Wide Residential Streets Are Dangerous. Why Are They So Common?

Seattle's 2nd Avenue NW is just 16 feet across, much narrower -- and safer -- than the typical residential street. Photo: Dave Amos.
Seattle's 2nd Avenue NW is just 16 feet across, much narrower -- and safer -- than the typical residential street. Photo: Dave Amos.

Ever wonder why so many residential streets are so wide even though they only see a trickle of car traffic?

Dave Amos, a doctoral student at the U.C. Berkeley College of Environmental Design, has been looking into it. The reason, as with so many things, goes back to car-centric engineering standards. Residential streets have highway-like dimensions because engineers thought wide, straight streets were safer. But in a neighborhood context, streets like that just encourage speeding and increase the risk of serious traffic injuries.

Narrower streets lead to safer, more cautious driving behavior. The trouble is that in many cities, the excess street width is now used for parking. So Amos went out and counted the number of cars parked on residential streets in Eugene, Oregon. He found that even in the more compact neighborhoods, the cars parked on the street could be accommodated in garages and driveways.

Those results won’t apply in every neighborhood, but in many places it could be a useful exercise to help make the case for narrower, safer residential streets, like Amos does in this video:

More recommended reading today: Systemic Failure considers the problems with evacuation plans that rely completely on cars and highways. And Austin on Your Feet looks at why Austin’s West Campus succeeds as an urban neighborhood.

26 thoughts on Wide Residential Streets Are Dangerous. Why Are They So Common?

  1. This is missing the huge influence local fire departments have on street widths. The local fire department here demands a 26′ clear zone on all streets.

  2. indeed, as a young architect in the early 1980s designing developments along (semi) new urbanist principles; it was appalling the arguments made for insanely wide residential streets:

    1) There was the Fire Truck canard.

    2) The ol’ red herring of 2 cars going opposite directions meeting each other.

    3) My favorite was the ‘how will a moving van turn around ?’

    These old arguments are one reason the ex-urbs are ‘tomorrow’s ghettos’

  3. Even if there’s on-street parking, there’s no reason for the entire roadway to be paved to 36′, especially at corners. More parking bays, especially with different/permeable surfaces, would go a long way toward alleviating the problem by visually narrowing the roads, especially when no one is parked.

  4. Don’t forget guest parking and holding fallen snow from plows. I see many garages used for storage so the residents park on the driveway and their guests park on the street.

  5. holding plowed snow ?

    that’s a good one, never heard that one before, but it’s a winner too. ( because of course plowed snow couldn’t possible be put on grass )

  6. Just like the “Sorriest Bus Stop in America” competition, maybe we should have a “Most Egregiously Wide Residential Street” competition. We have some streets like this in my neighborhood that just make you shake your head. The safest thing to do would be to grind up half the street and just give that land back to homeowners.

  7. I live on a residential street that the Google Maps measuring tool says is 50 feet wide. I know that’s not the most exact way of measuring things so I’ll add this: nominally the street is one lane of parking and one travel lane each direction, but is so absurdly wide that if a car double parks next to a parked car it’s still possible for a third card to comfortably proceed forward without at all going over the double yellow line in the middle of the street.

  8. “We need to have wide streets because fire trucks are huge.”

    “Well, why do we need such huge fire trucks?”

    “Why do you want people’s houses to burn down?!?!”

    That’s really all it is at this point, a circular logic dead-end where fire trucks were built that huge because we had the roads to accommodate that and now we use having those trucks as the justification for keeping roads to accommodate them.

  9. In my town we have “residential” streets with 35mph speed limits that are divided four lanes that are as wide as a major freeway. No sidewalks or crosswalks or bike lanes for miles. Antithetical to anything but auto traffic. I have to set my cruise control to prevent going 20-30 mph over the limit.

  10. We have many excessively wide streets in San Jose built in the late 50s and 60s while our local version of Robert Moses tried to create an autotopia. There are narrow streets lined with turn of the century Victorians widens to triple the width on either side clearly showing the city had intended to turn that quiet street into a busy thoroughfare (demolishing those old Vics in the process).

