You won’t be surprised, but City of Sacramento achieved a score of 34 out of 100 on the People for Bikes annual City Ratings. The scores are simplistic, using road width and bike lane mileage, but are still indicative of the relative ranking of cities and of the progress being made. Progress in the case of Sacramento is very slow.
I believe Sacramento’s poor ranking is due largely to the city’s policy of building bicycling infrastructure almost entirely with grant funding, and not with city budget. When you are competing nationally, statewide, or regionally for grants, funds will be limited and progress very slow. The city must spend more of its general fund on shifting our transportation system away from unsafe car dominated streets to streets that work for all users.
This is the eighth post (I think) on the Broadway Complete Streets project. Additional posts on Broadway Complete Streets are available at category ‘Broadway Complete Streets‘.
The long-line striping on Broadway is essentially complete, with the addition of yellow lines for center dividers and the center turn lane. There is still no green paint for bicycle facilities, and the shared transit/bike areas. None of the crosswalks have been installed. This lack of attention to crosswalks is typical of the entire project, motor vehicles first, sidewalks last and walkers crossing last.
Broadway at 3rd St striping
The short curb-separated bikeway eastbound between 15th Street and 16th Street was closed yesterday, though I had used it a few days earlier. I noticed a bicycle signal on Broadway at 16th Street / Land Park Drive, which may have not been there before or may not have been activated and so I didn’t notice it. In a short while of observing, it did not change to green, so perhaps it is awaiting completion of the curb-separated bikeway.
Broadway at 16th St / Land Park Dr, eastbound, bicycle signal
I continue to have concerns about the RRFBs (rectangular rapid flashing beacon) used for several crosswalks along Broadway. The one in the photo below seemed to be stuck on, for unknown reasons. The rate of driver yielding to people crossing is very low. An observer pointed out that because RRFBs are not common in Sacramento, drivers may not know how to deal with them, and that this would be a perfect time for a city educational effort to bring drivers up to speed (so to speak). The particular location shown below, Broadway at 22nd, has a median island in the center, preventing drivers from passing stopped motor vehicles by using the center turn lane. Other locations do not have this protection, and I observed at least one instance of a driver passing a stopped vehicle by using the center turn lane at Broadway and 18th Street. Reduced general purpose lanes, from two per direction to one per direction, do significantly reduce the multi-lane threat, where one vehicle stops and others do not, but the center turn lane allows drivers to continue to threaten walkers, and to violate the law.
Broadway at 22nd Str, RRFB and walker
As recently as the Broadway Fact Sheet in 2019, conversion of 16th Street between Broadway and X Street from one-way to two-way was part of the project. I’ve seen no evidence of work on that part, so it may have been delayed or may have been dropped. Also, work on Broadway between 19th Street and 21st Street has been delayed to another phase due to prolonged negotiation with Union Pacific over whether there will be one or two traffic lanes per direction approaching the railroad tracks between 19th Street and 20th Street.
I’ll post again when green paint has been installed, and the crosswalks completed.
The city yesterday added the Neighborhood Connections Story Board to the Streets for People Active Transportation Plan webpage. I encourage you to look at the entire storymap, but the traffic calming slides are worth sharing independently. The slideshow below has the 13 traffic calming features, with photos, brief descriptions, and relative costs. These traffic calming features are meant for local and minor collector streets, not for major collector and arterials streets. Note that the city is still using the outmoded classification system (local, collector, arterial) that focuses on motor vehicle throughput. This typology approach must change.
Additional posts on Broadway Complete Streets are available at category ‘Broadway Complete Streets‘.
Striping is finally occurring on Broadway, more than two weeks after marking for the striping was completed. Crosswalks have not been striped, though if I were in charge, they would be the first thing striped. Striping is incomplete from 3rd Street to 11th Street, and there is minor striping east of there. There is no green paint yet.
partial striping on Broadway at 3rd St
RRFBs (rectangular rapid flashing beacon) signals have been installed at three locations. These are mounted on poles and mast arms. Some observation has indicated they are being widely ignored by drivers. A person who has watched the RRFB at 18th Street says that only about 5% of the drivers were yielding to walkers who had triggered the lights. I will do more observation and talk to more people about their observations, but so far, the concerns I expressed in RRFBs are being ignored are true on Broadway.
The City of Sacramento Active Transportation Commission (SacATC) will meet today, June 20, 2024, 5:30PM in city council chambers, 915 I Street.
The main agenda item is:
Streets for People Active Transportation Plan
This is a discussion and feedback item, not for decision.
