WCEL > Issues > Urban Growth and Development > Smart Bylaws Guide > Part 4 > Tailor Road Requirements to their Preferred Use

Smart Bylaws Guide – Tailor Road Requirements to their Preferred Use

Roads are a major source of impermeable surfaces in municipalities and account for more than 25% of the land use in urban areas.  They also provide the largest amount of public space in each community.  Road corridors and networks shape the character, function and livability of adjacent land uses and communities.  Because of these strong public and community character considerations, roads can no longer be considered as predominantly traffic carrying facilities moving vehicles and goods.  While traffic movement is still a primary objective, the needs of all travel modes and adjacent uses must be given equal consideration.  

Of primary concern for smart growth development is the conventional width of streets.  Wide suburban roads may empty automobile traffic quickly onto arterial throughways, but they do not provide a safe route for children walking to school. Many municipalities are more closely tailoring street standards to their intended uses to decrease the cost of construction and maintenance. Avoiding excess road widths also ensures that traffic speeds fit into the character of neighbourhoods.  Using traffic calming to retrofit streets to reduce vehicle speeds can also assist municipalities to better tailor road designs to desired uses.

Narrowing streets helps slow traffic, improve both driver and pedestrian safety, and create a more welcoming pedestrian streetscape.  Street networks should include a wide sidewalk, limited drive-way cuts, and a boulevard or planting strip to enhance the urban forest and create a buffer for pedestrians.

Street rights-of-way also have an important role in urban ecology and rainwater management.  Streets are now designed to handle rainwater runoff using water infiltration devices such as swales along the edges.  Road rights-of-way are also increasingly used as part of the urban forest where standards are set for minimum revegetation and shade coverage of the road at maturity.

Concerns about Compromising Emergency Response

Municipal staff often cite concerns about increasing emergency response times as the primary impediment to decreasing road widths.  However, several resources (listed below) demonstrate how narrow streets are efficient emergency response are compatible.  The issue involves more the connectivity of the road network and access to buildings, rather than the width of the streets.  A street network based on a grid or modified grid system allows many routes to a single location and disperses traffic.  A conventional cul-de-sac and wider road network allows for greater speed but more limited access and greater route lengths.

Emergency Response, Traffic Calming and Traditional Neighborhood Streets, by Dan Burden with Paul Zykofsky, deals with concerns raised by fire departments and other emergency responders to innovative street retrofit and design efforts. It also explains to traffic engineers, local officials and residents what the emergency responders' concerns are. 

Walkable Streets and the Fire Department is a 30-minute videotape that addresses how to create more livable neighborhoods while allowing for prompt emergency response. It includes interviews with fire chiefs from Chico and Mountain View, California and Portland, Oregon discussing what works and what does not.

Examples of Tailoring Road Requirements

City of Surrey – East Clayton Neighbourhood Plan that integrates the green infrastructure with narrow roads (as proposed in the East Clayton Neighbourhood Concept Plan)

District of Langford traffic circles (with diagrams) that significantly improve the safety of intersections

District of Highlands – road standards (Schedule B, Section R to the Subdivision Bylaw No. 154 pp. 33-35) set maximum widths based on design speeds to ensure small, narrow, and windy roads in keeping with the character of the municipality. Coupled with the revegetation standards and requirements for minimum clearing to discourage scotch broom, most new roads quickly integrate into the rural setting.

Ottawa Regional Road Corridor Guidelines that create standards for urban arterials that take into account adjacent land uses and the needs of non-auto users

Portland, Oregon’s Skinny Streets

Apex, North Carolina - zoning that requires narrow, tree-lined streets with sidewalks designed to slow traffic

Hillsboro, Oregon - local and minor collector streets have a target design speed of 40 kilometres per hour (25 miles per hour) or less (Development Regulations for Station Community Planning Areas)

Dade County, Florida - zoning that limits blocks to a 1,300 foot perimeter and 400 foot length (or less), with alleys

For More Information

Neighborhood Street Design Guidelines: An Oregon Guide for Reducing Street Widths (Oregon Department of Transportation, 2000)

Narrow Streets Database (Congress for a New Urbanism)

Pedestrian & Streetscape Guide (Georgia Department of Transportation, 2003)

Traditional Neighbourhood Development: Street Design Guidelines (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1999) (includes TND design principles, safety, geometric design)

Traditional Neighbourhood Development Guidelines (North Carolina Department of Highways 2000)

Road Diets: Fixing the Big Roads (Dan Burden and Peter Lagerwey, 1999)

Second Nature: Improving Transportation Without Putting Nature Second (Surface Transportation Policy Project 2003)

Other recent model street guidelines can be found in: 

Residential Streets (Walter Kulash)

Street Design Guidelines for Healthy Neighbourhoods (Dan Burden)

Emergency Response, Traffic Calming and Traditional Neighbourhood Streets (Dan Burden with Paul Zykofsky)