltracksoffire-rescuevehiclestopasswithminimalspeedreduc8ons.TrafficCalmingdevicessuchascurbextensionscanbenefitemergencyresponsebyremovingthepossibilityofvehiclesparkingnearacorner,whichassuresunrestrictedentryatall8mes,andfacilitatesaccesstoadjacentfirehydrants.Impactsonpollu8onemissionsaredifficulttopredict,par8cularlyifTrafficCalmingreducesoveralltrafficvolumes.TrafficCalmingstrategiesthatresultinslower,smoothtrafficflow(roundabouts,neckdowns,chicanes)arelikelytominimizepollu8onemissionscomparedwithstrategiesthatrequirefrequentstops,suchasstopsignsandspeedhumps,andsometrafficmodelingindicatesoverallemissionreduc8ons(SmidfeltandRosqvist2007).SomeTrafficCalmingmeasurescancreateproblemsforcyclistsandvisuallyimpairedpedestrians,althoughsuchproblemscanbeavoidediftheyareconsideredinprojectplanningandthedesignofTrafficCalmingdevices.Ewing(2003)inves8gateslegalliabilityandlawsuitsovertrafficcalming.HefoundveryfewsuccessfulclaimsorsuitsintheU.S.,exceptwherefacili8esareimproperlyinstalledormaintainedandconcludesthat,“Atrafficcalmingfollowingra8onalproceduresisunlikelytosuccumbtoalegalchallenge.”Table 9 Benefit Summary
Objec1ve Ra1ng CommentsConges8onReduc8on -1 Reducesroadwayspeedsandmayreducetrafficcapacity.Road&ParkingSavings 0 Nosignificantimpact.Mayincreasesomemaintenancecostsbut
reducesothers.ConsumerSavings 1 Allowsmorewalkingandcycling,andcanincreaseresiden8alproperty
values.
TransportChoice 3 Allowsmorewalkingandcycling.RoadSafety 3 Significantsafetybenefits.EnvironmentalProtec8on 2 Reducestrafficnoiseandtotalvehicletravel.EfficientLandUse 2 Supportshigher-density,mixeduse,pedestrian-orienteddevelopment.CommunityLivability 3 Reducestrafficimpactsonneighborhoods.
Ra8ngfrom3(verybeneficial)to–3(veryharmful).A0indicatesnoimpactormixedimpacts.Equity ImpactsTrafficCalmingcandisadvantagesomemotorists(par8cularlythosewhowanttospeed),andbenefitsnon-driversmost.Someprojectsbenefitresidentsofonestreetorareaattheexpenseofothers.TrafficCalmingcanincreasehorizontalequitybyhelpingtocreateamorebalancedtransporta8onsystemthatincreasestravelchoicesfornon-driversandreducestheexternalcosts(crashriskandnoise)ofmotorvehicletravel(Bellefleur2013).TrafficCalmingtendstobenefitpeoplewhoareeconomically,physicallyandsociallydisadvantaged,sincetheyo[enwalkandcycle,arehighlyvulnerabletovehiclecrashinjuries,andaremorelikelytoliveinolderurbanneighborhoods(AARP2009).Grayling,etal.(2001)showthatTrafficCalmingispar8cularlybeneficialtoeconomicallyandsociallydisadvantagedcommuni8es.Table 10 Equity Summary
Criteria Ra1ng CommentsTreatseverybodyequally. 1 Usually.Insomecasesfavorsresidentsofonestreetover
others.Individualsbearthecoststheyimpose. 2 Reducesexternali8es(crashriskandnoiseimposedby
motorizedtrafficonpedestrians).Progressivewithrespecttoincome. 2 Significantlybenefitsnondrivers,whotendtobelower
income.Benefitstransporta8ondisadvantaged. 3 Significantlybenefitsnondrivers.Improvesbasicmobility. 1 Improvesnonmotorizedtravel,butcandelayemergency
vehicles.Ra8ngfrom3(verybeneficial)to–3(veryharmful).A0indicatesnoimpactormixedimpacts.ApplicationsTrafficCalmingisappliedmosto[eninurbanresiden8alandcommercialareas,wherethereispoten8alforincreasedwalkingandcycling.SomeTrafficCalmingstrategiescanbeappliedonarterialsandhighways.Table 11 Application Summary
Geographic Ra1ng Organiza1on Ra1ngLargeurbanregion. 1 Federalgovernment. 0High-density,urban. 3 State/provincialgovernment. 2Medium-density,urban/suburban. 3 Regionalgovernment. 3Town. 3 Municipal/localgovernment. 3Low-density,rural. 1 BusinessAssocia8ons/TMA. 2Commercialcenter. 3 Individualbusiness. 1Residen8alneighborhood. 3 Developer. 2Resort/recrea8onarea. 3 Neighborhoodassocia8on. 3 Campus. 3
Ra8ngsrangefrom0(notappropriate)to3(veryappropriate).CategoriesImprovedTransportChoiceandIncenAvetoReduceDrivingRelationships With Other TDM StrategiesTrafficCalmingsupportsandissupportedbyVehicleRestric8ons,SpeedReduc8ons,ContextSensi8veDesign,NonmotorizedTransportImprovements,UniversalDesign,SmartGrowth,NewUrbanism,Clustering,
StreetscapingandCampusTransporta8onManagement.Sincemosttransittripsinvolvewalkinglinks,TrafficCalmingisaTransitImprovementthatsupportsTransitOrientedDevelopment.StreetReclaimingandRoadSpaceRealloca8onareothertrafficimpactreduc8onstrategies.StakeholdersTrafficCalmingisusuallyimplementedbylocalgovernments,o[enwiththeinvolvementoforganiza8onsrepresen8ngresidentsandlocalbusinesses.TrafficCalmingprojectsareo[enini8atedbyneighborhoodgroupsconcernedaboutpedestriansafetyandtrafficimpacts.Barriers To ImplementationBarriersincluderesistancebysometransporta8onprofessionals(thosewhoemphasizevehicletrafficflowoverotherstreetdesignobjec8ves),andfinancialcostsforimplemen8ngTrafficCalmingprojects.Thereissome8mesopposi8onfromresidentstoTrafficCalming,althoughthisusuallyrelatestospecificTrafficCalmingdevices(suchasspeedhumps)ratherthantheoverallconceptofTrafficCalming.Opposi8ono[endeclinessignificantlywithinafewmonthsa[erTrafficCalmingisimplemented.Onesurveyfoundthatmostdrivers(55%)opposetrafficroundaboutsbeforeconstruc8on,withmost(41%)stronglyopposed,butthisdeclinedto28%opposedand15%stronglyopposeda[erconstruc8on(Reyng,LuVrellandRussell,2002).Best PracticesTrafficCalmingdesigninvolvesbothscienceandart.ThefollowingareguidelinesforTrafficCalmingbestprac8ces:1. TrafficCalmingplanningshouldincludeadequatepublicinvolvement.2. InvolveexpertsfamiliarwiththelatestTrafficCalmingresourcesanddesignstandards.3. ApplyCompleteStreetspolicieswhichrecognizethatroadwayso[enservediversefunc8onsincludingthrough
travel,recrea8onalwalking,socializing,vending,andnearbyliving,whichmustbeconsideredandbalancedinroadwaydesignandmanagement.
