The City of Sacramento is hosting a webinar on the draft Work Zone and Event Detour Policy Update, tomorrow, January 24, 6:00PM. You can register for the Zoom webinar here (registration is not available on the Work Zone webpage).
With two posts today on construction zone violations, and hundreds of reports to 311, and a series of posts on the work zone policy, I hope that you will agree with me that this is a critical issue for everyone who walks or bicycles in the city (or drives, for that matter), and will attend this webinar. This will probably be the last chance for public education and input before the policy goes to city council, perhaps in February.
The two most important steps to improve the draft policy are:
establish a monitoring program which requires city staff (or contracted services) to monitor construction projects of more than one day with a visit at the beginning of the project, and at reasonable intervals thereafter
For other improvements to the policy that could be made, please see previous posts in category ‘Work Zones‘.
On the northwest corner of 9th Street and Capitol Mall, the construction project on the east side, Jesse Unruh State Office Building Renovation, has closed the sidewalk on the northeast corner, and therefore the crosswalk over 9th Street north side. In general, the construction project has done a good job of signing and barriers to comply with ADA. State projects, though not perfect, are more likely to be compliant with ADA than any of the city or private projects.
9th St & Capitol Mall NW difficult corner
There should be a barrier across the crosswalk at this location, to indicate that the crosswalk is closed and the opposite side inaccessible. There is a barrier, and the correct sign, but the barrier is not blocking the crosswalk. But it can’t! If the barrier were placed to block this crosswalk, it would also block the crosswalk over Capitol Mall, which is not a closed crosswalk. That is just one of the things wrong with diagonal ramps. They make it impossible to correctly place barriers and signing for closed crosswalks and sidewalks.
Two actions could make this better. One, cover the pedestrian countdown signal so that it is not visible, and therefore subject to misunderstanding by limited vision walkers. But this would only be safe if, two, the crosswalk were completely blocked by barriers, and a temporary ramp to the Capitol Mall crosswalk placed, to the right of the barriers.
Diagonal ramps are now illegal everywhere via PROWAG, but of course existing diagonal ramps do not need to be corrected unless the corner is subject to modification for other reasons. The city has known for years that diagonal ramps are poor practice, but has continued to build them, or allow them to be built. And sadly, has even allowed illegal ramps to be built: serious concerns about Broadway.
Posts related to the work zone guidelines are linked via category ‘Work Zones‘ within City of Sacramento category. Posts about construction project issues, previous to and after the release of the draft guidelines, of which there are a huge number, are linked via tag ‘construction zone‘ within Active Transportation category.
The construction project at 16th Street & E Street, southwest corner, 500 16th Street, apparently called Studio 30, an affordable apartment complex, still has not corrected its significant flaws in ADA signing and barriers. An earlier post covered the difficulty in properly signing and routing due to the city’s mistake in prohibiting crossing on the north side of the 16th Street and F Street intersection: SacCity bad work zone and bad street design converge.
I reported the ADA violations on January 3, 2024. I checked the project today, 20 days later. Nothing has been corrected. Every violation of ADA standards, which is basically every one, is the same as it was. Apparently the city has decided not to follow up on my 311 report, or the construction company has decided not to correct anything. This is sad.
One thing I noticed today that I had not noticed last time is detour signs on the northeast corner of E Street & 15th Street. The sign directions are nonsensical. The signs may have once been set correctly, but if so, they have been moved, and now communicate incorrect information. This is what happens when signs are placed and then not monitored, by the city and by the construction company.
E St 15th St NE confusing detour signs
The folding barricades used around this project (which are trip hazards) are labeled with JVB, for JVB Construction Management. I have more recently been paying more attention to who places the construction signs and barriers. This is the first project I’ve noticed by this company, not surprising since it is a southern California company. From now on when I blog about work zone failures, I will do my best to identify who is responsible. Of course it is not just the construction company that is responsible, the city is also responsible.
At a recent meeting, people asked me about the crossing of N Street at 14th Street, what I thought of the pedestrian prohibition, and why I hadn’t reported it as I do most other construction related issues.
