When writing yesterday’s post about public spaces I went to see if the agenda for the development committee was available for more information on the QE2 Square proposal. (agenda there but report wasn’t available). While there I also noticed the latest agenda for my local board and so I had a quick look through it. Most local boards have a section where they get an update from Auckland Transport as to things going on in the region as well as responses to local issues that have been raised. Skimming through them I found a one issue that had been raised close to my house and the response to it from Auckland Transport is a good indication of how far we have yet to go to make the city more liveable.
SUMMERLAND DRIVE ROADING ISSUES
A request for Auckland Transport to look at the speeding issues and the increase of heavy vehicles on Summerland Drive, Western Heights
Response
Upon Auckland Transport receiving this request it has undertaken an assessment of this area. Summerland Drive is a scheduled bus route as well as a Collector Road and this type of road has to cater for greater volumes of traffic, including heavy vehicles, than a local road.
Installing speed humps would affect the capacity and level of service on this route and cause discomfort for bus passengers, and result in on-going maintenance costs due to the high stress the speed bumps would endure. Speed humps located on this type of road would also result in a significant increase in noise and vibrations, particularly when heavy vehicles navigate them. Therefore speed humps are not appropriate for Summerland Drive.
However, Auckland Transport notes that there are already some other speed calming measures installed on Summerland Drive such as median traffic islands at a few locations, a roundabout at the Harvest Drive intersection, a speed advisory sign near Waterstone Way, bend warning advisory signage, road markings to narrow down traffic lanes and a 40km/h school zone; which all help in reducing vehicle speeds.
Auckland Transport is also working with the Henderson-Massey Local Board to install two electronic speed advisory signs between Harvest Drive and Sturges Road and Auckland Transport expects these to be installed by the end of July 2014.
Auckland Transport has passed the incident details provided to the Road Corridor Maintenance Department, who will also look into doing maintenance works on the cycle track outside the constituent’s property.
Now I agree that the road is a collector road and can’t be calmed though speed bumps due to the heavier vehicles (including buses) that use the road but it’s the rest of the answer that I think is appalling. For example the suggestion that the “level of service” can’t be affected. Level of Service is a measure often used by (car focused) transport organisations to rank the performance of roads and basically if it moves lots of vehicles fast it’s good. According to Wikipedia:
Level of service (LOS) is a qualitative measure used to relate the quality of traffic service. LOS is used to analyze highways by categorizing traffic flow and assigning quality levels of traffic based on performance measure like speed, density,etc.
A: free flow. Traffic flows at or above the posted speed limit and motorists have complete mobility between lanes.
B: reasonably free flow. LOS A speeds are maintained, maneuverability within the traffic stream is slightly restricted.
C: stable flow, at or near free flow. Ability to maneuver through lanes is noticeably restricted and lane changes require more driver awareness.
D: approaching unstable flow. Speeds slightly decrease as traffic volume slightly increase. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is much more limited and driver comfort levels decrease.
E: unstable flow, operating at capacity. Flow becomes irregular and speed varies rapidly because there are virtually no usable gaps to maneuver in the traffic stream and speeds rarely reach the posted limit.
F: forced or breakdown flow. Every vehicle moves in lockstep with the vehicle in front of it, with frequent slowing required. Travel time cannot be predicted, with generally more demand than capacity.
That criteria might be ok out on some rural state highway but it is completely inappropriate in a setting such as Summerland Dr which is in the middle of a residential area and includes a primary school and kindergarten on it. Who cares if a car or truck takes 30 seconds longer to travel along a road if doing so makes the area more liveable and one where parents could feel more comfortable in letting their kids walk or cycle to school.
They then go on to suggest that a bit of paint and a few signs are all that’s needed to slow cars down but the reality is that those have been in place for last 5½ years that I’ve lived here and yet does nothing to affect driver speed. I’ve personally witnessed people driving along the road easily in excess of 90km/h and even the roundabout mentioned above doesn’t impact them, particularly those heading south (up the hill) easily travelling over 60km/h through it.
The problem with Summerland Dr is its appalling design encourages speeding. It’s often harder to drive at the speed limit than about 20 km/h over it. Below are some examples of what it looks like.