4. PlannersshouldconsideravarietyofTrafficCalmingdevices,ratherthanrelyingonasingletype,suchasspeed
humpsorrumblestrips.5. TrafficCalmingprojectsshouldsupportmul8pleobjec8ves,includingenhancedstreetaesthe8cs,improved
walkingandcyclingcondi8ons,aswellascontrollingtrafficspeeds.6. StopsignsshouldnotbeusedasTrafficCalmingdevices.7. Devicesthatarenewtoanareashouldbeimplementedonatrialbasiswithadequatesigning.Forexample,
thefirsttrafficcirclesinanareashouldhavesignsshowingthepathvehiclesshouldfollow.A[erafewyearssuchsignsbecomeunnecessary.
Belowareplanninganddesignprinciplestohelpbuildhealthycommuni8esandstreets,basedonDanBurden’s2001DisAnguishedLectureattheTransporta8onResearchBoardAnnualMee8ng.
· Buildforeveryone.Streetshavemul8pleusesthatmustbebalanced.· Createmanylinkages.Developawell-connectedstreetnetworkthatoffersmul8pleroutesandmodesto
des8na8ons.Addspecialwalkingandcyclinglinkageswherepossible(forexample,mid-blockwalkwaysandpathsthatconnectdeadendstreets).
· Makesidewalksthatarecomfortable,andstreetsthatareeasytocross.· Buildnarrowstreetsandcompactintersec8ons.Thismakesiteasierforpedestrianstocross.· Keepurbantrafficdispersed,lowspeedandmoving.· Buildgreenstreetsthatincludetreesandboulevards.· ProvideADAaccess(UniversalDesign).· Buildpublicspace.Recognizethatstreetsareprimarycomponentofthepublicrealm,wherepeoplecan
interactandbuildcommunity.· Buildwithpropersizeandscale.Scaleforpeople,notjustforcars.· Encouragediversity.Providemixedusesandmixedincomeswithinacommunity.Createamaximumnumberof
ac8vi8eswithinwalkingdistanceofeachneighborhood.WitandHumorWedon’tgetmuchtrafficbyourhouse.Weliveonaone-way,dead-endstreet.
Case Studies and ExamplesWest Palm Beach (Stillings and Lockwood, 2001)ThecityofWestPalmBeach,Florida(popula8on80,000)hasdeveloped“secondgenera8ontrafficcalming”whichmeansthattrafficcalmingdesignfeaturesarenormallyimplementedwhenastreetisbuiltorreconstructed(whetherforu8lityworkorotherwise),ratherthanconsideringtrafficcalmingaspecialprogramortreatment.Thisapproachisfoundtobemostcosteffec8veandequitable,andhasgreatlyimprovedthecommunity’swalkability.Thecity’ssuccessesinclude:· ClemaAsStreetwasatypicalone-wayurbanarterial,withthreetrafficlanesandtwoparkinglanes.Itwasa
run-downareawith80%vacantproper8es.Thecityimplementedastreetscapingplanwithtrafficcalmingandpedestrianimprovementsthatincludedconver8ngittotwo-waytraffic,narrowings,araisedintersec8on,lateralshi[s,andremovalofturnlanesandtrafficsignals.Sincethisworkwascompletedthestreethasbecomeamajorac8vitycenterwithawidevarietyofthrivingbusinessesanda10-foldincreaseinpropertyvalues.
· CityPlaceisanew77-acre,$400million,mixed-usedevelopmentnearClema8sStreetthatisbeingconstructed
withtrafficcalmingandNewUrbanistfeatures,includingbulbouts,narrowandraisedintersec8ons,on-streetparking,widesidewalks,andbuildingsthathaveground-levelshopswithofficesandresidencesabove,tocreateapedestrian-orienteddistrict.
· OldNorthwoodandNorthboroParkareresiden8alneighborhoodsthathavehadextensivetrafficcalmingto
reducecut-throughtraffic.Asaresulttheyhavechangedfrombeingdepressed,undesirableareaswithseriouscrimeproblemstoaVrac8veneighborhoodspopularwithyoungfamilies.
Health Benefits of Traffic Calming (http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/15/6/369.full.html)Jacobsen,RacioppiandRuVer(2009)examinetheimpactofvehicletrafficonlevelsofwalkingandbicyclingbasedonacomprehensivereviewofmedical,publichealth,cityplanning,publicadministra8onandtrafficengineeringtechnicalliterature.Theanalysisindicatesthatrealandperceiveddangeranddiscomfort
imposedbytrafficdiscourageswalkingandbicycling.Althoughitcanbedifficulttomeasuretheseeffects,observedbehaviourprovidesgoodevidencefortheseeffects,withthestrongestassocia8onbeinganinversecorrela8onbetweenvolumesandspeedsoftrafficandlevelsofwalkingandcycling.Theyconcludethatinterven8onstoreducetrafficspeedandvolumearelikelytoimprovepublichealthbyincreasingwalkingandbicyclingac8vity.Survey of Traffic Calming ImplementationAsurveyof21transporta8onagencieswithsignificanttrafficcalmingprogramsindicatesthatbetween1997and2004suchprogramsexpandedandpublicacceptanceincreased.Table 12 Summary of Traffic Calming Practices (Ewing, Brown and Hoyt 2005)
Issue FindingsProgrambudget Programcapitalbudgetsrangeform$30,000to$600,000peryear.Ofagencies
surveyedapproximately50%eitherareunfoundedorrelyexclusivelyonresidentfunding.
Residentfunding Approximatelyhalfoftheagenciesrelyonresidentstofundsomeoralloftheconstruc8oncosts.
Installedwithnewdevelopment
Approximatelyhalfoftheagenciesincorporatetrafficcalmingdevicesintonewdevelopments.Towagencieshaveadoptedguidelinesfortrafficcalminginnewdevelopments.
Publicinvolvement Allagenciessurveyedrelyonresidentorneighborhoodassocia8onstosubmitpe88onsreques8ngtreatment.Someagenciesalsowouldconsiderstafforcommissionappointedpe88ons.MorethanhalfinvolvethepublicthroughacommiVeeorneighborhoodassocia8ontohelpdevelopaplan.
Firedepartmentinvolvement
Alloftheagenciessurveyedinvolvethefiredepartmentinthedesignoftheavailabledevicesand/orduringtheplanningprocess.Someagenciesgivevetopowertothefiredepartment.Someagencieshavedesignatedprimaryemergencyresponseroutesthatprecludecertaintypesoftreatments.
Treatmentofarterials Sixofthesurveyedagenciesconsidertrea8ngarterials,withalimitedtoolboxofeligibledevices.Noneoftheseagenciesallowuseofver8caldevicesonarterials.
Priori8es Intotal,75%oftheagenciesrelyonsomeformofaquan8fiablepriorityrankingsystem.Someagenciestreatproblemsintheorderpe88onsarereceived;towagenciesrelyonresidentfundingand,therefore,nopriori8za8onsystemisneeded.
Deviceeligibility Amajorityofagenciesusewarrantsorguidelinestodeterminedeviceeligibility;theremainingeightagenciesrelyonastaffdetermina8on.
Toolbox Allbuttwooftheagencieshavecomprehensivetoolboxes(menuofcalmingdevicesthatmaybeused).AlmosthalfoftheagenciesrejectSTOPsignsastrafficcalmingdevices.
Thistablesummarizesmajorfindingsfromasurveyof21transportaAonplanningagenciesthathavetrafficcalmingimplementaAonprograms.Seattle Traffic Calming (www.usroads.com/journals/rmej/9801/rm980102.htm)TheCityofSeaVle,Washingtonhasimplementedmorethan700trafficcirclesonresiden8alstreetsandaddsdozensmoreeachyear(Mundell,1998).IthasastandardprocessforresidentstorequestTrafficCalming,andvariousfundingsources(SeaVle,1996).Theresponsehasbeenposi8ve:therearehundredsofrequestseachyearformoreTrafficCalmingprojects,andalthoughdevicescanberemovedifresidentsareunhappywiththefinalresult,thishasonlyhappenedonce.Lane Width StandardsThecityofTucsonhasestablishedthefollowingroadwaylanewidths,whichareconsideredideaformixed
traffic.