N Street is a three lane one-way street, reduced to two lanes by construction at the state capitol, and the CADA construction project on the southwest corner of N Street and 14th Street. At this construction project, the parking lane and rightmost lane are closed, with a barrier and fence along N Street. The barrier and fence block driver view of the crosswalk on the east side of the N Street/14th Street crosswalk, until just before the crosswalk. This is a situation not addressed by CA-MUTCD, nor the proposed city Draft Criteria and Guidance to Accommodate Active Transportation in Work Zones and at Events, or work zone guide for short.
There are probably ways of safely handling this limited visibility situation, but it is not immediately obvious to me how. So I have not reported the closure of this crosswalk. It is a low volume crosswalk, I believe. Any detour for walkers is an issue, and this one requires a detour of a block to the east or west, because both the east crosswalk and the west crosswalk are closed.
While it is true that this crosswalk closure is no absolutely necessary, it is also true that it would take some sort of traffic control at this location to make it safe for walkers.
N St approaching 14th St, poor visibilityclosed crosswalk over N St at 14th St, east leg, northeast cornercrosswalk closed over N St at 14th St, east leg, southeast corner
I participated in a Strong Towns Crash Analysis Studio on Thursday. I highly recommend these sessions, and will have much more to say about them in the future. One of the presenters shared the diagram below to illustrate what could be done with an over-wide street in Carlsbad, California, the scene of a bicyclist fatality.
Residential Neighborhood Collector Parallel Parking One Side
The diagram is from Better Town Toolkit, and I am quite pleased to find this website. It has design guidance for a variety of places, best practices, and case studies. “Our goal is to help you improve the prosperity, sustainability and quality of life in your community by providing you with the best practices for design and development in your area.” It is sponsored by Regional Plan Association in New York. I am unable to find this exact diagram on their website, but a similar one is L56.
Sacramento is full of over-wide streets. Of course pulling in the curb line and permanently narrowing the vehicle portion of the roadway is the best solution, but very expensive for moving drain inlets an re-pouring curbs. I’ve suggested using diagonal parking to narrow the travel way on slow, low-traffic streets: diagonal parking. The diagram shows another good solution for streets with attached sidewalks, no sidewalk buffer or planting strip. Plant trees in the parking lanes to narrow the roadway, retain parking on one side only, and make a two-way street with narrow lanes (9 foot?). The curb line does not necessarily need to be moved at all, and drain inlets may not need to be moved, so the project would be much less expensive than a street redesign.
There are many streets on which parking utilization is low, in fact, streets empty of parking have none of the traffic calming effect that parking can have. One lane of parking would be sufficient on many streets, and would disourage excess car ownership and long-term storage of cars on the street. Parking has benefits, but only if there is high utilization and turnover. Streets are not a place for long-term storage of private property.
Take a look at the website and let me know what your favorite diagram or page is.
City code specifies that property owners are completely responsible for repair of sidewalks adjacent to their property. State streets and highways code seems to allow the city to claim this. The two relevant sections within Chapter 22: Maintenance of Sidewalks are: Article 2. Repairs and Article 3. Collection of Cost of Repair. I have previously made the claim that both state code and city code are unconstitutional, because they make persons responsible for maintenance of property that belongs to the city, not the person. In almost all cases, sidewalks and the land on which they lie is city property, not private property. This is particularly egregious when the sidewalk damage is due to city-owned trees in the sidewalk buffer (which the city calls planting strips).
Therefore, I believe that it is illegal for the city to charge property owners for sidewalk repair.
The major focus of the article is that low income communities are being unfairly targeted for sidewalk repair, with a graph that indicates that. That is one interpretation of the data, and it would not be surprising. The city has always and continues to treat lower income communities and people of color with bias. There is another explanation however. Sidewalks in lower income communities were very likely built to lower standards than in others, and it is likely that the city has never maintained any of them, except in some locations placing ADA ramps at corners. I notice in the central city that many sidewalk cracks are covered with asphalt patches, which were placed by the city. I have not noticed these patches in lower income neighborhoods. It is likely that the city is doing work in moderate and high income areas that they are not doing in lower income areas. The central city has more construction projects than other areas, which often result in the sidewalks being repaired or replaced. The central city has also seen a lot more installation of new corners with ADA ramps that other areas of the city. This makes some sense because much of the central city has higher pedestrian (walker) levels, but this fact does not overcome the fact that there are walkers in disinvested neighborhoods, and in particular, children walking to and from school deserve good sidewalks more than anyone else.
