Bikes have a GREEN LIGHT, but cars are allowed to still pass through and intimidate the bikes.  The police officer? She just watches and waves her hands around, but is a HUGE DISTRACTION to all drivers, and is ineffective to improve any safety.  In fact, as seen in the video to the right, she fails (see vid at 1:40).

Complete Streets is billed as a green solution that provides equal access for all modes of transportation, making room especially for pedestrians and bikes, giving them "right of way" spaces, but these efforts often end up being a mass of chaos and "accidents waiting to happen" with a myriad of near-misses.

       Just look at this New York chaos in action>>>

Watch this video, as this avid New York City bike rider films his adventure with GoPro cameras, and watch how many unsuspecting people he feels the need to LECTURE along the way to "get out" of the bike lane (he's right, technically, but what an uphill battle against very real pedestrian congestion... frankly? I think he expects way way too much right-of-way for cyclists in such a situation). Pedestrians have to give way once in a while. Is a cyclist the only mode of travel that doesn't have to give way?

​As bikes speed past cars that are opening their doors (next to bike lanes), taking their chances, should a cyclist expect that, someday, everybody will learn how to open a car door and check both directions before they do so?  That is wishful thinking IMO.  It will never happen.  Its just a POOR design to have bikes ride in spaces that are immediately adjacent to the opening of car doors and mixed with so many pedestrians crowded on sidewalks who have sought the bike lane for a temporary refuge.  

​Also, there are MANY locations where the bike lanes lead the bike rider into HARMS WAY!!  Just watch the video, and let me know what you think about riding a bike in New York.

TEST:  Is this a "complete" street?
or is it a Chaos Street?

A great experiment has been taking place throughout the world for a couple of decades now, to get people out of their cars and riding bikes or walking on the sidewalks.  Complete Streets is the common name given to the efforts to get this done. But is it a good idea to do this to busy streets?  Is it working? Are people getting out of their cars?  The answer is a resounding NO!  As more and more people choose to buy cars. In Los Angeles alone, 600,000 more people decided to drive in the last decade, and now there are 2,000,000 vehicles on the road there every day.  During the same time, 5000 more cyclists also joined the fray there.

Watch this video, and ask yourself, "Is this something that I would want to do?"  Would anyone want to enter the chaotic environment that is shown in this video?  Does this look like fun to you, to ride a bike in designated bike lanes, but to have those bike lanes completely overrun with construction issues, parking issues, wrong way traffic issues, pedestrians suddenly entering issues, it is a mass of confusion and accidents waiting to happen.  It may not be fatal accidents waiting to happen, but certainly very PAINFUL accidents waiting to happen.

There is a better solution than this.

Mixing all modes of traffic in such close proximity of each other is just a recipe for disaster and pain.  
It would be better to have NO bike lanes than to give the impression that these cyclists are safe, to give them that false impression, or to give pedestrians the same false sense of security when at any turn of their body they might walk right into the path of a 20 mph bike, and get extremely hurt / injured.

A great experiment has been taking place throughout the world, but especially in California, to get people out of their cars and riding bikes or walking on the sidewalks.   It sounds really nice, but in the United States...there is a very deep rooted car culture.  Level of Service (LOS) still matters.  
Drivers want LOS C or better conditions, but instead they are getting LOS F.  
Traffic Engineering has been villainized by some planners, but it is so much more relevant today, than ever before. Get people out of their cars?  How about take care of those cars instead? LOS matters.
     Watch to see what SB 743 in California has done to transform the state into a more congested traffic jam.

The California Complete Streets Act (Assembly Bill No. 1358, CHAPTER 657, An act to amend Sections 65040.2 and 65302 of the Government Code), Requires Cities and Counties and Caltrans to have a transportation network that meets the needs of ALL users of streets, roads, and highways, defined to include:
MOTORISTS, PEDS, BIKES, etc.  Note that "MOTORISTS" are included in the law.  These can NOT be ignored.  The Level of Service on a road even for vehicles needs to "meet the need" as per state law.  General Plans need to reflect this.