1. Thestandardwidthforatravellaneis12feet,whichmaybereducedto11feetifneededtoaccommodateabikelane.Forroadwayswithapostedspeedlimitnogreaterthan40mphtrafficlaneswithnoopposingtrafficinanadjacentlanemaybereducedtoapproximately10feet,basedonengineeringjudgment.
2. Thestandardwidthforturnlanesistypically12feet,however,turnlanesmaybereducedto10feetwhere
thecrosssec8onwidthislimited.Turnlanewidthsmaybefurtherreducedto9feet,basedonengineeringjudgment.
3. Thestandardwidthforabikelaneis5feet,excludingtheguVerpan.Formajorstreetswithlimitedcross-
sec8onwidththebikelanemaybereducedtoapproximately4feetinwidth,includingtheguVerpan.Higherroadwayspeeds(morethan40mph)andabsenceofaguVerpanwouldindicatetheneedforawiderbikelanewherethewidthisavailable.
4. Whenplacedtothele[ofaRightTurnOnlylane,thewidthofabikelaneshouldbeaminimumof5feet.For
intersec8onswithlimitedcrosssec8onwidth,suchabikelanemaybereducedto4feet,orevento3feetforloca8onsofverylimitedpavementwidth,basedonengineeringjudgment.
Bike Lane Motor Vehicle Travel Lane
StandardWidth 5feet 12FeetReducedWidth 4Feet 11Feet
Asmuchaspossible,bikewaysshouldbedesignedtocrossrailroadtracksatornearrightangles.Wherethisisnotfeasible,considera8onshouldbegiventoinstallingappropriatewarningsigns.Bikelanesmaybewidenedattheseloca8onstoallowcycliststocrosstracksclosertoarightanglewhilestayingwithinthelane,asdescribedbytheAASHTOGuidefortheDevelopmentofBicycleFaciliAes.Community Planning Charrettes (www.walkable.org)Theorganiza8onWalkableCommuni8eshaspar8cipatedindozensofcommunityplanningcharreVes,inwhichresidentsandexpertsworktogethertodesignandorganizeroadwayimprovements,manyofwhichincludeTrafficCalming.Home Zones (www.homezonenews.org.uk)TheBri8shgovernmenthasdevelopedpoliciestoallowhighwayauthori8estodesignatestreetsas“homezones,”residen8alstreetswithlimitedtrafficspeeds.Withinthesezones,streetac8vity,includingplay,willbelawful.Designspeedswillbelessthan20mph-probably10mph.Signswillbepostedattheareaedgestoindicatetheirspecialstatus.Designswillincludesharedsurfaces(nocurbs),landscapingandplayequipment.Thefederalgovernmentwilldistributefundingtolocalagenciesforplanningandimplementa8on.Economic Development BenefitsEdgewaterDriveinOrlando,Floridainvolvedtrafficcalming,speedreduc8onandtheconversionofa4-laneundividedroadwayintoa3-laneroadwithbikelanesandon-streetparking.Whiletheneighborhooditselfisverywalkable,asa4-lane“MainStreet”EdgewaterDrivewasnot.Theroadrunsthroughalargeneighborhoodofabout10,000peopleonahighlyconnectedgridnetwork.EdgewaterDriveservesasthecommercialmainstreetfor
thecommunity,withagrocerystore,postoffice,highschool,severalpharmacies,high-endaswellasmoderaterestaurants,andaneighborhoodsizehardwarestore.Mostofthebuildingsareorientedtowardsthesidewalk.Resultsofthisconversioncanbefoundat:www.cityoforlando.net/planning/Transporta8on/documents/Edgewater.pdf.Sincetheprojectwasimplementedmanynewbusinesseshaveopenedonthestreet.Citystaffbelievethatthisresulted,inpart,fromthemorepedestrian-friendlycondi8ons.Pedestrian Safety Operations Proving Effective (www.odot.state.or.us/comm/news/2002071801.htm)Oregonci8eshavebeenabletoreducepedestriancrashesbyincreasingpedestrianlawenforcement.UnderthePedestrianSafetyOpera8ons(PSE)program,adecoypoliceofficeraVemptstocrossinacrosswalk,withavideocamerarecordingtheevent.Ifpassingmotoristsfailtostopandyieldasrequiredbylaw,theyareissuedeitherawarningoracita8on.Threeyearssincetheprogramwasestablishedcrosswalkpedestrianinjuriesdeclinedby16%(from348to293)andfatali8esdeclined19%(from16to13).Somepeoplehavecri8cizedtheseas“s8ng”opera8ons,buttheprogramisnotdesignedtosurpriseorentrapmotorists.Thepurposeistoraiseawareness,notwritecita8ons.Advancewarningisprovidedthroughmediacoverageandon-sitesigns.Policesupporttheprogramasaneffec8vecrashpreven8onstrategy,with31policedepartmentsandsheriff’sofficespar8cipa8ngin2002.“Wearegratefultoallpar8cipa8nglawenforcementagencies.They’vedoneagreatjob,”saidRickWaring,PedestrianSafetyProgramcoordinatorforODOT.“Pedestriansafetyisaseriousissueineverycommunity—peoplehavetroublegeyngacrosstheirstreetsandtheyaredelightedsomeoneisdoingsomethingaboutit.Communityresponsefromci8zensandpublicofficialshasbeenoverwhelminglyposi8ve,”saidWaring.ODOT’spedestriansafetyprogramalsohasprovidedspecializedtrainingfor71policeagenciesand108officersanddepu8es.Thegoalistoteachofficerstosetuptheopera8onsoitisfairtomotorists,yethasthedesiredeffectofraisingawarenessandimprovingsafetyforpedestrians.Formoreinforma8on,contacttheOregonDepartmentofTransporta8onBicycleandPedestrianSafetyProgram,(www.odot.state.or.us). Driving the argument home (BBC News )BySeanCoughlan,BBCNews(hVp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4459056.stm),22November2005.Acampaignisunderwaytolowerspeedlimitsto20mphinurbanareas,butwhat'sgoingtomakedriversslowdown?Abossyroadsign,ahumpintheroadorathree-piecesuiteparkedintheroad?There'snoreasonthattrafficcalmingshouldbeboringorwithoutasenseofhumour,sayschildren'sauthorandtrafficcampaigner,TedDewan.AndusinghisOxfordresiden8alstreetasatestlaboratory,Mr.Dewanhasbeenworkingonmorecrea8vewaystoreducetrafficspeed.“Peoplearetoousedtobeingscoldedbywarningsignstellingthemaboutlethalspeedanddriving.It'slike'tellmesomethingnew'.Butthey'renotusedtohavingtheirwitengaged,”hesays.Soinaspiritthatcombinesasenseofentertainmentwithaseriousintent,hehascomeupwiththeideaof“folktrafficcalming.”Thisiswhereartinstalla8onsmeetroadsafety,akindofsleepingpolicemanthat'sbeeninfluencedbyDamienHirst.WelivehereThesetypeof“DIYtraffic-calminghappenings”aredescribedbytheircreatoras“roadwitches”andhaveincludedan11-feethighrabbit,abigbed(forasleepingpoliceman),aCasualty-stylefakecrashsceneforHalloweenandtheseyngupofalivingroominthemiddleoftheroad.“There'sanelementoffunandmischief,butunderneathisthe