I have been in the habit of reporting sidewalk issues through the city’s 311 app. This article has made me rethink reporting. Am I causing unaffordable repair bills for people who can’t afford it? Is the sidewalk flaw really that bad? I’ve decided to stop reporting sidewalk locations, until these issues are resolved.
My next steps are to make a suggestion for how the city can mitigate these repair costs, and for the city to inventory its sidewalks so that it knows what the situation is throughout the city, rather than a complaint-driven system that is almost certain to have bias. Coming up!
broken sidewalk, V St, Sacramentosidewalk repaired due to damage by a city owned tree in a city owner sidewalk buffer, P St
The CalBike People-First Mobility Budget shifts significant funds from the standard Caltrans budget, which is focused on build more, but don’t maintain what we have, to a state of good repair. The typical Caltrans budget, which the governor’s proposed budget continues, is what has gotten us into our horrible transportation mess. Time for a new paradigm! Thank you, CalBike.
I, of course, would go further. I’d spend 100% of Federal Trust Fund and the California State Highway Account (SHA) on VMT reduction, and I’d fund Active Transportation Program at $1B. I completely support the 50% to historically marginalized areas. These are the places that have been intentionally isolated, divided, and polluted by our current highway system. Nevertheless, I recognize the CalBike proposal as a very practical one, and hope that legislators will integrate all these ideas into the state budget.
The SacBee published an article yesterday: After a deadly crash, Sacramento fixed a dangerous road. Why isn’t this the norm? Apologies for linking to a firewalled article; if you have a subscription or access to a printed newspaper, it is well worth reading.The article is quite in-depth, more like the investigative reporting that the SacBee used to do, but rarely does any more. The author is Ariane Lange.
The article highlights changes made to the intersection of Broadway and Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd (MLK) after a fatal crash single-vehicle crash in 2021. Though the article did not make clear, the driver was likely eastbound on Broadway and continued straight into the building. Google maps, below, does not show the changes, but a photo from the article does (second).
Broadway & MLK intersection, Google Maps (not up to date)Broadway & MLK, SacBee photo (more recent)Read More »
I’m soon to create two posts that refer to articles in the SacBee, so it seems like a good time to express my frustration with the SacBee firewall. The Bee does make a few articles available to the public, but most require a subscription to view. When I link to a SacBee article, I know that many of my readers will not be able to access that article, because they don’t have a subscription to the Bee. That is frustrating to me, and frustrating to my readers.
The SacBee app works reasonably well, but SacBee links don’t open in the app, you have to go to the app and search for what you want. The search engine is weak. Articles that have been posted recently are often not in Latest News or More latest news. Though it isn’t clear how long articles are retained in the app, a search for an older article may (or may not) bring up the print edition facsimile, and the article of interest may or may not be in that issue.
The web version of the SacBee is quite problematic. You can log into your account, but it will make you log in again within a few day. If you do have a subscription, it will often claim you don’t, and make you go though the whole log in process again. I had a subscription for a while, and tried to use the web interface. I quickly gave up and dropped my subscription. Which was another problem. It took me a deep dive into account management, and several tries, to drop my subscription.
Of course the Bee offers incentives pretty regularly. Free for a period of time, of a price far below subscription for a period of time, but trying to drop the subscription after these incentive periods is quite frustrating. I just tried to load the subscription page in the web interface, and after 15 minutes, the page is still loading. It loads in the app, however. Month subscriptions are $15.99 per month. That seems like a whole lot of money for a newspaper that most repeats national new sources, which I can get many other places, or rewrites articles from CalMatters, and has little real local journalism outside sports. But then, just when I’m about to give up completely, a useful article pops up.
