Pavement Alters You Mind

Robert Schneider, a professor of urban planning at the University of Wisconsin, and Rebecca Sanders, a post-doctoral researcher at UC Berkeley's Safe TREC interviewed hundreds of professionals in public health, planning and engineering, and safe streets advocacy around the country and uncovered three main factors that seem to determine if a driver will yield to a pedestrian at an intersection without a traffic signal: Street width, pedestrian volume, and the part of the US where you happen to be. All three of these factors are interesting, but the one most directly related to bike and pedestrian safety is street width. The design of traffic infrastructure directly affects both our perceptions and the behavior we expect from others and from ourselves: In short, pavement alters your mind.

Take a look at the walkability map for our old hometown, Berkeley, and you'll notice a lot of green. This is where the city is walkable: Good sidewalks, crosswalks, housing and density of neighborhood shops all contribute to walkability. If you live in the green areas you probably take the ease of walking for granted and might not even know that Berkeley has a walkability score of 79 out of 100. Those areas of red are less walkable mainly due to the steep terrain of the Berkeley Hills.

There's a lot to like about our new neighborhood in San Luis Obispo (SLO), an area referred to as Downtown South. Many errands can be accomplished on foot or by bike, there is a mix of single-family homes and apartments, most of the housing is modest. Our neighbors seem to have low-stress lives, there's seldom aggressive driving behavior. SLO has a reputation for valuing a SLOw way of life, but it has an unremarkable walkability score of 51 out of 100. That very small area of green just happens to be the part of town to which we gravitated. Unfortunately, there are parts of SLO where the speed of traffic and the lack of infrastructure are make things unfriendly to pedestrians.

We think we're lucky to be living in a walkable area, but it seems some folks do not like densely populated areas at all. A Pew Research study uncovered a strong correlation between liberal or conservative values and the type of neighborhood you in which want or choose to live. Quoting from the study:

"It is an enduring stereotype – conservatives prefer suburban McMansions while liberals like urban enclaves – but one that is grounded in reality."

The older part of town is the green area while the newer parts of SLO is mostly optimized for cars. We've tried biking through the non-green areas shown on that map of SLO. It ain't pretty. The city prides itself on being "bike friendly" and there are bike lanes in most parts of town, but my wife finds many of the shopping areas just too dangerous to cycle: Multi-lane roads, speed limits of 40 to 50 miles per hour, numerous opportunities for vehicles to turn right, bike lanes that end unexpectedly, and nothing but a stripe of white paint on the pavement to separate a cyclist from a fast moving car. I feel safer cycling through most parts of Berkeley and gritty downtown Oakland. My wife is right, the commercial shopping areas of SLO are dangerous.

For pedestrians, SLO has plenty of crosswalks near schools and most city parks. In other areas of the city, crosswalks are strangely absent. One intersection where the lack of a crosswalk is particularly striking is where King Street intersects with South Street (which also happens to be California State Highway 227).

• Neighborhood residents need to cross South Street to access Meadow Park
• The speed limit on South Street is 40 MPH
• The road has a median, parking on each side, and a designated bike lane
• There are no crosswalks painted where three neighborhood streets intersect this state highway
• Several years ago, a child was killed on halloween night while crossing this intersection

In short, South Street looks like a highway and so it's natural for drivers use it as a freeway: They seldom yield to pedestrians trying to cross or in the process of crossing the street, even though they are required to yield by the California Vehicle Code. No one expects to see pedestrians on a freeway because that is where we've all be trained to think "Cars are King."

CalTrans and the City of SLO arranged to do a traffic study of these intersections and concluded they didn't meet the necessary thresholds required to justify crosswalk paint on the pavement or signs to alert drivers to the possible presence of pedestrians at each intersection. There are just two signs at each end of South Street that warn drivers of pedestrians crossing in the next 3/4 miles. These traffic studies were done over eight years ago.

Another problem area for pedestrians is Broad Street from South Street eastward to the entrance to the San Luis Obispo county airport. This part of Broad Street has four lanes, a painted medial/turn lane, and bike lanes. It also has a speed limit of 45 to 40 MPH and looks like a highway. Woe unto him or her who tries to cross this four-lane street. I've witnessed pedestrians literally trapped in the median, trying to cross, and virtually no drivers yielding right-of-way. 

The problem at work here is that if a road looks like a highway, has near-highway speeds, and no crosswalks, then pedestrians must not matter. And the lack of protected bike lanes in heavily trafficked commercial shopping areas sends a similar message: Leave you bike at home, get in your car and drive. The SLO life is a great ideal, but the city's traffic engineers have some work to do if that ideal is to survive and grow.