ambi8ontoencouragepeopletore-examinehowroadsareused,”saysMr.Dewan.“Withthelivingroom,itwasthemostdirectwayofsaying‘Welivehere.Thisisourlivingspace.’”Andhesaysthatresidentsreallyenjoyedthestrangenessofbeingabletorelaxoutsideintheirownstreet,ratherthanfeelitwasaplaceonlybelongingtothecarsthatraceupanddownit.ResidentshadforgoVenwhatitwasliketohaveastreetwithouttheusualhigh-volumeandlow-courtesyofpassingtraffic.Ini8allythestreetwaslegallyclosed,toallowtheseyngupofthisoutdoorlivingroom,includingsuchmiddle-Englandtouchesasastandardlamp.Itwasthenre-arrangedtoallowtraffictopassthrough,butMr.Dewansaysthereac8onsofmotoristsshowedhowmotoristsexpectnothingtostandintheirway.PsychoAc“Adriverofa4x4didn'tsomuchdisapprove-hewastoocrazedandviolentforthat.Heseemedtobemadepsycho8cbytheideathatroadscouldexistforanythingotherthanhimtodriveon,”hesays.Thismotoristdeliberatelydroveintopiecesofthelivingroomfurnitureandthencalledthecounciltodemandthattheyshi[whateverwasle[lyingintheroad.Thereweregenderdifferencestoo,saysMr.Dewan.Maledriversdidn’tseemtoliketheideaofdrivingacrossthecarpet.Butfemaledriverswerelesssympathe8candmoreaggressive,withastronger“getoutofmywayaytude.”It’sthissenseofen8tlementthathesayshewantstochallenge-leavinga4x4blockinghalfthestreetiscalledparkingbutacoupleofchairsandamagazinerackputinthesameplaceisseenasasenselessprovoca8on.“Mydaughterisn’tallowedtothrowsnowballsatschool,becauseit'sconsideredtoodangerous.Butit’smeanttobeacceptablethatshecanwalkhomeonlyinchesawayfromcarsdrivingatlethalspeeds.Thereissomethingweirdaboutthis,adeepculturalbias.”SelfishAstheowneroftwocars,Mr.Dewansayshe'sfarfrombeingan8-motorist,buthewants“mutualrespect”betweendriversandpedestriansandtostopthe“deluded,selfish”waythattraffichascometodominateurbanspaces.Mr.Dewanhasplanstoextendtheroadwitchconcept,sendingthemessagethatthereare“crea8ve,non-confronta8onal”waysthatresidentscancontrolwhat'sgoingonintheirownroads-andtoassertthatroadsdonotonlybelongtodrivers.AndTuesdayalsomarksana8onaldayofcampaigningbyTransport2000tosupportalowerspeedlimitforresiden8alareas.The“20’sPlenty”campaignsaysa20mphlimitonresiden8alstreetswouldmeanatwo-thirdsreduc8oninthenumberofchildrenkilledorinjuredbycars.LindaBeard,Transport2000'sstreetsandtrafficcampaigner,saysthat“atthemoment,we'refailingtoprotectpeople,especiallychildren,fromtraffic.”RoadmosaicTheuseofsuchlowerspeedlimitsinsomeresiden8alareasissupportedbytheRACFounda8on,butexecu8vedirectorEdmundKingsaysithastobepartofabalance-withsufficientthrough-routestopreventtrafficgrindingtoahalt.“Wesupportwell-plannedhomezones,butmobilityisalsoimportantandtherehavetobestreetsformovement,wherepeoplecangoabouttheirbusiness,”hesays.Mr.Kingisalsosympathe8ctomoreimagina8veapproachestotrafficcalming,andhepointstostreetdesignsconstructedtoshowdriversthattheyareenteringaresiden8alarea.Thismightbedifferentcolouredroadsurfaces,oramosaicembeddedintheroadshowingthestreetnameoragatewaygivingtheimpressionthatyouareabouttodrivethroughaplacewherepeopleareliving.“Thereneedstobesomethingmorecrea8vethanjustabumpintheroad,”hesays Community Traffic CalmingHass-Klau,etal(1992)providesnumerousTrafficCalmingcasestudiesfromEurope.CountySurveyorsSociety,etal(1994)includes65casestudiesfromtheU.K.Ewing(1999)alsoprovidescasestudies.
Road Diets Support Local Economic Development and Reduce Crashes (Burden and Lagerway 1999;Rosales, 2007)SeveralMainStreetarterialsinFlorida(Atlan8cBoulevardinDelRayBeach,andcoupletsinWestPalmBeachCounty)wenton4-to3-laneand4-to2-lanereduc8ons.IneachcasethebusinessesdidmuchbeVeroncetheroadsweremademoreaVrac8veandspeedingwasreduced.TheAtlan8cBeachtreatmentwassosuccessfulthatitisbeingextendedanother10blocks.InFerndale,Michigan,a4-lanewasconvertedtoa2-laneontheirverybusymainstreet.Beforethetransi8onmostbusinesseshadeitherfailedorwereopera8ngoutofthealley.Followingtheconversiontherehasbeenamajorreturnofshoppers.Thetreatmentisbeingextended.TheRoadDietHandbook:SeangTrendsforLivableStreets(Rosales2007)isacomprehensiveguideforroaddietimplementa8on,includingguidelinesforiden8fyingandevalua8ngpoten8alroaddietsites,designconceptsandprac8ces,andexperiencefromcasestudies.Table13indicatestypicalRoadDietcrashreduc8onbenefits.Table 13 Road Diet Safety Benefits (Rosales 2007)
Location Street Initial Traffic Volume CrashesVancouver,Washington FourthPlain BoulevardArterial~17,000ADT -52%Athens,Georgia BaxterStreet Arterial~20,000ADT -53%ClearLake,Iowa USStateHighway18 StateHighway~12,000ADT -65%Toronto,Ontario StGeorgeStreet MinorArterial~7,500ADT -40%Dunedin,NewZealand KaikoraiValleyRoad Arterial~10,000ADT -30%
Swiss Strolling Zones (www.modelcity.ch)TheSwissfederalgovernmenthasestablished“Begegnungszonen”(StrollingZones),whichisadowntowncommercialstreetthatisoperatedasapedestrianzone,wherelanesarenarrowandcarsmusttravelatalowspeed.Thisconcepthasprovenpopularwithresidentsandbusinesses,andisbeingimplementedinmorethan20communi8esinSwitzerland.Grandveiw Avenue Speed Reductions (Smart Growth Network, 2002)GrandviewAvenueinUniversityPlace,Washingtonisabusytwo-lanesuburbanroadwheretrafficaveraged44milesperhourdespitea35-mphpostedspeedlimit,un8ltheroadwaywasredesignedwithnarrowertrafficlanes,bikelanes,landscapingandsidewalks.A[ertheproject,averagetrafficspeedshavedeclinedto35-mph,andtheroadismuchmoreaVrac8veforpedestriansandcyclists.References And Resources For More InformationAARP(2009),PlanningCompleteStreetsforanAgingAmerica,AmericanAssocia8onforRe8redPersonsPublicPolicyIns8tute(www.aarp.org/ppi);atwww.aarp.org/research/housing-mobility/transporta8on/2009_02_streets.html.AltaPlanning+Design(2005),CaltransPedestrianandBicycleFaciliAesTechnicalReferenceGuide:ATechnicalReferenceandTechnologyTransferSynthesisforCaltransPlannersandEngineers,CaliforniaDepartmentofTransporta8on(www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/survey/pedestrian/TR_MAY0405.pdf).APG(2009),TrafficCalming,Alterna8veParksGeek(www.partsgeek.com/makes/traffic_calming.html).CrysValAtkinsandMichaelColeman(1997),“InfluenceofTrafficCalmingonEmergencyResponseTimes,”ITEJournal,August,pp.42-47;atwww.ite.org/traffic/documents/JHA97A42.pdf.
