the end of red light enforcement

2024/03/152024/12/13 Dan Allison5 Comments

A SacBee article today notes the end of the red light camera program in City of Sacramento, which was part of Sacramento County’s program: Sacramento’s red light camera program has been shut down by the Sheriff’s Office. Here’s why. (sorry about the firewall)

This is very sad news, given the epidemic of red light running in the City of Sacramento (and elsewhere). I’ve written about this before: how do we get more red light cameras?, red light running consequences, SacCity red light cameras and crashes, Sac Vision Zero intersections & red light cameras, red-light-running bullies, and pandemic of red light running. It has only gotten worse over time, and will continue to get worse unless the city takes action to reduce it.

A quote from the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office is particularly galling: “Gandhi said the Sheriff’s Office wants to focus on its mission of suppressing violent crime and other criminal activity.” Apparently, in the view of law enforcement, traffic violence is not a violent crime. Apparently, the fact that red-light runners kill and injure walkers, bicyclists, passengers, and other drivers is of little concern. Sadly, this is a very common law enforcement attitude.

If cost-cutting were an appropriate response to criminal activity, it would be reasonable to just eliminate law enforcement. Law enforcement responds to criminal activity; it does little to nothing to prevent criminal activity. Automated red light enforcement is an effective response to criminal activity, and it does reduce future criminal activity. Why is the Sheriff’s Office and the City of Sacramento not interested?

If you think that direct law enforcement of red light running is a good replacement, you would be wrong, for two reasons. One, almost no enforcement of motor vehicle violations occurs anymore, other than some enforcement of speeding. Two, the law enforcement practice of pretextual stops, stopping people of color for traffic violations to search for other violations, and to intimidate people of color, results in law enforcement violence against drivers of color.

One of the useful things the city was doing to reduce traffic violence is no longer. Don’t you feel safer now? You can visit the city’s Red Light Running Program page, in case you wish to leave condolences, remembrances, or flowers.

photo of red light camera, from City of Sacramento — *red light camera, from City of Sacramento*

Envisioning Our Transit-Oriented Future: Del Paso Boulevard

2024/03/122024/03/12 Dan AllisonLeave a comment

Envisioning Our Transit-Oriented Future: Del Paso Boulevard

Instagram? maybe…

2024/03/122024/03/19 Dan Allison2 Comments

Update: I have decided that, for now, I’m only going to follow back transportation organizations and agencies. My concern is that if I start following individuals, my feed will become overwhelming for the limited time I have for Instagram.

As an experiment, I have created an Instagram account for Getting Around Sacramento. I started using Instagram for the Week Without Driving Sacramento campaign last year, on the encouragement of one of the program partners, SABA, which has an active Instagram. I maintain the WWD Sac website on behalf of Sacramento Transit Advocates and Riders (which does not so far have Instagram). We gained some engagement, but not much participation in Week Without Driving. It was definitely a learning curve for me.

The main reason for my interest in using Instagram for Getting Around Sacramento is not promoting my posts, but linking to events sponsored by other organizations and agencies, which are important but not necessarily worth a separate blog post.

I stopped using Facebook years ago because there was little of import there, and stopped using Twitter/X two years ago because it had become toxic under the regime of Elon Musk. I’ve looked at Mastodon, but the most logical server is a bay area server, and haven’t found one relevant to the geography and mission of Getting Around Sac.

A media icon for Instagram has been added to the top of the sidebar.

Time will tell!

Jackrabbit Trail crossing at Truxel Rd

2024/03/112024/03/12 Dan Allison5 Comments

I participated in Slow Down Sacramento’s Traffic Safety Forum on March 2. I participated in the session looking at specific locations that need safety improvements, with two individuals interested in the North Natomas area, specifically the locations where the Jackrabbit Trail, a multi-use path, crosses streets. We focused on the crossing of Truxel Road at Natomas Crossing Drive. I intend to write more about the forum in a future post.

Jackrabbit Trail is not just a recreational trail, it is also the main route between North Natomas and downtown Sacramento, which is why North Natomas Jibe has been active in promoting the trail and working with the city to complete the trail. There are still gaps, but it is heavily used, and I have used it a number of times when I was doing bicyclist education in North Natomas. The UEDA trail is also a north-south route, but it is far to the east, serving an industrial area and along a levee, rather than serving residents and businesses.

Summary

The crossing of Truxel Drive by the Jackrabbit Trail is poorly designed and hazardous for bicyclists and walkers.
The crosswalk should have an exclusive phase, without motor vehicle movement, to protect walkers and bicyclists using the crosswalk.
The crosswalk should be painted in a high-visibility pattern rather than the low visibility parallel lines.
The ends of the path should be aligned with a multi-use crossing just south of the existing crosswalk, and perpendicular to Truxel Road.