As you can see we have a lane marked for parking that is almost never used, a large wide median so that the odd car that turns off the street doesn’t hold up traffic and long, clear sightlines. As I said, it’s a recipe for drivers speeding and putting up signs to try and slow people down is a good indication the planners and engineers failed when designing road.
So what could be done differently?
Well some rough measurements using the councils GIS viewer suggests the actual corridor is about 22m wide, I guess in case it ever needed to become a 4-lane highway (hopefully something that doesn’t happen). Within that corridor the carriageway itself is about 13m wide. As mentioned, I’ve noticed is that very few people actually park cars in the on street parking spaces which I guess could be one of the very few benefits of minimum parking requirements. However it also means that there should be a lot less opposition to making better use of the road space.
I accept that the road is never going to have a high volume of cyclists, isn’t critical like the K Rd separated lanes Generation Zero are promoting and in fact isn’t even on the long term cycling plan (nothing in the area is) however to me the fact that so much road space is available but effectively unused it presents an opportunity. Without any modification to the kerbs, perhaps something like the idea below is what could be considered.
- the parking lane blocked off on either side with a bit of green paint and some cheap plastic dividers between the driveways/side roads.
- the median removed and shifted to one side of the road with the space used to provide parking on one side of the street
By having the opposing cars drive closer together along with the visual element of the barriers my guess is it would help to slow drivers down far more than a couple of signs which are effectively the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff approach to traffic calming.
And who might use this, well my guess is the biggest potential would be for getting kids safely to school from the surrounding area. This is an old image from a post called, Why I want intensification in my neighbourhood. Summerland is the leftmost red line however both Sturges Rd (right hand side) and Harvest Dr (road connecting Sturges Rd and Summerland Dr) could easily have the same treatment done to them. Another potential user group is people from around the Summerland Rd area who might want to ride to the train station, which after you get off Harvest Dr is accessed by a series of quiet local streets. A lot of the high school aged kids going to the schools along Rathgar Rd (to the north of the image) via this route too.
So come on AT, if you really want to claim that you’re making the streets safer then prove it. It’s already clear that the existing traffic calming measures aren’t working. Perhaps it’s time to try a different approach and that starts with fixing our broken street designs. I imagine there are hundreds of streets just like Summerland Dr that could be changed almost overnight to being more people friendly if AT really wanted to do so.
Processing...
Too many old school traffic engineers at Auckland Transport. Without strong leadership progress comes one retirement at a time sadly.
Gotta love the ‘drive to the conditions’ sign; the street conditions are those of a racetrack.
Yeah I thought that was the problem, people are driving to the conditions!
We got one of those drive to the conditions signs in the Waitakeres. Someone drew a penis on it and it was made of paper that went wrinkly and peeling at the edges. It was up for years. It was an eyesore. And yes made our winding rural road look like a motorway. When I rang AT about it they didn’t have a record of it so it didn’t exist. Because it was made of paper i suspect it was meant to be a temporary campaign and they were never taken down. Not effective and ugly. And there are a bunch of them around Auckland. Finally someone crashed into it and with a few more phone calls to council we finally got it removed.
The quoted AT response reads, word for word, remarkably like a verbal response I received in respect of pedestrian safety issues I raised on a classic AT-re-designed rat run of a residential street (Bollard Ave, New Windsor). The AT traffic engineer I spoke with told me she didn’t have a budget this year, but would consider ‘drive to the conditions’ signage next financial year in an attempt to diminish vehicle accidents. She really couldn’t understand why I was more concerned about pedestrian safety than potential vehicular collisions at unsignalised intersections; stated it was impossible to lower speed limits; and nearly choked when I raised the idea of traffic calming measures.
Speed bump cushions would work, they are designed to be narrower than the track on a bus or truck, but still create a bump for cars. Job done.
Which they are installing on Beach Rd, Te Atatu.
Which have also just recently been installed on Oak Tree Ave in Browns Bay.
