Central City Mobility update: turn wedges

2023/09/072024/01/12 Dan Allison1 Comment

This is Central City Mobility Project update #23.

Concrete islands have been installed for the turn wedges at P & 21st, P & 19th, Q & 19th, and just today, at P & 9th and Q & 9th. The planned locations of these turn wedge islands are the intersections of the separated bikeways. The Q & 21st one is not installed yet, and I did not see any on 10th. The other intersections will have a different treatment, rubber speed bumps and vertical delineators.

The islands are centered by stamps red concrete. The curbs are four inches, and sloped at about 45 degree angle. Apparently these are poured on top of the pavement, I did not see any sign of excavation below the surface.

In a brief observation, about 20% of the turning drivers hit these islands. This is not surprising, as they are new, and drivers have gotten used to taking these corners at high speed, passing over what was just painted areas. I admit I almost hit one, as I had been riding straight through these intersections rather than swooping with the markings. But I pay more attention that most drivers, so I didn’t hit it.

Apparently the purpose of these is not to provide a wait area or bike box for bicyclists, but to slow drivers and have them pointing more perpendicularly to the bikeway and crosswalk, so they are more likely to see other people. But they do offer an area where bicyclists can get out ahead of and more visible to drivers.

concrete turn wedge island at P St and 21st St

Updates

P Street, Q Street, 21st Street: No significant changes.

19th St: Markings for the separated bikeway are marked from Q Street at least as far south as S Street. Not observed south of there.

I Street: No change, still just lane marking tabs. Paving was continued to 12th Street, so it is possible the project will be extended that far, but as designed, the separated bikeway and lane reduction ends at 15th Street.

10th Street: No significant change, is largely complete but some marking and delineators are still missing.

9th Street: I had speculated that the project would not be completed from L Street to Q Street, but it has been marked and partially painted now. There is a left side regular bike lane (two white lines but no buffer) from L Street to O Street, then mixed left side bike lane and separated from O Street to Q Street.

5th Street: No change.

SMART hosts Stockton Blvd envisioning

2023/09/05 Dan Allison1 Comment

SMART (Sacramento Metro Advocates for Rail and Transit) is hosting Envisioning Our Transportation Future: The Renaissance of Stockton Blvd, on September 27, 2023, 5:30 to 7:00PM. Tickets are free (but not unlimited) via Eventbrite. Check the registration page for more information about the event and the panelists.

From the registration page: “Join us for a transformative panel discussion on shaping a sustainable and prosperous future for Stockton Boulevard. This historic corridor, linking East and South Sacramento, is on the brink of unprecedented growth — but its potential is constrained by outdated transportation infrastructure.”

I encourage you to participate, whether you live or work along Stockton, or are just interested in the evolving community needs of one of the most dis-invested neighborhoods in Sacramento (and Sacramento County – significant part of the roadway are in the county).

The City of Sacramento came up with a tepid Stockton Blvd Corridor Plan in 2021, putting bandaids on the road to try to increase safety, but unwilling to really reduce motor vehicle throughput or speeds. The city has recognized that the plan did not and does not meet the evolving needs of the area and is now proposing a BRT (bus rapid transit) route along much of Stockton. The details of that upgrade are not available. The Stockton Blvd Plan, Community Working Version (draft) from 2022 treats the larger area around Stockton Blvd and all aspects of the built and cultural environment.

SMART graphic for Envisioning Our Transportation Future

$5 billion, or reduce cars

2023/08/31 Dan Allison3 Comments

The number of $5 billion (or more) has been bandied about recently as the amount of money we need to fix all the poorly designed and dangerous roads in the City of Sacramento. The number seems reasonable, and I myself have estimated that sidewalk repair alone is $1.5 billion. This is just the city, let alone the county or region. The county and region are in most cases much worse off than the city. I support more funding for this work, some via sales taxes, but more via property taxes. After all, it is property that requires our transportation infrastructure and benefits from a good system.

But what if there is a better way? A less expensive way?

I encourage you to watch the latest (August 24) episode of Not Just Bikes (by Jason Slaughter), titled ‘Even Small Towns are Great Here (5 Years in the Netherlands)‘. He has collected video clips from visits to small towns across the Netherlands. He has two main points about small towns: almost all of them are served by good rail service, and many of the small towns and suburbs don’t need extensive bike structure because there are so few motor vehicles that it is safe and comfortable to ride on any street. My favorite quote from the video is:

“To make a place friendly for cycling, it was more important to restrict cars than it was to build a bunch of expensive bicycle infrastructure. After all, protected bike lanes are just an extension of car infrastructure, right. You don’t need bike paths if you don’t have a lot of cars.”
Not Just Bikes (Jason Slaughter)

A related quote, that I will have to paraphrase, since I can’t find the original source is: We have plenty of space for bikes on our streets, its just that it is currently occupied by cars.