What I want from the Bee is an option to buy an article. For personal, non-commercial use, to read or excerpt a small portion of the article, maybe 50 cents per article. If I want to share the entire article on my non-commercial blog, maybe $2. The Bee knows that its readers want this sort of payment by article, but it has resisted offering this. I don’t know why. It is a chance to make more money off of its journalism. Talking to my friends about the Bee, very few of them subscribe, so the Bee is missing all of the income from these people, and additional income it might make from me.
These are modern times. Why can’t the SacBee offer per article payments? Why can’t the Bee make a website that works?
With the establishment of the regional tolling authority, Capitol Area Regional Tolling Authority (CARTA), a joint powers authority (JPA), the opportunity exists for existing HOV (high occupancy vehicle) lanes to tolled lanes, specifically Express Lanes. HOV lanes had their time, but that time is past. HOV lanes are routinely violated. If you stand on an overpass and look down at vehicles in the HOV lane, you will see that many of them are single occupant vehicles, not high occupancy. You could also do the same while driving, but I’d rather you kept your eye on the road. The HOV 2+, used in the Sacramento region, which requires two occupants, is a pretty low bar, but even that is not achieved by many drivers. HOV lanes, being free, also generate no funds to maintain the lanes.
The SACOG region current has about 144 lane-miles of HOV lanes. It has no HOT (high occupancy toll) lanes, and no Express Lanes (all vehicles tolled, though toll may vary with occupancy or time of day). The map below (pdf) shows the existing HOV lanes (blue), and the HOV lane now being constructed as part of the Fix50 project. I have seen a SACOG map of the intended Managed Lane Network, but am unable to find it at the moment.
While the Yolo 80 project initiated the current tolling effort, SACOG in the 2020 MTP/SCS, identified managed lanes as a key component of both managing traffic and paying for maintenance of the system.
The MTP/SCS identifies these policies directly related to tolling:
POLICY 11: Initiate a leadership role in testing and piloting roadway pricing mechanisms, such as facility-based tolling and mileage-based fees, in partnership with the state, federal, and local agencies and private sector organizations.
POLICY 12: Take steps to implement tolling or pricing of specific lanes on major facilities, such as freeways, to improve traffic management, reliability, and operations of those facilities and to help raise funding for the cost of building and maintaining large capital investments.
POLICY 13: All new major expansion projects on the region’s freeways and expressways should be planned for eventual deployment of pricing options to both manage demand and provide a financing mechanism for capital costs. Any pricing strategy pursued should be sensitive to changes in roadway demand during different parts of the day (peak/off-peak) with the objective of managing demand and providing travel choice.
POLICY 14: Revenues generated from facility-based pricing should be used to build and maintain a regional network of paid express lanes and, where surplus revenue is available, on strategic transit services (e.g., express buses) or other mobility solutions that can reduce vehicle miles traveled and provide multiple travel options along priced corridors.
SACOG also has Managed Lane Network webpage, which includes Frequently Asked Questions.
I propose that all HOV lanes in the Sacramento region be converted to Express Lanes within a five year period, and that tolling be managed by CARTA. The reason for five years is that it will take about that long to do the public hearings required by law, to purchase and install the tolling infrastructure, and to determine the amount of tolls and any discounts offered for occupancy or time of day.
There are now so may types of vehicles that might lay claim to discounts that it would be better to charge the same for every vehicle. The road mileage charge, which is being considered by the state, could vary by type of vehicle, particularly to charge by weight which directly corresponds to wear and tear on the roadway, as well as the amount of tire and brake dust generated.
Converting HOV lanes to Express Lanes is the first step. The second step is to convert any lanes in excess of two per direction to Express Lanes (the basic two would remain free, for a period of time), and eventually to toll all lanes on all freeways and bridges. Freeways and bridges are incredibly expensive infrastructure to build and maintain, and users of the freeways and bridges should be paying for this, not the general taxpayer, many of whom never drive (though they do derive some benefit from freight traffic).
For additional posts on managed lanes, see category ‘managed lanes‘.
Getting Around Sacramento 