CrysValAtkins(1999),“TrafficCalming,”Chapter17,TransportaAonPlanningHandbook,Ins8tuteofTransporta8onEngineers(www.ite.org),pp.642-675.GordonBagby(1980),“EffectsofTrafficFlowonResiden8alPropertyValues,”JournaloftheAmericanPlanningAssociaAon,Vol.46,No.1,January1980,pp.88-94.DanBurdenandPeterLagerway(1999),RoadDietsFreeMillionsforNewInvestment,WalkableCommuni8es(www.walkable.org).DiscussesTrafficCalmingprojectsonarterials.DanBurden(2003),LevelofQuality(LOQ)Guidelines,ThomasJeffersonPlanningDistrictCommission(www.tjpdc.org/transporta8on/walkability.asp).Illustratesroadwaycondi8onsthataffectwalking,bicycling,trafficcalming,transitaccessandstreetcrossing.CenterforLivableCommuni1es(www.lgc.org/clc)providesinforma8onandresourcestohelpcreatemorelivablecommuni8es.RobertCerveroandCarolynRadisch(1995),TravelChoicesinPedestrianVersusAutomobileOrientedNeighborhoods,UCTransporta8onCenter,UCTC281(www.uctc.net).CMHC(2008),TamingtheFlow—BeQerTrafficandSaferNeighbourhoods,CanadianMortgageandHousingCorpora8on(www03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca);atwww03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/b2c/catalog/product.do?next=cross#.
CNU(2003),CivilizingDowntownHighways:PuangNewUrbanismToWorkOnCalifornia’sHighways,CongressfortheNewUrbanism(www.cnu.org).CompleteStreets(www.completestreets.org)isacampaigntopromoteroadwaydesignsthateffec8velyaccommodatemul8plemodesandsupportlocalplanningobjec8ves.CongressfortheNewUrbanism(www.cnu.org),providesavarietyofinforma8ononinnova8veurbandesign.TheCNUNarrowStreetsDatabase(www.sonic.net/abcaia/narrow.htm)describesmoreflexiblezoningcodesbeingimplementedinvariouscommuni8es.CORDIS(1999),BestPracAcetoPromoteCyclingandWalkingandHowtoSubsAtuteShortCarTripsbyCyclingandWalking,CORDISTransportRTDProgram,EuropeanUnion(www.cordis.lu/transport/src/adonisrep.htm).CountySurveyorsSociety,etal(1994),TrafficCalminginPracAce;AnAuthoritaAveSourcebook,LandorPublishing(availablefromwww.ite.org).CoulterTransporta1onConsul1ng(2004),NeighborhoodTrafficManagementinDuPageCounty:RecommendedAcAons,DuPageCountyMayorsandManagersConference.CTRE(2006),Four-LanetoThree-LaneConversion:ResearchProjects/Reports,CenterforTransporta8onResearchandEduca8on(www.ctre.iastate.edu/research/4laneto3lane.htm).DEA&Associates(1999),MainStreet…WhenaHighwayRunsThroughIt,Transporta8onandGrowthManagementProgram,OregonDOTandDept.ofEnvironmentalQuality(hVp://egov.oregon.gov/LCD/TGM/publica8ons.shtml).CamilleDelepierre(2008),DecreasingCarSpeedInCiAes–Pro’sAndCons-InTheoryAndPracAce:WithLund,
Malmö(Sweden)AndLille(France)Examples,MastersThesis,LundUniversity.DETR(2000),TrafficCalmingBibliography,DepartmentofEnvironment,TransportandRegions,(www.roads.detr.gov.uk/roadnetwork/ditm/tal/index.htm).DfT(2006),ManualforStreets,DepartmentforTransport(www.manualforstreets.org.uk).Providesguidancetoprac88onersoneffec8vestreetdesign.DfT(2011),SharedSpace,LocalTransportNote1/11,DepartmentForTransport(www.d[.gov.uk);athVp://assets.d[.gov.uk/publica8ons/ltn/1-11.pdf.DKSAssociates(2002),VancouverTrafficManagementPlan:StreetDesigntoServeBothPedestriansandDrivers,CityofVancouver,Washington(www.ci.vancouver.wa.us/transporta8on/ntmp/seindex.html).RichardDowling,etal.(2008),MulAmodalLevelOfServiceAnalysisForUrbanStreets,NCHRPReport616,Transporta8onResearchBoard(www.trb.org);athVp://trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?id=9470;UserGuideathVp://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_w128.pdf.Thisdescribeswaystoevaluateroadwaydesignimpactsonvariousmodes(walking,cycling,drivingandpublictransit).EmilyDrennen(2003),EconomicEffectsofTrafficCalmingonUrbanSmallBusinesses,MastersThesis,SanFranciscoStateUniversity(www.emilydrennen.org);atwww.emilydrennen.org/research_trans.shtml.EricDumbaugh(2005),“SafeStreets,LivableStreets,”JournaloftheAmericanPlanningAssociaAon(www.planning.org),Vol.71,No.3,pp.283-300;atwww.naturewithin.info/Roadside/TransSafety_JAPA.pdf.RobertM.Eschbacher(2006),“TrafficCalmingAsAnIntegralElementOfASuburbanRevitaliza8onProgram,”ITEJournal,Vol.76,No.11(www.ite.org),November2006,pp.28-29.RuneElvik(2001),“Area-WideUrbanTrafficCalmingSchemes:AMeta-AnalysisofSafetyEffects,”AccidentAnalysisandPrevenAon,Vol.33(www.elsevier.com/locate/aap),pp.327-336.MarkEppliandCharlesC.Tu(2000),ValuingtheNewUrbanism;TheImpactofNewUrbanismonPricesofSingle-FamilyHomes,UrbanLandIns8tute(www.uli.org).ReidEwing(1999),TrafficCalming;StateofthePracAce,FHWAandITE(www.ite.org/traffic/tcstate.htm#tcsop).ReidEwing(2003),“LegalStatusofTrafficCalming,”TransportaAonQuarterly(www.enotrans.com),Vol.57,No.2,Spring2003,pp.11-23.ReidEwing,StevenBrownandAaronHoyt(2005),“TrafficCalmingPrac8ceRevisited,”ITEJournal,Vol.75,No.11(www.ite.org),November2005,pp.22-28.ReidEwingandStevenBrown(2009),U.S.TrafficCalmingManual,PlannersPress(www.planning.org)andASCEPress(www.asce.org).Fehr&PeersandReidEwing(2002),TrafficCalmingGuidelines,CityofSacramento(www.pwsacramento.com/traffic/ntmp.html).FHWA(1997),FlexibilityinHighwayDesign,FHWA(www.�wa.dot.gov).
