User:Gendron.Katelyn/sandbox

Current Street Infrastructure in the US
The U.S. Department of Transportation's Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices focuses primarily on vehicular traffic and how to optimize its movement. . Conversely, the concept of a living street focuses on creating healthier, more walkable, and more livable places while optimizing environmental benefits. Living streets aim to prioritize the safety of all street users, especially more vulnerable groups such as pedestrians and cyclists, by improving infrastructure to accommodate all street users.

Urban Design Professor Donald Appleyard's Street Livability Study in the 1970s suggested streets in the United States were often noisy, polluted, and dangerous, and residents and cities both do not feel in control of creating clean and safe street environments. Livable streets aim to create cleaner and safer environments by "greening" streets and creating spaces where cars are guests to pedestrians and cyclists. This concept prioritizes the environment and the community over accessibility and movement of traffic. The Dutch woonerf is an international example of this concept. The woonerf eliminates exclusive spaces for pedestrians and vehicular traffic and instead encourages the whole street to be accessible to pedestrians and provide obstacles and traffic calming measures for vehicles. In their paper Reclaiming the Residential Street as a Play Place, Trantle and Doyle argue woonerfs increase traffic safety and children are more likely to play near or in the street.

Purpose of the Living Street
The living street reimagines the role of the street by reconsidering its purpose and who it is intended to serve. When implemented, the street may be a cooler, safer, more walkable, more attractive place that promotes the user’s health and wellbeing. It can serve as a recreational space for the neighborhood and improve the air quality through reduced carbon emissions and other air pollutants as well as improve water quantity and quality as well as prevent erosion and flooding through storm water management and reuse. There are three major components of the living street: being green, cool, and complete.

Green Streets
Green streets can help alleviate water security issues prevalent in some areas of the United States and droughts that are expected to rise in the future as a result of climate change. The design of a green street includes implementation of storm water management strategies in order to protect nearby water sources from pollutants as well as encourage water reuse. Managing water at the source will reduce pollutants that get carried to nearby waters which can be damaging to the ecosystems that live there as well as the water quality. Examples of storm water management infrastructure include planter boxes which can collect and absorb any storm water runoff with pollutants as well as bioswales which can aid in groundwater recharge and filter and infiltrate storm water. Tree canopies are another aspect of the green street design. Adding trees to the street can reduce the Urban Heat Island effect since they aid in shading paved surface from the heat. Trees also use evaporative cooling and can sequester carbon, meaning they will improve air quality and reduce carbon emissions.

Cool Streets
Cool streets replace dark impervious surfaces, which tend to absorb energy from the sun and result in warmer surrounding temperatures. Dark impervious surfaces can be replaced with light colored cool pavement and sidewalks, which reflect solar energy from the sun and aid in the evaporation of storm water. These cooler surfaces will reduce emissions, and communities may have fewer illnesses related to extreme temperatures due to the mitigation of the Urban Heat Island Effect. In addition to lower surrounding temperatures, lower temperatures in storm water runoff will also pose less of a threat to aquatic life in receiving waters. In comparison to dark impervious surfaces, these surfaces are more durable because heat tends to degrade surfaces. The reflective properties also allow for more visibility at night.

Complete Streets
Complete streets are intended to be accessible, accommodating, and safe for pedestrians and cyclists. The design of the street aims to improve or expand upon current infrastructure with the implementation of strategies to promote active transport. These strategies include high visibility crosswalks, buffered bike lanes, curb bulb outs, and tactile ramp. Complete streets aim to provide social equity for all users regardless of age, income, or ability. In designing complete streets, factors such as trip duration, gradation of travel paths, and typical weather conditions can be addressed to see whether the conditions are ideal for active transport. Design strategies in complete streets include raised crosswalks which act as a traffic calming design by bringing motor traffic to the level pedestrians walk at, and curb extensions which increase space for other street amenities such as plants, benches, and trees.

Public comradery

Progress in the United States
Since the late 19th century American planners have faced problems concerning traffic congestion and street safety. The two typical designs of American neighborhoods were the gridiron plan and curvilinear street, but safety concerns regarding motor vehicles brought new street patterns in the 1920s, one being the “neighborhood unit.” The Radburn plan developed by Henry Wright and Clarence Stein in the late 1920s as well as Clarence Perry’s proposal in 1933 used the "neighborhood unit" to try to encourage prevention of traffic on residential streets.