CARB grants

2024/03/10 Dan AllisonLeave a comment

In addition to the SacRT Mobility Hubs grant to Civic Thread, the Sacramento region received another grant from the CARB FY 2022-2023 Planning and Capacity Building (Planning), Clean Mobility in Schools (CMIS), and the Sustainable Transportation Equity Project (STEP) program.

Lead Applicant: Sacramento City Unified School District
Organization Type: Public School
Funding Program: Planning
Project Community Location: South Sacramento (Sacramento County)
Project Name: Safe Routes to School for All
Sub-applicants: Civic Thread, United Latinos
Funding Request: $500,000
Summary from application: The overarching goal of Sacramento City Unified School District’s Safe Routes to School for All project is to increase transportation equity by way of enhanced mobility access and safe routes to schools in our highest need school neighborhoods in South Sacramento through a community-led planning and capacity building process. The community priorities and identified solutions will be documented in the Community Transportation Needs Assessment (“Needs Assessment”). The Safe Routes to School project will encompass a one to two-mile radius surrounding up to 15 Title Idesignated elementary, middle, K-8, and high schools serving nearly 7,500 students in South Sacramento. The project will prioritize engaging those living in Sacramento’s SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities who are BIPOC-identifying; LGBTIA+ identifying; those with limited or no English proficiency; refugees or recent immigrants; those with physical and/or learning disabilities; and households with no vehicle.

Note that Civic Thread is a partner in this application and program.

Streetsblog California posted on the grant awards: CARB Announces Planning, Clean Transportation Grants.

SacATC Annual Report to Sac Council March 12

2024/03/10 Dan AllisonLeave a comment

The 2023 Annual Report from the Sacramento Active Transportation Commission is agenda 5 for the Sacramento City Council on March 12, 2024, starting 5:00PM. Unfortunately, the item has been placed on the consent agenda. Every transportation advocate in Sacramento is disappointed that it is on consent, because we feel that the report deserves discussion by council. The report is critical to the future of active transportation in the city, and all the livability and safety benefits of active transportation, so the consent agenda minimizes its importance.

The public may comment on items on the consent agenda, both in eComment beforehand, and at the meeting. In-person comments are always weighted more than eComments, but if eComment is all you can do, please do! However, unless a council member pulls the item from consent, it will not be discussed by the council. If it were pulled from consent, I assume that City of Sacramento Transportation Planning Manager Jennifer Donlon Wyant and 2024 SacATC chair Arlete Hodel might present the report to the council.

To comment in person, you must submit a request to speak before the agenda item comes up, which will be very close to the beginning of the meeting at 5:00PM. Once the consent agenda comes up, it is not possible to submit a request. Speaker cards are on the back counter, to your left when you walk in to chambers, and the basket for cards is at the left front of chambers. Though you can of course comment on anything during the ‘items not on the agenda’ at the end of the meeting, it is much better if you can comment directly on the agenda item in question.

Even if you cannot comment, the Annual Report is well worth a read. The Sacramento Active Transportation Commission has shifted to a much more progressive and activist stance over the last two years, and the ten recommendations in the report (starting on page 8) should be implemented by the city. These are listed below, but read the document for supporting details.

Increase Funding for Active Transportation Infrastructure Projects
Develop a Citywide Safe Routes to School Program
Expand Speed Management Programs
Pilot an Electric Bike Library
Promote E-Bike Incentives
Create a Sacramento Quick-Build Bikeways Program
Increase Bike Parking
Re-establish Slow & Active Streets
Finalize the Construction Detour Policy
Develop an ATC Dashboard

If you are going to comment, I recommend that you pick one item of most importance to you, and comment on that. Personal perspectives are best, why the lack of these programs has harmed you, or why the implementation of these programs will benefit you.

too much to write about

2024/03/10 Dan AllisonLeave a comment

There is much to write about transportation, and housing, in the Sacramento region. I keep track of blog post ideas in a ToDo application called OmniFocus. The list gets longer rather than shorter. Eight days since my last post, and seven days before that. Twenty-three items are on the list. Yow!

I also write for Sacramento Transit Advocates and Riders (STAR) and am now the lead person for the new SacMoves Coalition website. And Week Without Driving Sacramento, my Granite Chief Wilderness blog (though only during Sierra backpacking season), and even my personal blog, which is much neglected. I enjoy writing for all of these blogs, not to mention writing in my personal journal, which I get to a few times a week. But there are a lot of other things in my life besides writing. I walk and bicycle, I dance, mostly contra dancing in the bay area, I go to plays, in Sacramento and San Francisco, I read books (though too little), I watch movies, mostly at home on my computer, I go often to the grocery store (being car free, I walk or bicycle, and so do more frequent trips rather than big shopping trips), I attend both agency meetings and advocacy group meetings, I go to coffee shops to write and read and socialize, and I hang out with my neighborhood cats on my porch. And a lot of other things.