FHWA(2000),WalkableCommunity;YourTownUSA,FHWA-SA-00-010,USDOT(hVp://safety.�wa.dot.gov/programs/ped_bike.htm).FHWA,TrafficCalmingWebsite(www.�wa.dot.gov/environment/tcalm/index.htm)bytheFederalHighwayAdministra8onprovidesavarietyofresourcesfortrafficcalmingplanning.B.Fildes,S.Godley,T.TriggsandJ.Jarvis(1999),PerceptualCountermeasures:ExperimentalResearch,MonashUniversity(www.monash.edu.au)fortheAustralianTransportSafetyBureau.LawrenceFrankandChrisHawkins(2007),FusedGridAssessment:TravelAndEnvironmentalImpactsOfContrasAngPedestrianAndVehicularConnecAvity,CanadaMortgageandHousingCorpora8on(www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca);atwww.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/su/sucopl/fugr/index.cfm.PerE.Gårder(2004),“TheImpactofSpeedandOtherVariablesonPedestrianSafetyinMaine,”AccidentAnalysis&PrevenAon,Volume36,Issue4(www.elsevier.com/locate/aap),July2004,pp.533-542.FanisGrammenos(2004),“FusedGrid:ANewModelforSustainable–AndLivable–Development,”MunicipalWorld(www.municipalworld.com),July2004,pp.11-12,54-55;atwww.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/inpr/su/sucopl/fugr/index.cfm.TonyGrayling,KarlHallam,DanielGraham,RichardAnderson&StephenGlaister(2002),StreetsAhead:SafeandLivableStreetsforChildren,Ins8tuteforPublicPolicyResearch,(www.ippr.org).JeffGuldenandReidEwing(2009),“NewTrafficCalmingDeviceofChoice,”ITEJournal(www.ite.org),Vol.79,No.12,pp.26-31;athVp://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Gulden-and-Ewing-2009.pdf.ShaunaL.Hallmark,SkylarKnickerbocker,andNealHawkins(2013),Evalua8onOfLowCostTrafficCalmingForRuralCommuni8es,Ins8tuteforTransporta8on,IowaStateUniversity(www.intrans.iastate.edu);atwww.intrans.iastate.edu/research/documents/research-reports/updated_rural_traffic_calming_w_cvr2.pdf.HamiltonAssociates(1996),SafetyBenefitsofTrafficCalming,InsuranceCorpora8onofBri8shColumbia,(www.icbc.com).CarmanHass-Klau,IngeNold,GeertBockerandGrahamCrampton(1992),CivilizedStreets;AGuidetoTrafficCalming,EnvironmentalandTransportPlanning(Brighton,UK).ComprehensiveguidetoTrafficCalmingwithnumerouscasestudies,mostlyinEurope.JenniferR.HefferanandPeterLagerwey(2004),“CityofSeaVle,WA,USA,CrosswalkInventoryandImprovementPlan,”ITEJournal,Vol.74,No.1,January2004,pp.34-41.HMSBID(2000),“Conver8ngDowntownStreetsfromOne-WaytoTwo-WayYieldsPosi8veResults,”citedinUrbanTransportaAonMonitor,12May2000,p.3.WolfgangHomburger,etal.(1989),ResidenAalStreetDesignandTrafficControl,ITE(WashingtonDC;www.ite.org).Guidefortrafficengineersonthedesignofresiden8alstreetstocontroltraffic,includingmanyTrafficCalmingstrategies.HSIS(2010),EvaluaAonofLaneReducAon“RoadDiet”MeasuresonCrashesSummaryReportResearch,Development,andTechnology,HighwaySafetyInforma8onSystem(www.hsisinfo.org);summaryreportatwww.hsisinfo.org//pdf/10-053.pdf.
HermanHuangandMichaelCynecki(2001),TheEffectsofTrafficCalmingMeasuresonPedestrianandMotoristBehavior,FederalHighwayAdministra8on,FHWARD-00-104(www.walkinginfo.org/rd/for_ped.htm#calm).WilliamHughesandC.F.Sirmans(1992),“TrafficExternali8esandSingle-FamilyHousePrices,”JournalofRegionalScience,Vol.32,No.4,pp.487-500.HillaryIsebrands,TracyNewsomeandFrankSullivan(2015),“Op8mizingLaneWidthstoAchieveaBalanceofSafety,Opera8ons,andUserNeeds,”ITEJournal(www.ite.org/itejourna),Vol.85,No.3,pp.36-42.ITE(1997),TradiAonalNeighborhoodDevelopmentStreetDesignGuidelines,Ins8tuteofTransporta8onEngineers(www.ite.org).ITE,TrafficCalmingLibrary(www.ite.org/traffic/index.htm),Ins8tuteofTransporta8onEngineersprovidesavarietyofinforma8onontrafficcalmingresearchandresources.ITE,ManualonUniformTrafficControlDevices(MUTCD)(hVp://mutcd.�wa.dot.gov),Ins8tuteofTransporta8onEngineers,definesstandardtrafficsignsandothertrafficcontrols.ITE(2010),DesigningWalkableUrbanThoroughfares:AContext-SensiAveApproach,AnITERecommendedPracAce,Ins8tuteofTransporta8onEngineers(www.ite.org)andCongressforNewUrbanism(www.cnu.org);atwww.ite.org/cssJohnN.Ivan,NormanW.GarrickandGilbertHanson(2009),DesigningRoadsthatGuideDriverstoChooseSaferSpeeds,Connec8cutTransporta8onIns8tute,Connec8cutDepartmentofTransporta8on(www.ct.gov);atwww.ct.gov/dot/LIB/dot/documents/dresearch/JHR_09-321_JH_04-6.pdf.PeterL.Jacobsen,F.RacioppiandH.RuVer(2009),“WhoOwnsTheRoads?HowMotorisedTrafficDiscouragesWalkingAndBicycling,”InjuryPrevenAon,Vol.15,Issue6,pp.369-373;hVp://injurypreven8on.bmj.com/content/15/6/369.full.html.RobertKahnandAllisonKahnGoedecke(2011),“RoadwayStripingasaTrafficCalmingOp8on,”ITEJournal(www.ite.org),Vol.81,No.9,pp.30-37;atwww.ite.org/membersonly/itejournal/pdf/2011/JB11IA30.pdf.KiUelsonandAssociates(2000),Roundabouts:AnInformaAonalGuide,TurnerFairbankHighwayResearchCenter,FederalHighwayAdministra8on,FHWA-RD-00-67(www.shrc.gov/safety/00068.htm).KevinJ.Krizek,etal.(2006),GuidelinesforAnalysisofInvestmentsinBicycleFaciliAes,Transporta8onResearchBoard,NCHRPReport552(www.trb.org);athVp://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_552.pdf.DanielA.Kueper(2007),“RoadDietTreatmentinOceanCity,NJ,USA,”ITEJournal,Vol.77,No.2(www.ite.org),February2007,pp.18-22.LACDPH(2011),ModelDesignManualforLivingStreets,LosAngelesCountyDepartmentofPublicHealth(www.modelstreetdesignmanual.com).W.A.LeafandD.F.Preusser(1998),LiteratureReviewonVehicleTravelSpeedsandPedestrianInjuries,Na8onalHighwayTrafficSafetyAdministra8on,USDOT(www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/pub/hs809012.html).LeedsUniversity,ReviewofTrafficCalmingTechniques(www.its.leeds.ac.uk/primavera/p_calming.html)provides