Sounds the left hand doesn’t know what the right is doing…
Great post Matt. I find this kind of thing so frustrating. Some residential streets near me have been given the same kind of treatment in recent years with the result that cars now drive faster (to the conditions) and it’s almost impossible for kids to cross the roads safely themselves. No wonder most kids get driven about these days. The thing is this kind of stuff isn’t rocket science. If you increase vehicle separation you may reduce some traffic collisions but you will increase speeds and reduce the amenity and general friendliness of streets for pedestrians and cyclists. AT just don’t get it. Their goal should be to make Auckland more liveable but instead their driving force is all about following out-of-date design guidelines and old school roads engineering practices.
Sounds word for word like the responses I get from AT whenever I raise the lack of crossings, overly wide roads etc around the inner city area. It’s always declined because of ‘low pedestrian numbers’ and the detriment to the LOS if anything is done. For example AT considers pedestrian numbers to be too low on Shortland Street to justify anything being done to the massively oversize Fields Lane – a lane that is 4 lanes wide. Same answer to why Princes Street and Bowen Street has a slip lane, apparently trucks would be hindered, and once again according to AT pedestrian levels are too low on Princes Street to justify any changes. That organisation is a complete and utter joke with absolutely no vision or desire to see changes in Auckland. The almighty LOS rules above all else.
Agreed. Disgusting.
If only AT understood the concept of self-explaining roads. Signs, including speed limits, don’t cut it. Motorists travel at the speed that feels “right” for the environment. If you want traffic to slow down in a residential area to make it safer, you’ve got to design those features in.
Ah, but now I’m starting to get it. AT DO understand the self-explaining roads concept. Their desired outcomes are maximum speed, maximum capacity, maximum motor vehicle LOS – and bugger the cyclists and pedestrians. Put a sign up so people think we care.
Now, sadly, I understand.
Flush medians are the best thing since sliced bread. They greatly separate oncoming traffic, reducing the number of head on accidents. They provide a safety refuge for people going in and out of their driveways, and they make pedestrians crossing the road feel much safer by giving them a wide spot in the middle when navigating traffic. It’s the sort of thing this blog should promote surely?
Summerland Drive certainly did change after they built the bridge in 2005. It was a quiet street until then. But don’t forget, it’s going to get much busier when the missing links are constructed (it’s part of a planned arterial through to Birdwood Road). Another 20 years and they’ll be four laning it like Tiverton.
Yeah flush medians are great eh? They allow vehicles to be driven much faster and much more recklessly than otherwise as there is more room for error, more chance that speeding drivers won’t die themselves in head-ons, but of course makes the Stroads much more dangerous for other users like people crossing or cycling or kids. But hey, so what who cares, what are they doing there anyway; losers. LOS A!
C’mon Patrick, you just know that 100mm x 3mm of paint is all that’s needed for pedestrians to feel safe. After all, drivers never veer offline and hit roadside objects.
yeah like the driver of a car I saw yesterday who had lost control and wrapped his car around a tree on suburban Ash St. If it wasn’t for the tree and if a pedestrian had of been walking past right as it happened then they would have been wiped out.
Yes Patrick, they are great.
19% reduction in overall vehicle crashes.
66% reduction in rear-end crashes.
30% reduction in pedestrian accidents.
That’s why more and more of them are appearing. They make roads safer for everyone.
Fewer crashes that occur at higher speeds not safer just different. Also making a road so hostile that pedestrians don’t go is not a plus
Source? Does it include pedestrian crossing numbers before and after?
http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/factsheets/52/flush-medians.html
How is it that half the time on the blog you are condemning cities as ecologically irresponsible and the other half defending cars. Do you think that if everyone just went out and lived in the countryside and drove cars everywhere that this would be a positive thing for the environment?
I just dont understand how anyone who cares about the environment cant be wildly in favour of anything that lowers car use or at least makes it less attractive as a transport option. The use of fossil fuels (whether you agree with peak oil and climate change or not) is certainly the major environmental issue of our time.
Or is it just that you like country living and cars and so defend both? They are certainly almost inseperable in NZ.
I am genuinely puzzled.
Statistics can be manipulated to show whatever you want. Just the same way AT misuses stats to claim providing pedestrian priority is dangerous. Slip lanes where all the onus is on the pedestrian to stand there waiting is much safer they think than drivers themselves having to give way to pedestrians at a zebra crossing. It’s flawed science and clearly being peddled by people who a) no scientific training in how to report and conduct experiments and b) with an ulterior motive.