The attachments to the staff report are available separately on the Streets for People webpage. Hopefully this will solve issues with the very large and likely corrupted combined document.
You can comment via eComment at the city’s meeting page, http://sacramento.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=21, before the meeting starts, or in person. Of course in-person is more powerful, but eComments are valuable and the only method many people can use. eComments submitted well ahead of time can be viewed by commissioners, while last-minute ones will go into the record but not be viewed before the meeting.
If you are frustrated by my posting the meeting on the day of the meeting, please view or subscribe to the calendar hosted by STAR, at https://star-transit.org/events/, which has this event and many others of interest to transportation advocates.
The third post by Strong SacTown to improve and promote the City of Sacramento update to its Street Design Standards. Other posts at tag: street design standards.
Narrower lanes are generally correlated with slower speeds, reduced collisions, and safer streets. Our recommendations:Lane widths instituted as maximums (rather than minimums) Maximum 10 feet for any streets 30+ mph (except limited cases) Increased flexibility for streets designed for 25 mph or lowerOver 80% of the fatalities and serious injuries on Sacramento roadways happen on streets signed between 30 mph and 45 mph. Taking a serious approach to Vision Zero will mean addressing these higher-speed, higher-volume roads. Both a reclassification of these roads (discussed later) and redesign of the current geometry to appropriate speeds is crucial.
The second post by Strong SacTown to improve and promote the City of Sacramento update to its Street Design Standards. Other posts at tag: street design standards.
Over time, the major use of our streets and public right of way has shifted: from pedestrians and horse-drawn carriages, to streetcars and bicycles, and — over the last several decades — to ever larger private vehicles. In designing our streets for vehicle throughput, our network of roads has become a transitional space focused on getting as many cars from Point A to Point B as fast as possible. This means dedicating an ever increasing amount of space to travel and parking lanes, with only the space left over from vehicle use — if any — allocated to people: pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transit.
Strong SacTown Street Design Team will be posting a series to improve and promote the City of Sacramento update of their street design standards. This is the first. You can follow their website at https://www.strongsactown.org/, and the series at https://www.strongsactown.org/tag/street-design-standards/. Getting Around Sacramento / Dan Allison is participating in the team planning and writing, but these posts are the work of the team.
“We are Strong SacTown — Streets for People, a group of Sacramentans advocating for updated street designs that will rank safety, livability, and economic vitality above vehicle throughput or speed; where congestion relief will not be the goal in street design.
The City of Sacramento is updating the street design standards for the first time since 2009. The city is embarking on this effort as it is becoming increasingly apparent that the existing standards do not meet the needs of all users in the modern era.”
I was a strong supporter of RRFBs (rectangular rapid flashing beacon), where a safer crossing of the street is intended mid-block. I worked with transportation agencies in a number of locations to get them installed, and was very happy to see them go in.
They are used where multi-use trails cross roadways, and at intersections where additional traffic calming and safety are needed, but where the transportation agency does not want to add stop signs, or is unwilling or financially unable to install a traffic signal. The cost savings of an RRFB over a traffic signal are significant, about $25K for a RRFB, and upwards of $1M for a full traffic signal.
But…
Driver behavior has rendered RRFBs untenable for protecting people walking. I have observed a number of RRFB locations over the last few months. All of them are failing. Between 25% and 50% of drivers are failing to yield to people using these crossings, bicyclists or walkers. I have seen several people almost get hit by car drivers. Some drivers are slowing but failing to stop, or yield, and some drivers are not even slowing. Apparently the attitude of many drivers is that the RRFBs are only advisory and do not require yield to people in the street. Of course the law requires yielding to people crossing the street in a crosswalk, whether there is any type of signing or signaling, or not. But drivers don’t see it that way.
So, I find myself having to withdraw support for RRFBs. I will not support them as freestanding safety improvements, not as part of project. It is sad that driver behavior has erased the benefit of a safety enhancement, but it is a fact, and driver behavior gets continuously worse, never better.
Additional posts on Broadway Complete Streets are available at category ‘Broadway Complete Streets‘.
The section of Broadway from just west of 3rd Street to 19th Street has been repaved, and marked for striping, but no striping has been done yet. The section from 21st St to 24th Street has been ground down in preparation for paving, but no paving has occurred.
There are construction vertical delineators scattered all over the street, along with delineator bases without the vertical. Most of the delineators were placed in what will be the bike lane, not in what will be the bike lane buffer. Presumably the construction company wishes to keep them further away from motor vehicles, which is sort of understandable since more than one-third of the delineators have been hit by drivers.
I’ll post again when there is actual striping installed.
Getting Around Sacramento 