In the 1930s and 1940s, increased highway traffic provoked the publication of the Community Builders Handbook. Written by the Federal Housing Administration, the handbook provided a hierarchy of street types such as arterial, collector and minor access. However, unsafe conditions were still being observed, and street types were not meeting their intent. Following this, cul de sacs and diverters were used in places such as Montclair and Grand Rapids to encourage streets to fulfill their assigned street type. In the 1950s and 1960s, extensive urban development projects concerning housing and highway construction brought increased volumes of traffic and improvements focused on the flow of the motorized vehicle. Colin Buchanan’s Traffic in Towns published in 1963 in England introduced his American companions to the concept of “environmental areas”, places where pedestrians are safe from motorized vehicles. He acknowledged that there was an environmental capacity to every street, and pedestrian safety, air and noise pollution, and lighting were all of particular concern. This report influenced design in countries such as Sweden and Australia as well as San Francisco’s Urban Design Plan.

At the national level, the Federal Highway Administration sponsored a study conducted by Donald Appleyard in the 1970s looking at the impacts of traffic on residential streets. From the study which looked at 500 homes in the San Francisco area in comparison to other international street designs, they found residents were deterred by unsafe travel speeds of motorized vehicles. This was a particular concern in areas with children and elderly. Noise and pollution decreased the overall livability of the streets, and more social interaction as well as perceived privacy was found on streets with lower volumes of traffic. Stress, occupancy turnover, and adapting to unsafe living conditions were also results of unfavorable traffic conditions. The findings of Appleyard’s Street Livability Study inspired the San Francisco City Planning Board to launch the San Francisco Urban Design Plan in 1971 which introduced the idea of the “protected residential area.” The goal of the design was to slow down traffic to acceptable levels in a residential area through infrastructure improvements for active transport as well as traffic calming measures. While the city’s focus in street design used to be increasing the flow of motor traffic, this new approach discouraged high travel speeds. Following this plan, San Francisco developed the Protected Residential Area Program (PRA) which allowed neighborhoods to petition for traffic management measures. This also encouraged community participation as well as equity and safety for all residents.

Influence from other countries
Dutch, Danish, and German cities have incorporated several design concepts and policies surrounding traffic management. They have seen improvements in overall street safety and for the more vulnerable modes of transport such as walking and cycling. The focus on active transport in countries like the Netherlands may be attributed to the more car restrictive policies they have had in place since the 1970s. The ‘woonerf’, ‘home zone’, or ‘Spielstrasse’ requires motorists to drive at walking speeds and yield to pedestrians, cyclists, and playing children who have the same rights in road use.

These cities have implemented traffic calming measures, have dedicated auto-free zones for pedestrians and cyclists, enforce lower travel speeds, and have limited and more expensive parking compared to the United States. They have no turn on red, a concept the United States has had since the 1970s which has led to a drastic increase in the injuries for pedestrians and cyclists. Street design in the United States tends to focus more on travel speed of motorized vehicles. In these European countries, the mindset is that motorists should anticipate the actions of pedestrians and cyclists may be unsafe or even illegal. Their traffic causing measures have had a significant impact in traffic accidents. Dutch neighborhood have seen reductions in traffic accidents by up to 70% in some areas, whereas a study looking at Denmark, Great Britain, and the Netherlands found that in traffic-calming neighborhoods injuries related to traffic fell about 53%.

These studies and ideas have changed some of the mindsets and ideas of street planning and design in the United States. Some planners and designs in the United States now see the street as a place to live, gather, and play instead of a means to get from one place to another. They have started to address making streets clean and safe for everyone, and a place where the community can gather and socialize.

Some cities in the US such as Portland, Oregon and Minneapolis, Minnesota have increased cycling rates by over 5 times from 1990 to 2008 through implementation of the same practices used in the Dutch, Danish, and German cities. They have improved cycling infrastructure, public education on traffic safety, integrated with public transportation, increased in bike sharing, and used traffic calming strategies. These cities have found that even those the United States has a history and culture associated with using motorized vehicle as a means of commuting, policies and infrastructure can have a greater influence on people’s actions and habits.

Design
The design of the living street aims to restrict car use and parking by reducing convenience to motor vehicles as well as promote safe walking and cycling. This is accomplished through better infrastructure, traffic calming, integration of walking and cycling with public transport, policies regarding land-use that encourage mixed use development, regulations that are sensitive to more vulnerable populations and commuters, and traffic education of the entire community. Proponents believe a successful design cannot simply be individual measures taken but a combined, comprehensive approach that implements all of these factors into a fully integrated and incorporated design.

Environmental Design


Street trees shade surfaces and provide protection from the sun. This can lead to a longer life of the infrastructure, which saves in replacement costs and turnover for the surfaces. Other benefits of incorporating street trees in living streets include lower temperatures as well as improvements in air quality. They also have the potential to make the street seem like less of a highway and more like a community street. Other environmental design strategies consist of storm water management infrastructure. This includes permeable paving and bioretention planters and swales. Permeable pavement can be used for sidewalks, bike lanes, parking lanes, and low-volume streets to allow water to infiltrate through surfaces and reduce runoff to nearby water. Bioretention planters and swales are typically used in planting strips or curb bulb outs to treat storm water runoff. Swales can be used where the water can infiltrate the soil, whereas planters should be used when infiltration into the existing soil is not desired.