I’m not apologizing for the gaps between posts, or for not writing about what you want to hear about. But I do want to write about what interests or concerns you. So let me know. You can comment on the blog, or email me at allisondan52@gmail.com. If you would like to contribute yourself, let me know what your idea is and I’ll work with you. If you’ve been reading, you will know that I support active transportation and transit, not motor vehicles, and I support housing, of all types and price points. If that is not your passion, look elsewhere, because there are still plenty of voices for cars, and parking, and exclusionary zoning.

San Joaquins on new Siemens Venture trainset

2024/03/02 Dan Allison2 Comments

This is a followup to its a rough ride!

On March 1, I rode San Joaquins 719 from Bakersfield (4:12PM) to Stockton (8:55PM). The 719 continues on to Oakland Jack London, but there is a bus connection to Sacramento from Stockton. I had picked that schedule specifically to experience the new Siemens Venture trainset used on that route.

The official page is Welcome Aboard Amtrak San Joaquins New Venture Cars. I did not know until observing the cars more closely, that Sumitomo Corporations of America is actually the lead contractor, and Siemens is the subcontractor who built the cars. Roger Rudick wrote Review: Amtrak California Passengers are Starving for New Trains on StreetsblogSF. Though the trainsets have been in service since December, I haven’t found any other reviews that have details.

Seats: Roger talked about narrow seats. They are indeed narrower than those in the California Cars (I don’t have measurements; an online source says 19.1 inches for the new seats), though I did not find them uncomfortable. Others may.

No food or water: As noted, there is no food service on the train. The announcements said ‘snack packs’ and water were available for free, but what was actually offered was Cheez-Its. Though there are rumors of eventual vending machines, none were present, and it is not clear where they might be placed, perhaps in vestibules. No water dispenser is available on the trainset, only bottled water.

Bikes: One of the luggage racks in each car has three bicycle hooks, but the luggage racks were fully occupied by luggage, so not available to bicycles. A conductor told a bicyclist to take his bike to the baggage car rather than on board. I don’t know if that is policy. Given that there is not space set aside for bicycles, I’d have to say these new track sets have zero bicycle capacity. The baggage car is a false locomotive that has been used on San Joaquins for years, not part of the new trainset. Bicycle use on the San Joaquins has always been low. It will be a long time before these trainsets are used on the Capitol Corridor – San Joaquins and Pacific Surfliner first, with California Cars moved to Capitol Corridor and prolonging that. But the bicycle configuration would be totally unacceptable on Capitol Corridor, where bicycle use is moderate and sometimes high.

Automation: Many things are automated: the doors between the passenger seating and vestibules; standard announcements; restrooms doors. The toilet, water, soap and dryer are no-touch.

Power: There are two power receptacles and two USB-A receptacles between each seat. Hello! This is 2024, and few people use USB-A anymore, but actually most people use plug-in chargers, so the USB-A is irrelevant.

Display: There are three display signs overhead in each car. At this time, the only useful information they carry is which of the six coach cars you are in. The destination was shown as Bakersfield, when the train was northbound with destination Oakland Jack London. I imagine they will have useful information in the future, otherwise they are a waste.

Access: On the train I was on, three doors were opened at each stop, between 2/3, 4/5 and 5/6, with a staff member at each (two conductors and one attendant, I believe). If one of the wheelchair doors were being used, then either staff would not be at one of the other doors, or one of the others would not be opened. Apparently they are never opening all doors.

ADA Access: One door at each end of the train is for wheelchair and device loading. I did not observe this in operation. One person with a wheelchair was on board for part of the trip. The aisles are wide enough for most wheelchairs, and each car has a wide aisle though only those two cars out of six have the loading door.

The Ride (the big question): Is the ride smoother? Yes. It is still a little rough, but much smoother than the California Cars. I did not feel unsafe standing up and walking around, though it is still too rough to write. So tracks condition continues to be a problem on the San Joaquins route (and everywhere else).

photo of SanJoaquins Venture boarding — San Joaquins Venture boarding

photo of SanJoaquins Venture outside — San Joaquins Venture boarding

Broadway Complete Streets is NOT

2024/02/24 Dan AllisonLeave a comment

The Broadway Complete Streets project is underway, with new corners installed at many locations, some of them curb extensions (bulb-outs) to shorten crossing distance for walkers. Though I’m reluctant to criticize a project that is underway, I just can’t remain quiet. I have been spending a lot of time on Broadway because I’m interested in the street and its businesses, and always want to see how the city is shifting away from its former ‘cars first’ policy and design. Some of what I’m seeing is great, but I’m also seeing a lot that makes me very concerned, and disappointed. The city could have done much better, but decided not to.

photo of Broadway near 19th St, south side, too narrow sidewalk — Broadway near 19th St, south side, too narrow sidewalk

The project was designed from the inside out, first motor vehicle space for turn lanes, travel lanes, and parking lanes, then bicycle lanes. The result clearly shows this priority. But streets should be designed from the outside in, taking care first of the needs of people walking. The city did not do this.