    Here’s another case where the city had intended to turn Campbell Ave. into a broad boulevard. But the neighboring city of Campbell to the east had different plans. The busy boulevard never occurred and we’re left with a freakishly 67 feet wide street on the blocks just east of Meridian! : https://www.google.com/maps/@37.2871126,-121.9145717,136m/data=!3m1!1e3

  11. We have some studies in contrast in my neighborhood. Some of the wider residential streets are speedways, while narrower 2-way streets like this have much slower traffic. There are usually a lot more cars parked on the street here, so that it’s only possible for traffic to go in one direction, while cars going in the other direction have to wait for an opening.

  12. Sometimes there are historical reasons for unnaturally wide streets. There’s a section of Shattuck avenue in Berkeley,CA that’s absurdly wide because it once had six streetcar tracks running down it. Down the coast in Santa Cruz there are a few very wide, straight streets in the middle of quiet residential areas. When I lived there I was told they were built during WWII to serve as emergency runways for aircraft, but that may be an urban legend.

  13. One problem in many residential areas at least where I live, among single-family homes with attached garages, is that many people have so much JUNK that they pile it up in their garages, and then park on the driveway. And then they might have more than 2 cars at the household (or a single wide driveway with more than one car), and instead of playing car jockey every day, one or more cars just sit on the street. We have streets in my neighborhood that are 36 feet wide, and when cars are parked on the street directly across from each other or nearly so, it makes 2-way traffic impossible. Even worse is when it happens on a curving road, because both motorists and cyclists can’t see who is coming from the other direction around the curve.

  14. hilarious that every trivial challenge in the ex-urbs is solved by making streets and parking craters bigger & bigger

  15. where i live, the clear zone is 32′. not sure why they need a 10 story ladder truck in a residential street

  16. I’m trying to find that street in Seattle, but looking on Google Street view is not showing anything like that. Can anyone supply a link? I’d love to see it in context. It looks incredibly cool.

  17. This is absurd. In Brazil streets are narrow, creating several serious problems.
    Cars often collide head on because they avoid people leaving garages, opening car doors, etc. Driving is stressful and dangerous, because distances at the sides are so narrow. One has no space to avoid collision or running over a pedestrian. If one car parks where it is not supposed to do, it blocks the street.
    Also wide streets usually have wide sidewalks, which are safe and pleasant for pedestrians, while here they are so narrow that people have to walk on the street if there is a lamppost.
    I’m always amazed of how many American crybabies like to bash their own country. You are so ungrateful.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Can Oklahoma City Become a Great Cycling City?

Portland. Minneapolis. Oklahoma City? Ok, so you probably won’t find that last one on any lists of the most bike-friendly cities in the U.S. But with a little bit of effort, the city could change, says Eric Dryer at Bike OKC. In a lot of ways, Oklahoma City has all the right ingredients to be a […]

Traffic Death Experts Ignore the Role of Dangerous Streets

When it comes to preventing traffic fatalities, are the country’s leading authorities missing the point? Scientists at the Center for Disease Control told the New York Times last week that the key to preventing traffic deaths is strong seat belt laws, speeding enforcement, car seat promotion, drunk driving prevention and restrictions for teenage drivers. Traffic […]

WSJ Invites More Ignorant Anti-Bike Zealots to Sully Its Pages

Law professor Frank H. Buckley seems to want to be the next Dororthy Rabinowitz. That is, he wants to gain notoriety by clinging to old and unsafe street designs while, simultaneously, shoring up the Wall Street Journal’s reputation as a bastion of change-averse curmudgeons. Done and done. Buckley wrote an op-ed in Friday’s Journal about […]

Complete Streets Could Help America Lose Weight, Says CDC

When people who aren’t transportation geeks ask me why transportation policy is a topic worthy of more attention on the national stage, I often start by talking about the public health implications. Not only are tens of thousands of Americans killed and injured in car crashes every year, not only are countless thousands of others […]

The Crucial Connection Between Street Width and Walkability, in 3 Photos

There’s a good deal of empirical evidence that narrower travel lanes are safer for everyone because they slow motorist speeds. On a perceptual level, narrow streets just feel more inviting, writes Katie Matchett at Network blog Where the Sidewalk Starts. Matchett looked at Jewel Street in the Pacific Beach neighborhood of San Diego, which varies in width. She shows how, as it transforms from […]