The point, for me, is that we could make much more effective investments if we greatly reduced the number of cars on the road rather than trying to make all our roads safe for bicycling and walking. We need to make car drivers pay the true cost of their transportation choice: fossil fuel extraction, climate change, air pollution, expensive highways, foreign wars and fossil fuel subsidies, and a long list of others. Yes, and making it necessary to build protective infrastructure for walkers and bicyclist to protect them from those drivers. We need to make is more expensive and less convenient to drive, so that people will make other choices.

If we actively and directly reduce car dominance, we might only need $1 billion to fix everything. Still a lot of money, but not out of reach.

Jason moved to the Netherlands from Canada, but the car dominated ‘no places’ that he left are the same car dominated ‘no places’ of the United States, and of Sacramento. In fact, Canada tried to imitate the US, and left themselves impoverished, both economically and mobility wise.

Imagine for a moment, someone saying “Carmichel, where there are so few cars that it is safe to bicycle and walk on any street, and the are great transit connections to all the regional destinations.” They would be laughed out of the room. Yet Carmichael, and unincorporated town in Sacramento County, is about the same size as many of the small cities called out in the Not Just Bikes video. We have designed a horrible world in service of the idea that we can and should drive everywhere. We if we flip that and make it hard and expensive to drive everywhere, places will begin to heal. Even Carmichael.

Steinberg’s proposal for 2024 county ballot measure

2023/08/312023/09/15 Dan Allison5 Comments

Mayor Darrell Steinberg used his third State of the City address on Friday to introduce his concept of a housing and transportation measure for the 2024 ballot, called the ‘Climate, Clean Transportation and Affordable Housing Measure’. The half cent sales tax would generate about $8-9 billion over the 40 years, and the transportation aspects would be administered by Sacramento Transportation Authority (SacTA) which administers the current Measure A. More detail is available on the Mayor’s Community Engagement website https://engagesac.org/blog-civic-engagement/2023/8/25/a-new-vision-to-fund-affordable-housing-and-transportation.

One-third would go to a countywide housing trust fund, to provide affordable housing, permanent supportive housing, and other types. One-quarter of the one-third would be devoted to keeping people in their housing so they don’t become homeless to begin with.

Another one-third would go for public transportation. Specifically, initiate bus rapid transit routes, increase bus frequencies on all routes, buy new fleet, and create express buses across the region.

The other one-third would be for safe streets and active transportation. Implement vision zero, build sidewalks and protected bike lanes, multipurpose trails, car and bike share, and repair roads, all with an equity lens.

All of these investments would help the city and county reach the agreed-upon greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction target of 19% for the region.

Steinberg acknowledged that there will be opposition from the old guard, who want to keep doing the same things that don’t work and have never worked for most citizens of the city and county.

He pointed out that transit cannot be effective unless we achieve a density of housing and destinations that allows transit to work.

The mayor said that he would prefer a countywide measure, but would go for a city measure if the other partners (county and the four cities) are not interested. He emphasized several times that climate change compels us to change directions and invest more wisely.

Panel

A panel was composed of Elk Grove Mayor Bobbie Singh-Allen, Steve Cohn of SMART (Sacramento Metro Advocates for Rail and Transit), Cathy Creswell, Chair of Sacramento Housing Alliance, Luke Wood, President of Sacramento State, and Gabby Trejo of Sacramento Area Congregations Together (SacACT).

I won’t detail the panel questions and answers, except to say that there was a recognition among all that housing and transportation are inextricably linked. If you watch the video of the session, note that the first ten minutes is dead air space, and the quality of the video is poor. But still worth watching.

As I say, “You can’t have affordable housing without effective transit, and you can’t have effective transit without a density of housing and services”.

SacATC recommendations supported by city council

2023/08/30 Dan AllisonLeave a comment

Agenda item 11 on the Sacramento City Council agenda last night (2023-08-29) was ‘Active Transportation Commission 2022 Annual Report Regarding the Status of Walking and Bicycling in the City of Sacramento and Activities of the Commission‘. Twenty members of the public and organizations spoke in support of the recommendations, no one against, and all council members spoke in support. Comments of both the public and council focused on the need for more funding to make infrastructure changes to our roadways, in order to fix the unsafe roadway network we have.

I have written twice before about the SacATC recommendations: support SacATC status on walking/biking (now!) and SacATC meeting Jan 19 with report, Northgate, Freeport. I recommend you read the full set of recommendations. Do they go far enough? No. Do they miss some important issues? Yes. But these recommendations are beyond anything that the city has considered before, and deserve the support of everyone in the city (and county and region).