The Broadway Complete Streets webpage says “The project location is the two-mile Broadway corridor between 3rd Street and 29th Street, south of downtown Sacramento, California. It anchors multi-modal transportation connections and improves access for all modes through introduction of a four lane to three lane road diet, new buffered bicycle lanes, new marked pedestrian crossings and refuge islands, and multi-modal improvements at two intersections”, and “The project is designed to calm traffic, improve safety, and make the street more inviting for travel on foot and by bicycle.” Notice that sidewalks are not specifically mentioned.

The pedestrian selection criteria from the 2016 Broadway Complete Streets Final Recommendations shows the following table. The third row (of eight) is ‘pedestrian space’, and it talks about space at ‘sidewalk enhancement locations’. But the document never indicates where these location are, nor mentions them again.

The plan cites as a critical issue: “Sidewalk obstructions or narrow sidewalks”. It also says, under transit improvement, not sidewalks: “Over time, opportunities for sidewalk expansion can be explored on blocks as appropriate. The Broadway Complete Streets Plan designs allow for conversion of the parking lane to an expanded sidewalk to create space for better bus amenities, landscaping, sidewalk dining, and other urban design elements.” What I think that means is that concrete for sidewalks and curbs will be poured now, and we’ll think about doing better later. The document refers to information about sidewalk widths in the existing conditions technical appendix, but that document has not been made available to the public.

The city’s Street Design Standards for sidewalks is five feet, or six feet for arterials. Broadway is a ‘minor arterial’ from 5th Street to 10th Street, and a ‘principal arterial’ from 10th Street to 29th Street, so the sidewalk width would be six feet. Existing sidewalks along Broadway vary greatly in width, from expansive, to wide sidewalks typical of the central city, to very narrow sidewalks. Of course there are locations where the sidewalk has been narrowed to accommodate tree growth, but the city is installing NEW sidewalk along Broadway that is less than city standards. The PROWAG requirements are four feet, but there are NEW sidewalks that are as little as 34 inches. The city’s project engineer has claimed that PROWAG does not need to be followed for this project because PROWAG is not enforceable yet. Seems strange to claim that because enforcement action can’t be taken, federally promulgated regulations don’t need to be followed.

The project is installing better crossings for walkers at several locations, but has pretty much ignored the needs of people walking ALONG the street. The design documents do not show sidewalk widths anywhere, though turn lane, traffic lane, parking lane, and bike lanes are clearly labeled with widths. It is as though the project design did not even think about sidewalks.

The city must correct its too-narrow sidewalks along Broadway. Where a parking lane is adjacent to these too narrow sections, the parking lane must be converted to sidewalk so as too provide the legally required width, or better yet, at least eight feet. If this is to be a complete street, and a walking-friendly and business-friendly street, then eight feet should be the minimum. If a parking lane is not available to convert, then the city must purchase property or easements to widen the sidewalks to the minimum five feet required by its own standards.

Strong SacTown street design standards group

2024/02/22 Dan Allison2 Comments

Strong SacTown, the local affiliate, or local conversation of Strong Towns, has formed a committee to develop ideas for the update of the City of Sacramento Street Design Standards, which is currently underway. These standards, from 2009, are very much in need of an update. They do not include many modern or innovative ideas, and in fact don’t include much. The committee has adopted the city’s own Streets for People moniker for its efforts, as they believe that perspective should inform not just the Active Transportation Plan, but all city documents and efforts in transportation, including the street design standards.

The Street Design Standards will be guided by and consistent with the 2040 General Plan, soon to be adopted.

The group has recently formed, and will be meeting in person about every two weeks. If you have a strong interest in street design, you may want to join. You do not need expertise ahead of time, you do not need to be a planner or engineer, just a person with passion for better and safer streets. But you will develop some expertise as the committee does its work.

The committee is searching out innovative plans from other cities that might be a model for us. We are also looking at progressive design guidance, including but not limited to NACTO’s Urban Street Design Guide and Urban Bikeway Design Guide (which is being updated, with several pieces already published).

If you wish to join in, or just find out more, contact Matt Anderson, the committee lead, matthew.n.anderson@gmail.com.