informa8onontrafficcalmingtechniques.LGC(2001),TheEconomicBenefitsofWalkableCommuniAes,LocalGovernmentCommission(www.lgc.org).LGC(2007),EmergencyResponseandTradiAonalNeighborhoodStreetDesign,LocalGovernmentCommission(www.lgc.org);atwww.lgc.org/freepub/land_use/factsheets/er_streetdesign.html.RudolphLimpert(1994),MotorVehicleCrashReconstrucAonandCauseAnalysis,FourthEdi8on,MichieCompany(CharloVesville).ToddLitman(1999),TrafficCalmingCosts,BenefitsandEquityImpacts,VTPI(www.vtpi.org);atwww.vtpi.org/calming.pdf.ToddLitmanandStevenFitzroy(2005),SafeTravels:EvaluaAngMobilityManagementTrafficSafetyImpacts,VTPI(www.vtpi.org);atwww.vtpi.org/safetrav.pdf.GordonLovegroveandTerekSayed(2006),“Macro-levelCollisionPredic8onModelForEvalua8ngNeighborhoodLevelTrafficSafety,”CanadianJournalofCivilEngineering,Vol.33,No.5(hVp://pubs.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/cgi-bin/rp/rp2_tocs_e?cjce_cjce5-06_33),May,pp.609-621.GordonLovegroveandToddLitman(2008),MacrolevelCollisionPredicAonModelstoEvaluateRoadSafetyEffectsofMobilityManagementStrategies:NewEmpiricalToolstoPromoteSustainableDevelopment,Transporta8onResearchBoard87thAnnualMee8ng(www.trb.org);atwww.vtpi.org/lovegrove_litman.pdf.WilliamH.LucyandDaivdL.Phillips(2006),Tomorrow’sCiAes,Tomorrow’sSuburbs,PlannersPress(www.planning.org);analysisofcul-de-sacsafetyimpactsisatwww.npr.org/programs/morning/features/2006/jun/culdesac/book.pdf.Metro(2003),CreaAngLivableStreets:StreetDesignGuidelinesfor2040,PortlandMetro(www.metro-region.org).EricMeyer(2001),“ANewLookAtOp8calSpeedBars,”ITEJournal,Vol.71,No.11(www.ite.org),Nov.2001,pp.44-48.SueMitchellandBenHamilton-Baillie(2011),TrafficinVillages–SafetyandCivilityforRuralRoads:AToolkitforCommuniAes,DorsetAONBPartnership(www.dorsetaonb.org.uk);atwww.dorsetaonb.org.uk/assets/downloads/Rural_Roads_Protocol/trafficinvillages-web.pdf.JeonghunMok,HarlowC.LandphairandJodyR.Naderi(2003),ComparisonofSafetyPerformanceofUrbanStreetsBeforeandAserLandscapingImprovements,UrbanStreetSymposium,TRB(www.trb.org).D.S.Morrison,HilaryThomsonandMarkPeycrew(2004),“Evalua8onOfTheHealthEffectsOfANeighbourhoodTrafficCalmingScheme”JournalofEpidemiolCommunityHealthVol.58,pp.837–840.AnneVernezMoudon,etal.(1996),EffectsofSiteDesignonPedestrianTravelinMixedUse,Medium-DensityEnvironments,WashingtonStateTransporta8onCenter,DocumentWA-RD432.1,(www.wsdot.wa.gov/ppsc/research/onepages/WA-RD4321.htm).JamesMundell(1998),“NeighborhoodTrafficCalming:SeaVle’sTrafficCircleProgram,”RoadManagement&EngineeringJournal(www.usroads.com/journals/rmej/9801/rm980102.htm).
NACTO(2012),TheUrbanStreetDesignGuide,Na8onalAssocia8onofCityTransporta8onOfficials(www.nacto.org);athVp://nacto.org/urbanstreetdesignguide-overview.JodyRosenblaVNaderi(2002),LandscapeDesignintheClearZone:TheEffectofLandscapeVariablesonPedestrianHealthandDriverSafety,DepartmentofLandscapeArchitectureandUrbanPlanning,CollegeofArchitecture,TexasA&MUniversity(hVp://swutc.tamu.edu/Reports/167425TP2.pdf).ShashiS.NambisanandVenuParimi(2007)“ACompara8veEvalua8onoftheSafetyPerformanceofRoundaboutsandTradi8onalIntersec8onControls,”ITEJournal,Vol.77,No.3(www.ite.org),March,pp.18-25.NCCHPP(2011),UrbanTrafficCalmingandRoadSafety:EffectsandImplicaAonsforPracAce,Na8onalCollabora8ngCentreforHealthyPublicPolicy(www.ncchpp.ca);atwww.ncchpp.ca/175/publica8ons.ccnpps?id_ar8cle=719.NCCHPP(2012),UrbanTrafficCalmingandHealth:ALiteratureReview,Na8onalCollabora8ngCentreforHealthyPublicPolicy(www.ncchpp.ca);atwww.ncchpp.ca/docs/ReviewLiteratureTrafficCalming_En.pdf.Thisseriesincludes:
· UrbanTrafficCalmingandRoadSafety:EffectsandImplica8onsforPrac8ce· UrbanTrafficCalmingandAirQuality:EffectsandImplica8onsforPrac8ce· UrbanTrafficCalmingandEnvironmentalNoise:EffectsandImplica8onsforPrac8ce· UrbanTrafficCalmingandAc8veTransporta8on:EffectsandImplica8onsforPrac8ce
Nelson\Nygaard(2009),AbuDhabiUrbanStreetDesignManual,AbuDhabiUrbanPlanningCouncil(www.upc.gov.ae/en/Home.aspx);atwww.upc.gov.ae/guidelines/urban-street-design-manual.aspx?lang=en-US.NMA,PosiAononTrafficCalming,Na8onalMotoristsAssocia8on(www.motorists.org/issues/engineering/nma_traffic_calming_posi8on.html),undated.PatNoyes(1998),TrafficCalmingPrimer,PatNoyes&Associates(www.patnoyes.com).IntroductoryguidetoTrafficCalming.OlivierBellefleur(2013),UrbanTrafficCalmingandHealthInequaliAes:EffectsandImplicaAonsforPracAce,Na8onalCollabora8ngCentreforHealthyPublicPolicy(www.ncchpp.ca);atwww.ncchpp.ca/175/publica8ons.ccnpps?id_ar8cle=917.OUawa(2004),AreaTrafficManagementGuidelines(Dras);Appendices,DepartmentofPublicWorksandServicesCityofOVawa(www.oVawa.ca);athVp://oVawa.ca/calendar/oVawa/citycouncil/trc/2004/10-20/ACS2004-TUP-TRF-0012%20Annex%202.pdfandhVp://oVawa.ca/calendar/oVawa/citycouncil/trc/2004/10-20/ACS2004-TUP-TRF-0012%20Appendix%20A-H.pdf.NJDOTandPDOT(2008),SmartTransportaAonGuidebook:PlanningandDesigningHighwaysandStreetsthatSupportSustainableandLivableCommuniAes,NewJerseyDepartmentofTransporta8onandPennsylvaniaDepartmentofTransporta8on(www.smart-transporta8on.com);atwww.smart-transporta8on.com/assets/download/Smart%20Transporta8on%20Guidebook.pdf.BhagwantPersaud(2000),CrashReducAonsFollowingInstallaAonofRoundaboutsintheUnitedStates,InsuranceIns8tuteforHighwaySafety(www.iihs.org).TheodoreA.Petritsch(2009),TheTruthAboutLaneWidths,PedestrianandBicycleInforma8onCenter(www.walkinginfo.org);atwww.walkinginfo.org/library/details.cfm?id=4348.
