It Just Got Easier for Cities to Design Walkable, Bikeable Streets

The federal government threw out 11 rules that prevented cities from building walkable streets Photo: NJbikeped.org
The federal government threw out 11 rules that prevented cities from building walkable streets. Photo: NJbikeped.org

We probably haven’t seen the last of engineers who insist on designing local streets like surface highways. But at least now they can’t claim their hands are tied by federal regulations.

Last week, the Federal Highway Administration struck 11 of the 13 design rules for “national highways” — a 230,000-mile network of roads that includes many urban streets.

The rule change eliminates a major obstacle to safe street design around the country. The old rules applied highways design standards — wide lanes, no trees — to streets that function more like main streets, with terrible consequences for safety and walkability.

In October, FHWA proposed eliminating all but two of the old standards on streets designed for speeds under 50 mph, citing a lack of evidence that the rules improve safety. Now, those changes are official.

Ian Lockwood, a consultant with the Toole Design Group and formerly the transportation director for West Palm Beach, Florida, said the changes are important. The new rules open the door to treatments like road diets, bike lanes, and street trees — the kind of street designs that lead to a safe pedestrian environment, not high-speed traffic.

“This allows the designs to better support the place and not so much how fast people can drive through it,” he said.

In his career, Lockwood has often worked with residents who want their streets “to facilitate exchange, social exchange, economic exchange,” only to run up against what he calls “technical brushoff” from other engineers. “The big one was ‘Federal Highways won’t let us do that,'” he said. “Now we have a lot more freedom to do cool stuff.”

Prior to the change, if local agencies decided to make car lanes that were narrower than what the feds prescribed, they would have to go through the expensive and time-consuming process of applying for an exemption. New Haven, Connecticut, for example, had to apply for more than half a dozen exemptions when it designed a surface boulevard to replace a grade-separated section of Route 34.

After the new regulations were first proposed in October, the FHWA received 2,327 public comments. The feedback was overwhelmingly supportive, the agency says, with only seven people opposed.

Lockwood thinks the update is a good sign about the direction FHWA is steering federal transportation policy. “What used to be a very, very highway-oriented group are now trying to help,” he said.

  • Good, we’re finally reversing the course set half a century ago.

  • J Milan

    I think the costs of owning a vehicle will return us to the days where only the rich drive cars, and violently at that.
    Only now, no horses in the way.

  • PastTense

    The 230,000 mile national highway system is less than 6% of the 4,000,000 mile U.S. road system. If a road is going to treated as a local street it should be removed from the national highway system.

  • WoodyinNYC

    Doesn’t the state government pay to repave (maintain) state highways, including the one downtown you call Main St.? So City Hall likes them.

    Don’t know if federal funds pay for repaving U.S. highways thru small down main streets, but probably so. Again, local officials need the money so they like it like that.

  • neroden

    What Woody said. “National highway” status means federal money, so the cities like it for that reason.

    Most of these “national highways” are things like the US Routes and State Highways, which tend to run right through downtowns, and always have. It makes sense to design them for high speeds *outside the downtowns*, but when they reach downtown, the speed drops to 30 mph or lower, as it should, and they shouldn’t be designed as speedways in downtown. These are supposed to let you drive from one downtown to the next, not speed past every downtown.

  • neroden

    Electric cars don’t seem to inspire as much road rage in the driver as gasoline cars. It’s just way more comfortable to follow a bike at 10 mph in an electric car than an in gas car. So that might help.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Tell FHWA You Want Safer Designs for City Streets

|
Earlier this fall, the Federal Highway Administration proposed a major policy change: Instead of requiring roads that receive federal funding to be designed like highways, the agency would change its standards to allow greater flexibility. The implications for urban streets were huge — with less red tape, cities would have a much easier time implementing safer designs for walking […]

Feds Propose Major Rule Changes to Eliminate Barriers to Safer Streets

|
Applying highway design standards to city streets has been a disaster for urban neighborhoods. The same things that make highways safer for driving at 65 mph — wide lanes, “clear zones” running alongside the road that have no trees or other “obstacles” — make surface streets dangerous and dreadful for walking, killing street life. The one-size-fits-all approach to […]

Feds to Traffic Engineers: Use Our Money to Build Protected Bike Lanes

|
The Federal Highway Administration wants to clear the air: Yes, state and local transportation agencies should use federal money to construct high-quality biking and walking infrastructure. State and local DOTs deploy an array of excuses to avoid building designs like protected bike lanes. “It’s not in the manual” is a favorite. So is “the feds won’t fund that.” Whether […]

When the State DOT Stands in the Way of Local Progress

|
There should be a special term for the all-too-common phenomenon of a state DOT putting the kibosh on a promising local project. DOT-blocking! (Yes, it’s pronounced “dot-blocking.”) And have we got a good DOT-blocking story for you today. Ohio Department of Transportation regulations are essentially making it impossible for Cleveland to act upon its recent, […]