The California COMPLETE STREETS ACT of 2008,
"requires that the legislative body of a city or county, upon any substantive revision of the circulation element of the general plan, modify the circulation element to plan for a BALANCED, MULTIMODAL transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets, roads, and highways, defined to include:
1) motorists, 2) pedestrians, 3) bicyclists, 4) children, 5) persons with disabilities, 6) seniors, 7) movers of commercial goods, and 8) users of public transportation,
in a manner that is:
suitable to the rural, suburban, or urban context of the GENERAL PLAN."

Take note of this language.  The law states specifically that the NEEDS of even MOTORISTS are to be included in the development of the circulation plan.  However, in so many cities this has not been the case, as the vehicle levels of service continue to plummet and the needs of drivers to avoid unnecessary delays has not been met.  In fact, they have been ignored in favor of only installing bike lanes and adding buses, with an over-sized budget to implement these changes, even when there is little demand for a full system of such modes of traffic.  For instance, some cities have taken away lanes from cars, making an already LOS E condition into a terrible LOS F condition, not meeting the needs of those drivers, and instead making room for a bike lane which ends up having a very small and limited use.  And the bike riders using such lanes still have to compete at street level with vehicles at every single signalized intersection, and the risk of accident and fatality has been steadily rising. Solutions are needed!  Traffic congestion can NOT be ignored any longer, and this is by a CA state mandate which is over a decade old.

The purpose of Complete Streets involves creatively developing a transportation system that provides safety and mobility for ALL users: peds, cars, bikes, transit, and trucks. There is no "one size fits all." It will be unique for nearly every different community or situation. It must be adaptive to meet specific needs and traffic demographics, and should be efficient and not unnecessarily inhibit vehicle flow (which leads to aggravated drivers).  Attention to safety is paramount.  The safety needs of pedestrians and cyclists is especially important. Seeking solutions where peds and vehicles do NOT directly mix is ideal.  When vehicles and peds mix at the street level, this is where the fatalities primarily occur.

PRISM Engineering's Grant Johnson, TE spent 2.5 years in China specializing in creating transportation designs and solutions based on Complete Streets concepts and guidelines. Because population density is very high in China, Complete Streets looks a little different than typical implementations in rural America, even in major urbanized cities.  The primary reason for this is because 90% of the population in China do not own a car.  Walking is key to most transportation systems that interface with the sidewalks including transit and subways.  In China, Grant worked on the design of new bus lines and station locations in a new town, using AutoCAD to draft Signing and Striping, Crosswalk locations, Parallel Parking and Bike Lane design, all using Complete Streets methodology.  In addition, he conceptually designed a transportation roundabout/hub with dedicated taxi and bus lanes inside the hub, interfacing with pedestrian walks and escalators serving subway lines beneath grade. 

CALTRANS defines Complete Streets as: a transportation facility that is planned, designed, operated, and maintained to provide safe mobility for all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit vehicles, truckers, and motorists, appropriate to the function and context of the facility. Every complete street looks different, according to its context, community preferences, the types of road users, and their needs.

Complete streets, CHINA Style 中国风格 (HIGH density)

What does Complete Streets look like in china?
• LARGE PED BRIDGES
• VEHICLE BRIDGES & UNDERPASSES
• GRADE SEPARATION OF MODES
• TUNNELS
• GUARDRAILS
• FENCES
• SIDEWALKS

Grant Johnson visited CHINA (Chongqing) in Jan 2018 and observed traffic conditions of numerous facilities, and compared the traffic situation to American traffic.  In China, only 10% of the population in Chongqing actually own a vehicle. All others ride transit or taxi, or walk. 

By separating the various modes of traffic as shown in this video, the safety is improved.  PEDS cross the street on a high bridge with escalator access.  THRU vehicles pass under a major pedestrian block in a sunken tunnel to avoid conflict with thousands of pedestrians.  Subway stations interface with the pedestrian areas which are flanked by skyscrapers of stores and businesses.  Buses, taxis, trucks, and passenger cars share massive nine-lane roadways that carry as much traffic as a freeway, but are signal controlled at grade with other intersections. Capacity is nearly saturated.  Stop and go conditions exist in some areas.  Bikes are not accommodated in this case, but must share the same space as pedestrians (not practical to incorporate bike facilities in this case)