I provided researched facts, and you’ve provided personal opinion. Do you have any professionally-researched facts that say flush medians are dangerous?
Geoff, your stats quoted from NZTA are correct. No argument there. But what story are they telling us? Has the 19% reduction in overall vehicle crashes resulted in the remaining 81% of crashes being at higher-speed and more serious than before? The stats don’t tell us. Were the 66% of rear-end crashes which have since been eliminated, generally low-speed prangs causing little more than fender-damage? They don’t tell us this either? Have pedestrian accidents reduced by 30% because pedestrians have been deterred from using/crossing the road due to higher traffic speeds? Could well be, but you wouldn’t pick this up from NZTA’s talk-up of flush medians. Are the remaining 70% of pedestrian accidents more serious than previously? Again, may be, because NZTA say nothing to disclaim this likely outcome.
If the road environment promotes faster driving on a residential street, how can this possibly not have some very negative consequences? It is hard to see NZTA’s so-called Flush-median fact-sheet as anything other than propaganda by a body whose overriding concern is simply traffic-flow. Geoff Blackmore it is hard to see your view as anything other than falling for this propaganda.
Actually Geoff, you might want to read this: http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/research/reports/312/index.html
I am also going to email NZTA on their pedestrian safety figures as I believe they are misleading and are in conjunction with raised median refuges, not flush medians alone. Also, the main crash that medians are good at preventing is loss of control which indicates to me that alternatives that reduce traffic speed is a better option. Of course, LOS would decrease but safety is more important in my opinion.
Indeed Bryce. A search through that document for “speed” shows that speed on the flush median roads was not considered at all in the report, yet would seem to offer a pretty good explanation of the change in the rates of various accident types (more loss of control on straights, less on curves, more pedestrian accidents on 4 laners, less on 2 laners (less peds?) more rear ends, more accidents while turning).
Geoff you missed my point completely, as Dave and Bryce have indicated, it’s easy to (misre)present statistics in a way that proves your point. But it doesn’t tell the full story. Walls along the road blocking pedestrians would also reduce pedestrian accidents but is maximum speed and minimal pedestrians really what we want Auckland to be?
Dave B, I can’t answer your question about whether speed is taken into account, but I will point out that generally speaking, flush medians act as a traffic calming measure. Flush medians are only installed on wide roads, so once installed, they reduce lane width, which has the effect of slowing traffic.
bbc, if you believe NZTA have misrepresented their fiugures, then present your evidence. Otherwise, there’s no reason to doubt them.
Bottom line is that flush medians have more pros than cons. I suspect the anti-car brigade hate them simply because it’s more space allocated to roads, and no amount of benefits will change their mind.
Flush medians reduce the most serious types of crash, which are GD “Rear end
near centreline”, which frequently lead to the rear-ended vehicle being propelled into oncoming traffic, with often fatal consequences. The increase in pedestrian accidents on 4-lane roads, versus the reduction on 2-lane roads, suggests that they cause an increase in pedestrians not using controlled crossings.
Have a read of this American study http://www.eng.auburn.edu/files/centers/hrc/FHWA-RD-93-130-1.pdf – it shows medians did reduce pedestrian accidents
Wow. 130-odd pages in this report, so without a lot of work it is difficult to determine exactly what it is saying. However a quick read of the abstract suggests that raised medians reduce pedestrian accidents but not flush medians (referred to as TWLT, “two-way left turn” medians).
I don’t think anyone here is arguing about raised medians.
The other thing that doesn’t seem to be explicitly addressed by this study is whether or not speeds increase BECAUSE OF the insertion of a flush median. But this is the main concern of Matt’s post: That the road environment encourages faster speeds when a flush median is present.
It’s interesting that the old Transit had this in there standards :-
“The use of edge lines to protect parking, and a flush median can reduce vehicle speeds by better
defining vehicle paths and narrowing the travelling lanes.”
http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/road-traffic-standards/docs/rts-04.pdf
I haven’t been able to find any international study that documents before and after speeds, that would support the above statement or AT’s opposite claim. The Illinois study also included “two way left turn lanes” in it’s defition of “flush medians”, which may explain some of their “less safe” results.