Traffic Calming Measures
In order to reclaim streets as a play area for children and a place for the community to gather and socialize, traffic calming measures can be put in place. These measures may include introducing speed bumps, changing the surface of the road, or creating artificial bends in the street called chicanes. The design of these measures enforce reasonable speeds rather than signage which can have little effect on the driver’s actions. The design of the street will instead force driver behavior and raise awareness of their actions and the actions of other street users. Other traffic calming measures include raised intersections and pedestrian crossing which bring the vehicles to the pedestrian level, indicating cars do not have full ownership of the road and must be vigilant of other road users. Chicanes, narrower travel lanes, and roundabouts are other designs that purposefully slow down cars to safer speeds. Extensive car-free areas, wide, well-lit sidewalks, refuge islands for crossing, crossing signals, and zebra crossings provide safe and convenient facilities for more vulnerable road users. The woonerf in the Netherlands is an example that incorporates some of these traffic calming techniques. However, the Dutch design goes further in that it uses the concept of the shared street where separate spaces are not defined and pedestrians have access to the entire street. Develop the street more by filling in the “street wall” is another design measure to encourage walking and cycling. This concept consists of filling in the empty spaces and large parking lots often found adjacent to streets to make the street not only more attractive or inviting but more accessible to these active commuters. In addition, moving parking lots to the back of the store like found in European countries give priority to pedestrians and cyclists near the entrance.

Living streets focus on how to best move people and not simply a means to move the car. The design aims resolve issues such as high-speed traffic arterials, few intersections, and lack of sidewalks. There may be dedicated transit lanes, sidewalks, and bike lanes and be spaces that serve the entire community regardless of age, income, or ability. Measures such as bike lanes and safe, accessible maintained sidewalks will provide the infrastructure for the community to become active commuters. Further design strategies such as medians can serve as a safety net for pedestrians and indicate pedestrian presence for motor vehicles, while reduce lanes and land width and bulb-outs can decrease crossing distances for pedestrians. Speed bumps and traffic circles can make the street seem like less of a highway. Instead, these measures encourage lower travel speeds and therefore bring increased safety for other street users. Adequate signage, signals, and lighting can also be used to make all users aware the street is a shared space. These measures may require even less space to carry more people.

Compact and Mixed Use Development
Compact and Mixed-use development is another strategy of the living street since how land is used will determine trip distances and mode of transportation. Cycling is typically done at distances below 3 km and walking is typically done at distance below 1 km. If trip destinations are within walking or cycling distance, people may utilize the sidewalks and bike lanes for their commute. In addition, compact neighborhoods will also make transit a realistic option because the population will exist to provide the necessary ridership. Advocates suggest a focus on establishing strong neighborhood centers with local accessibility instead of creating separate commercial and residential areas which promote car use through the increase in trip length will lead to more sustainable and livable conditions.

Benefits
Living streets are sustainable from an economical, environmental, and social view. They can promote public health through the different modes of active transport offered as well as social equity through enhancing livability for all users. The design is intended to reduce traffic danger and increase safety using modes of active transport that have minimal noise and air pollution and far fewer non-renewable resources compared to motorized transportation alternatives. By reducing the amount of cars and incorporating modes of transport such as walking and cycling, living streets can move more people with the same or less amount of space than the current street can carry since these modes take up far less space than cars, whether in use or in storage.

Health
The design of living streets makes it easier for people satisfy the need for daily physical activity since they can walk or cycle as a part of their commute. Walking and cycling provides a form of physical activity and accounts for numerous health benefits that can combat current concerns for public health. In comparing obesity rates with walking and cycling for commuters between countries, studies show that the countries with a greater number of cyclist and pedestrian commuters tend to have lower rates of obesity. Lack of exercise can also lead to other chronic health problems like diabetes or heart disease. In addition, walking and cycling can reduce the number of cars on the street, bringing a reduction in air, water and noise pollution as well as carbon emissions. Cleaner area caused by these reductions may reduce asthma and other respiratory diseased in urban areas. The CLAN study conducted by Carver and Crawford in 2008 revealed that the built environment and street design can also play a role in the health and wellbeing of children.

