I'm headed out of town today to speak at the National Conference of State Legislators Annual Summit in Chicago and did not have time to finish the next piece in the conversation we are having on projections. Hang with me. We're over 20% of the way to our fundraising goal for holding a series of Curbside Chats across Pennsylvania. We would really love to make this trip happen and share the Strong Towns message across the entire state. If you are a PA-based organization, an individual or a local government that wants to make this happen in your community, help us reach our goal and we'll make it happen.

As a very brief aside today, I wanted to share this delightful little book I acquired a year or so ago. It is called, The Original Highway Code: Reproductions of Highway Code Booklets from the Thirties, Forties and Fifties, and it is an amazing little trip back to the not-so-distant past of highway design.

For those of you that have been following the conversation we've been having on the Strong Towns Blog about the dubious value of traffic projections, this book will reaffirm the notion that traffic engineering is a very young profession that is, in large part, making it up as it goes along. I'm not saying these people aren't competent, just that engineers rarely admit (even to themselves) that this is all a huge experiment and society is essentially the guinea pig.

The book contains a little background and narrative prior to each model code. For example, on early speed regulations, the following is reported at the turn of the past century:

In Brighton, Mr. Jeal was prosecuted for driving at a speed that was deemed wholly inappropriate for the traffic and road conditions. The police reported that he had been traveling at a shocking 12 mph, the court pronouncing that no one need ever travel through Brighton at more than 4 mph.

Then there was this regarding the first pedestrian killed by an automobile, a 44-year old woman named Bridget Driscoll:

At the inquest into her death, witnesses claimed that Bridget had been startled by the car and froze as it approached at a speed of at least 4 mph, although the twenty-year-old driver was accused of having modified the engine to produce up to 8 mph. An expert proved this to have been impossible.

Since we expect pedestrians to routinely walk adjacent to traffic -- just a couple feet away, really --traveling at speeds from 25 mph to 45 mph, the idea of someone being mowed down by an oncoming car traveling somewhere between 4 and 8 mph is hard for the modern mind to comprehend. Imagine suggesting that nobody need travel more than even 20 mph in a city, let alone the 4 mph that society held to be acceptable a century ago. In Minnesota, the minimum design speed is mandated to be 30 mph, a speed too fast for neighborhood or productive commercial areas.

There are three codes in the book: The 1935 Highway Code, the 1946 Highway Code and the 1954 Highway Code. They are all formatted similarly and have the rules listed in numerical order. It is interesting to note how the code started as we progress from the one to the other. Here's the first rule from each:

1935: (1) All persons have a right to use the road for purpose of passage.

1946: (1) The Highway Code is a set of commonsense provisions for the guidance and safety of all who use the roads. Consideration for others as well as for yourself is the keynote of the Code. Remember that you have responsibilities as well as rights.

1954: The road use on foot. (1) Where there is a pavement or footpath, use it.

You can see the transformation. In 1935, the road is for everyone equally; we all have rights. By 1946, we all have rights but we also have responsibilities. We're advised to use common sense and be considerate. When we get to 1954, pedestrians, if you can get out the way, you need to do so. It is clear that we're no longer talking about sharing the space equally.

Compared to the myriad of codes and regulations we have today, these rules seem simplistic to me but also quite effective. Our codes today seem to be obsessed with the deviant, an undertaking that I'm not so sure protects any of our common interests. Here's Rule #14 from the 1934 Code:

(14) Do not drive in a spirit of competition with other road users. If another driver shows lack of care or good manners do not attempt any form of retaliation.

Quaint? Sure. 

Effective? I don't know. Do our current laws that deal with road rage, aggressive driving and the like work any better? I doubt it.

I must admit that there are times when I am nostalgic for a slower, simpler world. Yes, give me highways that allow me to get somewhere quickly, safely and efficiently, but when I get there, I actually want to be there. Let's make our places worth being in, which may mean slow traffic along with more common sense and a little consideration. I think we can do it.


Let you legislator know that, if they're planning to be in Chicago for the National Conference of State Legislators Annual Summit, they need to attend the Strong Towns session Tuesday afternoon at 2 PM. We hope to have some audio at the Strong Towns Podcast