Several representative from Land Park talked about how much they loved the slow streets in the park, and how disappointed they were when the city nixed them. They want them back! So do a number of other speakers. Grace Bartley talked about how she was hit by a driver while riding her bike to McClatchy High on Freeport, probably the most impactful speaker of the evening. Several speakers mentioned the imperative to control motor vehicle speeds, by whatever means necessary. (The ultimate solution to this issue is not any action of the city, but speed-limited motor vehicles.)

Eric Guerra mentioned again, as he has other times, that many parents seem to care about only their own children, once their children are safely dropped off at school, they speed away, endangering other people’s children. And some not ever their own children, encouraging their kids to run across the street at drop-off and pick-up. There was general agreement that there needs to be more money in next year’s budget for active transportation, though no one said what would be cut to accomplish that. SacATC had wanted their recommendations to go to the council for consideration in adopting this year’s budget, but a roadblock (intentional?) was thrown up by requiring that the report go first to the Personnel and Public Employees Committee, which meant that it did not come to the council until August. Katie Valenzuela suggested that Public Works come up with guidelines for citizen-initiated ‘tactical urbanism’ projects so that quick-builds can happen now, when the city does not have the funds or materials or personnel to complete in a timely manner. Jennifer Donlon Wyant was open to the idea, but I’m sure it would get nixed in Public Works. Darrell Steinberg talked about his proposal for a housing and transportation measure in 2024, that would provide some of the additional funding needed. This will be the topic of my next post.

I spoke along with the other 19 people, and my comments are below:

I strongly support all of the recommendations included in the 2022 report from the ATC to the city council. In particularly, I would like to address two of those, 3. Develop a Citywide Safe Routes to School Program, and 4. Finalize the Construction Detour Policy.

I was the Safe Routes to School Coordinator for San Juan Unified for 10 years. Having that position funded through federal and ATC grants, and district funding, allowed the completion of many infrastructure project though collaboration with the City of Citrus Heights and Sacramento County. Most of these would not have occurred without the position. We also offered an extensive program of walking and bicycling education to students, and to the community. Civil Thread/WALKSacramento was a key partner in these efforts. I recommend that Sac City schools and the city create and fund a Safe Routes position to head an ongoing program in the support of students and their families.

It is long past time for a policy to accommodate walkers and bicyclists during construction projects. Nearly every construction project that has occurred in the central city has violated ADA guidelines, which require accommodation. City staff is on record as saying that walkers and bicyclists would be accommodated when it does not remove capacity from motor vehicles. So every project presents dangers to walkers and bicyclists. The are poorly signed and do not provide detectable barriers. I spend a lot of time reporting these violations, and over time many though not all of them are corrected. However, it should not be the responsibility of citizens to hold the city to ADA requirements. A progressive city would develop traffic plans that accommodate all travel modes, and would then inspect and enforce those plans.

Slow Down Sacramento

2023/08/302024/01/12 Dan Allison6 Comments

A new organization and effort has been developed in Sacramento to encourage drivers to slow down, in order to protect walkers and bicyclists from the traffic violence of high speed traffic. You can read the organization intro and charter at Slow Down Sacramento, and sign up to join the effort.

Slow Down Sacramento logo

This organization was created by Isaac Gonzalez, a community activist, in part due to the tragedy of a mother who was killed while waiting to pick up her child at Phoebe Hearst Elementary, the same school as his kids attend (KCRA: Husband of woman killed outside Sacramento school says changes to Folsom Boulevard would save lives for more info).

Gonzalez held a press conference yesterday (Tuesday, 2023-08-29) at Sacramento City Hall to kick off the organization. Isaac spoke at length about the need to improve driver behavior, following the speed limit and being respectful of other road users. He pointed out that though better infrastructure is the ultimate answer to traffic violence, that will be very expensive and very slow, but the solution we have available right now is for drivers to be more responsible. Press conference attendees included many local advocates, parents, and kids, as well as a number of city staff. Four council members attended, and city council members Eric Guerra, Lisa Kaplan, and Mai Vang spoke on the issues. City transportation planning staff also supports the effort.

Isaac Gonzalez speaking at Slow Down Sacramento press conference

I tend to be cynical about the prospect of improving driver behavior. Drivers become aggressive when they get behind the wheel, and infrastructure that prevents their recklessness and aggression is the long term answer. But in the meanwhile, for the many years it will take to create safer streets, drivers can act responsibly. If the Slow Down Sacramento effort saves even one life, it is worth it, but it has the potential to save more. I encourage you to follow the organization’s work. I think the fact that this is a citizen-led effort, rather than the safety theater of government agencies that blames victims more than perpetrators, increases the chances of success.

Central City Mobility update: 9th, 10th, I

2023/08/282024/01/12 Dan Allison2 Comments

This is Central City Mobility Project update #22.