Safety
Safety in numbers is another benefit of the living street design. Published government injury rate statistics from California cities, Danish towns, and European countries show higher numbers of cycling and walking may increase safety. Public health consultants such as Peter Jacobsen suggest this is because there is a greater awareness of cyclist and pedestrain movements so motor vehicles are more prepared to react and avoid accidents. In addition, motorists may also be cyclists or pedestrians themselves which will allow them to be more sensitive to the needs and rights of these more vulnerable groups. Larger groups of these active commuters may also justify more rights to the road and an increase in improving and enhancing public infrastructure geared toward them. Less cars on the road may also reduce traffic congestion.

Social
Living streets give more options for how people travel or get from one place to another and balances options so it is safe for all users. In addition, revitalizing existing areas instead of continuing suburban sprawl helps utilize and build upon past investments in infrastructure. This revitalization may include improved infrastructure that encourages people to sit, walk, and gather instead of being driven away by noisy traffic polluting the air. In addition, more people out and about in the streets can help reduce crime.

The concept of living streets also works to prevent alienation children may have with their surroundings by providing them spaces to play and develop in an outdoor environment. The spaces can allow children to experience different spaces, environments, and communities as well as the ability to develop new relationships with others in these safer spaces. As a result, children living near these streets will be healthier individuals since they have a greater and safer exposure to the environment around them and are able to develop relationships as well as interact with various individuals.

Equity
Infrastructure incorporated in the living street design is intended to serve all users. The concept hopes to advance livability for the entire community by envisioning the street as providing multiple benefits for several different types of users instead of simply a means for motorized traffic to get from one place to another. This investment in public infrastructure also seeks to provide more economical alternatives for the user since they do not need a car to get from place to place.

Instead of focusing solely on the movement of cars, living streets are designed to move people and focus more broadly on several different modes of transportation that can be accessible to people regardless of income, age, gender, or mobility. A current and significant deterrent to active transport is lack of traffic safety, especially to the vulnerable groups of society like elderly and children. These groups are vulnerable to the dangers of traffic and with current streets often need more protection from car traffic. However, increased walking and cycling in these groups would cause an increase their physical activity and expand their mobility and independence.

In addition, current streets may have uninviting landscapes or be unsafe to walk or bike on, meaning driving a car is often the only safe or practical option. There is no place to gather or congregate or for children to play, and it is hard for the more vulnerable groups like children and those with disabilities to travel in anything but the car. Since lower income or senior citizens may not be able to afford or operate cars and rely on other modes of transportation to move around and be independent, living streets provide more economical and more independent modes of transport. In addition, implementation of street trees, foundations, and plazas can allow people to gather and enjoy the street in a shared and communal experience.

Counterarguments
Opponents to the living street believe that if more people opt for active transport alternatives as opposed to utilizing motor vehicles, travel time will increase significantly and will be inconvenient for commuters. They also believe that unless people utilize the infrastructure for active transport the living street provides, other nearby non-living streets will be congested due to the hinderance the living street creates for the motor vehicle.

Chicago Reader writer John Greenfield questions whether improving active transport infrastructure and encouraging transit-oriented development in communities will only increase property values, taxes, and rent, resulting in 'environmental gentrification' as marginalized groups are pushed out of their newly improved communities. Chicago leader Amara Enyia suggests while the concept focuses on decreasing dangerous driving, another result has been unfair enforcement of bike ticketing targeted at communities with people of color.

In addition, in 2020 the Institute for Housing Studies at DePaul University used their Mapping Displacement Pressure in Chicago tool to find that the addition of The 606 linear park system in Chicago significantly increased prices in the more affordable adjacent neighborhoods, indicating the vulnerability of marginalized groups in new and sustainable public infrastructure.

Steps to Implementation
While knowledge of proven design strategies are readily available, there are still issues the United States has concerning living streets and protected neighborhoods. There has not been a defined safe speed limit for neighborhoods that affect driver behavior and are safe enough for children at play. Acceptable volumes of traffic moving through the neighborhood has not been defined. Who has the right-of-way in the street and who has the greatest access to the street has been largely given to vehicular traffic, jeopardizing livability and safety of residents. Design of living streets work to reduce children accidents. Reducing noise emission for resident health and wellbeing is another issue yet to be addressed. Acceptable parking levels is another issue, and while the United States has restricted parking to residents in some areas, the actual parking needs of the residents may need to be evaluated so parking areas can be readjusted. Allocation of street space may be assessed, since often streets are over designed for traffic and could instead be used for pedestrians, children, gardens, and sitting. As voiced by residents in the United States, maintenance and appearance are other issues that need to be addressed to revitalize the streets and create healthy and livable spaces for residents.

Advocates for living streets suggest national guidelines will be necessary to make living streets a reality in the United States, and current legislation surrounding acceptable speeds and volumes of traffic in neighborhoods must be reevaluated. With more public education and more effective law enforcement, implementation of living streets and protected neighborhoods will bring happier, safer, and healthier communities.