This phrase summarizes the street network we have in the City of Sacramento. With a very, very few exceptions, every single street is too wide and too fast, across the entire range from residential streets to traffic sewer arterials. These streets kill and injure incredible numbers of people every year. Walkers, bicyclists, drivers, passengers, no one is immune to the danger that these poorly designed streets present. Though rankings change year to year, and depend on details, Sacramento is at or near the top of crash rates for the state. We probably don’t have worse drivers than other cities, we have worse streets.

The city has promised that it will update the Street Design Standards that have created this hazard. Maybe soon, maybe not for years. In fact, the existing standards don’t even have all that much detail, so a lot of the streets were apparently designed on the whim of traffic engineers, not even on standards. MUTCD (Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices) and CA-MUTCD will not be considered acceptable roadway designs since they emphasize motor vehicles over all other roadway users. NACTO (National Association of City Transportation Officials) or European standards such as the Netherlands CROW will be referred to as needed.

The new standards must ensure that we never build an unsafe roadway again. The goal must be no fatalities or severe injuries, no matter how drivers behave. Sacramento must be a true Vision Zero, safe systems city, not the lip service, we will fix things someday, when we have the money, that it is now.

What should the new standards be like?

1. There should be separate documents, or at least clearly separate sections, for new construction and for healing existing designs.
2. The state and federal roadway functional classification system (FCS) should not be used. Instead, a system that addresses the intended purpose of streets including ALL users should be used. The FCS is in large part responsible for the mess we have now. It represents that traditional traffic engineer focus on maximizing motor vehicle volume and speed. See SacCity street classification for more information.
3. New construction standards:
   • will emphasize limited roadways, one lane in each direction, and would include designs for two lanes in each direction in exceptional circumstances
   • design speeds and posted speed limits must match
   • base design speed is 20 mph
   • roadways over 20 mph must have bike lanes; over 30 mph must have separated bikeways
   • no roadway will have a design speed over 40 mph. Anywhere. Ever.
   • intersections will be designed so that it is clear that crosswalks, at sidewalk level, continue through the intersection, and motor vehicles are the guests
   • all new developments will be designed with a street grid of 1/4 mile
   • rolled curbs will not meet standards, however, streets without curbs may be used if the design speed is 10 mph
4. Healing existing roadways:
   • no street will be repaved without consideration being given to reallocating right-of-way width to walking, bicycling, transit, and sidewalks buffers for trees
   • the intent of reallocation will be to achieve the same design as new construction
   • on-street parking will be retained for its traffic calming effect, however, removal of parking will never prevent reallocation to higher uses
   • for overly wide streets, parallel parking will be converted to back-in diagonal parking in order to narrow roadways for safety
   • streets without a tree canopy will have trees added, in parking lanes if no other space is available
   • the city will adopt responsibility for maintenance of sidewalks, in the same way that they are responsible for pavement
   • designs will be available for closing sections of street temporarily or permanently for dining or community events
   • designs for diagonal ADA ramps will not be part of the updated standards; only perpendicular ramps will meet standards

My intent here is to provide something simple, summarizing beyond the details of previous posts on Street Design Standards.

What would you add?