Urbanists, fire officials seek common ground

After years of finding themselves on opposite sides of disagreements about street design approvals, new urbanists and members of the fire service profession gathered in Austin just before the start of CNU XVI and discovered they have more in common than many first thought. Twenty-five participants — fire marshals, civil and traffic engineers, planners, and researchers — discussed and debated urban street design and emergency response in a two-day workshop April 1-2. “Smart Growth Streets and Emergency Response” was the first public step in a multiyear effort by CNU and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to reconcile the need for narrow, pedestrian-friendly streets and the goal of emergency service providers for fast response times. Among the key findings: • Pursue mutual education: New urbanists and fire marshals should talk to each other across their professions — and communicate early when a particular project is proposed. • Focus on safer overall communities, not just shorter response times. With its improved connectivity and mix of uses, traditional urban form decreases vehicle miles traveled and the rate of traffic fatalities per mile, while giving emergency responders more flexibility for response routes. • Since the 1997 Swift-Painter-Goldstein study, “Residential Street Typology and Injury Accident Frequency,” confirmed from data in Longmont, CO, that accidents per mile increase exponentially as street widths grow and that “the safest residential streets are the narrowest ones,” the group called for research to confirm these findings nationally. • Focus on performance-based measures to achieve community safety. • Prevent misapplication of the rural-to-urban Transect so buildings, streets, and projects don’t go where they shouldn’t be. The Transect can also help guide fire equipment purchases. “A good first step overall,” said Tim Torma, acting director of the EPA’s Development, Community and Environment Division (also known as the Smart Growth office). “We left with a better understanding of each other, and [fire officials] have a better understanding of why insisting on wide streets is problematic not only from the perspective of how a community looks and feels, but also from a safety standpoint.”