RajV.PonnaluriandPaulW.Groce(2005),“Opera8onalEffec8venessofSpeedHumpsinTrafficCalming,”ITEJournal,(www.ite.org),Vol.75,No.7,July2005,pp.26-30.PBIC,ImageLibrary(www.pedbikeimages.org),bythePedestrianandBicycleInforma8onCenter(www.walkinginfo.org)providesanextensivecollec8onofphotographsrelatedtowalkingandcycling.PTI,SlowDownYou’reGoingTooFast,PublicTechnologyIncorporated(www.p8.org/index.php/p8ee1/inside/190).Goodintroduc8ontotrafficcalming.RichardReXng,GregLuVrellandEugeneRussell(2002),PublicOpinionandTrafficFlowImpactsofNewlyInstalledModernRoundaboutsintheUnitedStates,Transporta8onResearchBoard81stAnnualMee8ng(www.trb.org).JenniferRosales(2006),RoadDietHandbook:SeangTrendsforLivableStreets,WilliamBarclayParsonsFellowshipMonograph20,ParsonsBrinckerhoff(www.pbworld.com/library/fellowship);summaryatwww.oregonite.org/2007D6/paper_review/D4_201_Rosales_paper.pdf.JenniferA.Rosales(2007),“President'sAwardforMeritinTransporta8onEngineering:RoadDietHandbook,”ITEJournal(www.ite.org),Vol.77,No.11,November2007,pp.26-41.RoundaboutsUSA(www.RoundaboutsUSA.com)providesinforma8ononroundaboutdesignandimplementa8on.SACOG(2011),CompleteStreetsResourceToolkit,SacramentoAreaCouncilofGovernments(www.sacog.org);atwww.sacog.org/complete-streets/toolkit/START.html.SchallerConsul1ng(2006),CurbingCars:Shopping,ParkingandPedestrianSpaceinSoHo,Transporta8onAlterna8ves(www.transalt.org);atwww.transalt.org/campaigns/reclaiming/soho_curbing_cars.pdf.SeaUle(1996),MakingStreetsthatWork,CityofSeaVle(www.ci.seaVle.wa.us/npo/tblis.htm).Handbookforresidentsdescribeshowtorequestvariousstreetimprovements,includingTrafficCalming.SmartGrowthNetwork,GeangToSmartGrowth:100PoliciesforImplementaAon,SmartGrowthNetwork(www.smartgrowth.org)andInterna8onalCity/CountyManagementAssocia8on(www.icma.org),2002.LenaSmidfeltRosqvist(2007),VehicularEmissionsAndFuelConsumpAonForStreetCharacterisAcsInResidenAalAreas,TrafficPlanning,DepartmentofTechnologyandSociety,LundUniversity,Sweden(www.st.lth.se);atwww.lth.se/fileadmin/st/dok/KFBkonf/1R_Smidfelt.PDF.TimothyS1llingsandIanLockwood(2001),WestPalmBeachTrafficCalming:TheSecondGeneraAon,Transporta8onResearchBoardCircularE-C019:UrbanStreetSymposium(www.nas.edu/trb/publica8ons/ec019/ec019_i5.pdf).ThomasB.Stout,etal(2006),“SafetyImpactsof‘RoadDiets”inIowa,”ITEJournal,vo.76,No.12(www.ite.org),December2006,pp.24-27.JackStusterandCoffman,Zail(1998),SynthesisofSafetyResearchRelatedtoSpeedandSpeedLimits,FHWA-RD-98-154FederalHighwayAdministra8on(www.shrc.gov/safety/speed/speed.htm).PeterSwiZ,DanPainterandMaVhewGoldstein(2006),ResidenAalStreetTypologyandInjuryAccidentFrequency,Swi[andAssociates,originallypresentedattheCongressfortheNewUrbanism,1997;athVp://massengale.typepad.com/venustas/files/Swi[SafetyStudy.pdf.
TAC(1999),CanadianGuideToTrafficCalming,Transporta8onAssocia8onofCanada(www.tac-atc.ca).ComprehensiveguidetoTrafficCalmingfortransporta8onplannersandengineers.CarolH.Tan(2011),“GoingOnARoadDiet:LaneReduc8onCanIncreaseSafetyForPedestrians,Bicyclists,AndMotoristsWhileImprovingTheQualityOfLifeInDowntownsAcrossTheCountry,”PublicRoads,U.S.FederalHighwayAdministra8on(www.�wa.dot.gov);atwww.�wa.dot.gov/publica8ons/publicroads/11septoct/05.cfm.TGM(2000),NeighborhoodStreetDesignGuidelines;AnOregonGuideforReducingStreetWidths,Transporta8onandGrowthManagementProgram(www.lcd.state.or.us/tgm/pub/pdfs/neigh_st.PDF).TrafficCalmingWebsite(hVp://mn-traffic-calming.org),bytheMinnesotaLocalRoadResearchBoardprovidesinforma8onontrafficcalmingplanningandevalua8on.UTTIPEC(2009),PedestrianDesignGuidelines:Don’tDrive…Walk,DelhiDevelopmentAuthority,NewDelhi(www.uypec.nic.in);atwww.uypec.nic.in/PedestrianGuidelines-30Nov09-UTTPEC-DDA.pdf.TomVanderbilt(2008),Traffic:WhyWeDriveTheWayWeDo(AndWhatItSaysAboutUs),Vintage(www.howwedrive.com).WalkableCommuni1es(www.walkable.org)helpscreatepeople-orientedenvironments.AshaWeinsteinandElizabethDeakin,“HowLocalJurisdic8onsFinanceTrafficCalmingProjects,”TransportaAonQuarterly,Vol.53,No.3,Summer1999,pp.75-87.VickyFengWeiandGordLovegrove(2010),“SustainableRoadSafety:ANew(?)NeighbourhoodRoadPaVernThatSavesVRU(VulnerableRoadUsers)Lives,”AccidentAnalysis&PrevenAon(www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00014575).ThomasWelch(2001),TheConversionofFour-LaneUndividedUrbanRoadwaystoThree-LaneFaciliAes,Transporta8onResearchBoardCircularE-C019:UrbanStreetSymposium(www.trb.org).WSDOT(2010),CommunityPlanningAndDevelopment,WashingtonStateDepartmentofTransporta8on(www.wsdot.wa.gov);atwww.wsdot.wa.gov/LocalPrograms/Planning.WSDOT(2011),Washington’sCompleteStreetsandMainStreetHighways:CaseStudyResource,CommunityPlanningandDevelopment,WashingtonStateDepartmentofTransporta8on(www.wsdot.wa.gov/LocalPrograms/Planning)atwww.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/A49BBBE7-16BC-4ACE-AF2B-3C14066674C9/0/CompleteStreets_110811.pdf.CharlesV.Zegeer,RichardStewart,ForrestCouncilandTimothyR.Neuman(1994),“AccidentRela8onshipsofRoadwayWidthonLow-VolumeRoads,”TransportaAonResearchRecord1445(www.trb.org),pp.160-168.CharlesZegeer,etal(2002),PedestrianFaciliAesUserGuide:ProvidingSafetyandMobility,PedestrianandBicycleInforma8onCenter(www.walkinginfo.org),HighwaySafetyResearchCenter,FederalHighwayAdministra8on,Publica8onFHWA-RD-01-102.CharlesZegeer,etal.(2004),“SafetyEffectsofMarkedVersusUnmarkedCrosswalksin30Ci8es,”ITEJournal,Vol.74,No.1,January2004,pp.34-41;alsoavailableattheUniversityofNorthCarolinaHighwaySafetyResearchCenter(www.walkinginfo.org/rd/devices.htm),2001.
This Encyclopedia is produced by the Victoria Transport Policy Institute to help improve understanding of Transportation
Demand Management. It is an ongoing project. Please send us your comments and suggestions for improvement.
VTPIHomepage
EncyclopediaHomepage
SendComments
Victoria Transport Policy Institute
www.vtpi.org [email protected] Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA
Phone & Fax 250-360-1560“Efficiency - Equity - Clarity”
#4