Complete Streets will need to EVOLVE

Complete Streets as it now stands is based on an old paradigm.  It is based on purely human interactions in a transportation system where all modes of traffic are mixed, but where specific engineering treatments to roadways design and traffic control are introduced to make the roadway or corridor more friendly and safer for pedestrians and those riding a bike.  In the past before Complete Streets was implemented in hundreds of locations around the USA and the world, vehicles were given priority in the road system and safety was compromised when there were careless or inattentive drivers behind the wheel.  Accidents were more severe because they happened at higher speeds.  Widen open roads were hard to cross by pedestrians, and also encouraged even faster speeds by drivers of vehicles.  Since roadways have been redesigned to slow cars, there have been some improvements to safety as the number of fatalities has not grown with traffic growth... yet it still hovers around 40,000 fatalities per year in the USA.  This is unacceptable and needs to change... but we are not able to achieve the VISION ZERO goals of eliminating fatality on the roadways. In fact, when Los Angeles implemented Complete Streets recently, the traffic fatalities in the City soared to 260 deaths in 2016, and significantly higher in 2017.  Complete Streets is not a fool proof concept, and it needs to be revisited with updates that take into consideration the real reasons that fatalities would still climb in say Los Angeles even when Complete Streets is implemented.  

The underlying cause of fatalities is not necessarily the road design. It is the HUMAN element.

As long as there are a subset of human drivers who are unprepared to drive safely, get distracted easily, speed or drive recklessly, take drugs or alcohol before they drive, then we will have fatalities on the road. I can speak from experience, I have not had an accident, let alone a fatal accident in all my life.  I probably like you, are not the problem. But we let just about anybody drive in this country and the simple testing process does not make everybody an equal driver.  Some drivers still look at the passenger while talking, rather than look at the road, always.  Complete Streets will never solve these kind of problems.  So what will?

The Opportunity for a real Solution is at the door.

Its here already, and will soon be accepted.  Autonomous Vehicles.  Ubiquitous in all cities. If we had that now, safety problem would be solved!
The answer is NOT and never was to "get everybody out of their cars."  In the USA, population is spread out as a nation, and density in population centers is relatively low.  In China, where most everybody lives in very populous urban cities with skyscrapers throughout as a default... these could more easily make drastic changes to lowering automobile use because they already have so many non-car alternatives in place in the form of walking on large sidewalks, taxi and mass transit systems, and subways, that altogether move 90% of the population (who do not own or drive a car). 

In the USA, transit systems only serve major cities, and then just do it satisfactorily (not great), but in the vast majority of small cities or unincorporated population centers transit is sorely lacking.  The population in the USA by far relies on the use of a personal automobile, since nearly everybody owns one. It is the long time culture and all of our planning and construction has been based on it. It is the fixed system that is not going to change much, because that would be too cost prohibitive and cause most people to move into skyscrapers, and they might not want to do that. They might prefer to live on a street, with a yard, and have a larger family, etc., play in the local park, etc.  

​Planners who contemplate the possibility that people could be lured out of their cars to embrace a new active lifestyle are not considering the masses that do not have this option, literally.  It is not reasonable to expect the masses (who do not already live in dense / populous urban cities like San Francisco, to move there, embrace a lifestyle without a personal car, use transit and ride bikes or walk and enjoy that lifestyle, because the transit and walking or even biking options are not available or practical.  Expensive cities where these things do now exist are truly beyond the purchasing power of most people. SF is very expensive for a reason, it is built out with many such options for walking, biking, and transit. Skyscrapers and density abound.    Outside of these large cities you have lifestyles and infrastructure that demand traveling much longer distances for even typical activities such as shopping, work, and school, and the automobile is the only practical mode of travel to accomplish these in reasonable times.  For example, I sometimes have meetings several hours by car from my home or office. It is not practical to consider riding a bike at 10 mph... it would take all day!  3 hours travel would increase to 18 hours, and I am not sure I would survive that.  Plus there are times to carry loads of specialized equipment or computers, that would not fit on a bike.  Living in China, however, it might be possible to get by with a rolling hand cart or suitcase, and ride a nearby transit systems that have just 5 minute headways, and get to a needed destination in the city.  For the most part the traveling time is similar to what can be done in a car that has to travel through congestion and parking is a nightmare to find it.  The only difference for the driver of a car there is they have air conditioning, and privacy in a private vehicle.  Phone calls on a bike or transit are also not practical.  Time is money.