9th Street: 9th Street has a pavement overlay from L Street to Q Street. This is not repaving, removing old pavement and placing new, as has been done on many of the streets in the Central City Mobility Project, but a thin overlay. This was done very recently and there is no marking of any sort on the street. I had guessed that this section of 9th Street would not receive any treatment until the construction projects were complete, but I was wrong. I don’t know what kind of roadway allocation will be done in these five blocks. The left side is constrained by construction from L to Capitol Mall, and the right side from N Street to O Street and from P Street to Q Street. Note that in the photo below, there is a bus stop on the right hand side, which is why the city has designed the separated bikeway design on the left side.

10th Street: 10th Street is largely complete from W Street to Q Street, where a pre-existing separated bikeway continues north, but a few things are left unfinished and not all of the green vertical delineators have been installed. The block from Broadway to X Street has been marked. It does not appear that anything will be done with the block from X Street to W Street, under the freeway.

10th Street from Broadway to X St, new markings for separated bikeway

I Street: Nothing has been done on I Street since the pavement patching. There are lane marker tabs for three general purpose lanes and no bicycle facilities.

19th Street: Work south of Q Street is now underway, with repaving complete and the beginnings or markings for the left side separated bikeway. I have not ridden south on 19th to see what is being done beyond this point.

19th St at Q St, initial markings for separated bikeway

There is no change to the ‘turn wedges of death‘. The bicycle signal at 21st Street and I Street has not been installed. No further work is in evidence on 5th Street.

1000 posts!

2023/08/16 Dan Allison1 Comment

The preceding post was my 1000th!

I started the Getting Around Sacramento blog on March 14, 2012 with Getting started. The blog initially contained a lot about transit, but when Sacramento Transit Advocates and Riders (STAR) was formed, much of my thinking and research on transit moved over there.

I hope those with me from the beginning, or joining in later, have been entertained and edified.

Central City Mobility update

2023/08/16 Dan AllisonLeave a comment

This is Central City Mobility Project update #21.

I have been backpacking and traveling, so not keeping up as much with the Central City Mobility Project. I may do updates on my days back in town, about once a week.

19th St: Paint and vertical delineators are mostly complete from H St to W St. Nothing has happened in the two blocks from W St to Broadway. Though pavement has been patched from Q St to W St, no other work has occurred.

21st St: Paint and vertical delineators are complete from W St to I St. No bicycle signal at I St, so the intersection of 21st St and I St remains extremely hazardous to bicyclists (and walkers).

P St: Paint and vertical delineators are complete from 21st St to 15th St.

Q St: Paint is mostly complete from 14th St to 21st St. Vertical delineators have been installed on some blocks but not others, probably due to materials shortages. Some crosswalks are missing.

10th St: Paint is mostly complete from W St to Q St (Q St to I St was already ‘complete’ before this project). No vertical delineators yet. The block from Broadway to X St has a traditional bike lane on the right, but no changes. The block from X St to W St, under the freeway, has a wide right side shoulder, but it is not a bike lane, nor is it marked as such. The parking-protected separated bikeway on 10th St is on the right side, because 10th St does not have bus service to be accommodated by a left-side bikeway.

9th St: Other than some patching, nothing has happened on 9th St. The new bikeway from L St to Q St will be on the left side. A construction project from L St to Capitol Ave closes the left side bike lane, and there is no accommodation for bicyclists. Though there is a bus area on the right, followed by a parking lane, it is not marked as a bike lane, nor is it safe as a bike lane. There is no signed on 9th St approaching L St to indicate that the bikeway ends, nor how to ride south. See photo below.

9th St at L St, no bicycle accommodation

Another construction project from O St to P St closes the right side of the roadway, but the existing bike lane on the left hand side is still open. As previously noted, it is unlikely that the bikeway on 9th St will be installed until both construction projects are complete.

I St: Other than pavement patches, no other work has taken place. No-parking signs continue to be up even though no active work is occurring. Most blocks from 21st St to 12th St will be reduced from three general purpose travel lanes to two, but from 20th St to 19th St, and part way to 18th St, the three lanes will be retained. It is not clear why.

5th St: No further work has occurred.

Nothing has changed about the ‘turn wedges of death‘. A closer look at the design diagrams (thanks to the person who provided them) shows that the wedges at intersections of the separated bikeways are intended to have hard curbs, 4 inches with sloped sides (regular curbs are six inches or more) with stamped concrete interiors (style 3), but the other intersections will have ‘rubber speed bumps’, and vertical delineators. The bumps are apparently as shown in the photo below, though the photo shows a bump in the travel lane, and these are in the turn wedges. The bumps are 2.25 inches high, which won’t be even noticed by trucks and SUVs, though might be noticed and respected by passenger car drivers.

Getting Around Sacramento

by foot, bicycle, and public transit (car-free!)

Author: Dan Allison