This Auckland study makes the claims “Large savings are also achieved for the pedestrian related crashes NA and NB ($15.2 million). These categories observed 11 fatal crashes in the ‘before’ period while only 4 in the ‘after’ period. Implementation of a flush median provides protection to pedestrians and reduces the conflict area for potential crashes. Implementation of pedestrian refuge islands would also have contributed to the observed savings. Again, reduction in severity may be attributed to lower vehicle speeds resulting from constriction in lane width and better delineation.”.
http://www.atrf.info/papers/2003/2003_Jurisich_Segedin_Dunn_Smith.pdf
Yes, well the comparison only between two types of road provides no information about other safer options, especially ones that don’t default to LOS A and that cater for all users instead of just powered vehicles. Two types of Stroad, I should say.
Bryan,
Now that’s what I call ignoring bull in the china shop.
We know there are stronger predictors for collision frequency and for injury severity, regardless of crossing control or location: vehicular traffic volume, and vehicle speed. There are bigger wins to be had here, if we — no, if traffic engineers — would only be willing to sacrifice vehicle speed and sometimes throughput. [1] [2] [3]
Besides, we know that medians and controlled crossings are only as effective as nearby opportunistic crossings are rendered difficult. [4] This, too, has another name: severance — which is counter to walkability and liveability. How likely is it that a car-oriented traffic department will put in enough frequent and large protected medians to enhance or even maintain pedestrian amenity? It would surely slow down vehicle movement too much for their taste.
In other words, there are ways to use medians well, ways to use them poorly, and better ways to achieve the same goal sans car priority. Introducing “side friction” is a known and useful phenomenon, which lane and carriageway narrowing takes advantage of; however, (a) there are obviously many ways to create side friction, and (b) the application of medians does not necessarily achieve it. Among other options, we could narrow the entire carriageway, or reduce travel lane widths by introducing separated cycle tracks or car parking, while pedestrians can have kerb buildouts (with bike bypasses) and raised crossings, or we could introduce more intersections/driveways and less-setback frontage and taller, permeable foliage. On the other hand, medians could easily be added without any narrowing, with too few pedestrian crossings, with landscaping low enough to grow sightlines for drivers but obstructive enough to sever pedestrian crossing, etc — like in the original post.
There’s more to street design than microscopic engineering interventions. We should also consider land use, the built environment, pedestrian activity, desire lines, aesthetics, and much more — but above all, how to catch and tame the raging bull running amok.
It’s interesting that Matt says “As you can see we have a lane marked for parking that is almost never used”, and yet in the photos there are as many parked cars as moving cars. As a local, the roundabout at the school is the most effective traffic calming measure, and I personally found I drove slower after the flush median went in than before.
I suspect AT have quietly buried the New Lynn to Massey “western bypass”, as WCC’s funding for the bridges on Marinich Dr and Waitemata Dr and Swanson Rd roundabout has disappeared from their 5-year plan.
Indeed Bryan, the same thing happened on Swanson Road as well – people slowed down after the flush went in. That’s because the painted lines reduce the lane width, making the road feel narrower. Take away the flush median, and the road looks more like an airport runway, with lanes much wider than they need to be.
Racetracks on the shore
1: Maritime Tce bisects a park, playground and the beach front, traffic calming does not avail much for kids trying to cross the road https://goo.gl/maps/J0VrY
2: Archers Road / Agincourt St, race down the hill of Archer Rd or blow straight thru the stop sign on Agincourt, council not interested in fixing http://goo.gl/maps/d5KUv
3: Beach Road pedestrian crossing betwixt Castor Bay and the cafe/shops/bus stop is a good place to get run over by cars racing down the hill and round the corner without looking for peds https://goo.gl/maps/Cf50C
I guess what a lot of people are talking about here when the flush median topic comes up is that a lot of road space is taken up that could be used for bus / cycle / walking options – which also calms traffic.
I would agree that flush medians calm traffic speeds, I certainly drive slower when the road feels narrower.
We all need to share the roads – motorised traffic, non-motorised traffic, and PT users.