Week 10/14

The 10 tools/strategies I liked best are:

1. Steering development to sites where public transit can be utilized.

2. Integrating local and regional transit modes.

3. Paying attention to the speed, comfort, and enjoyability of public transportation.

4. Exclusive lanes for trams and buses.

5. Giving buses and trams green lights at intersections.

6. Using a centralized computer system to control traffic lights to manage congestion.

7. Allowing buses to stop not at designated stops for night service (to enhance safety).

8. Using hybrid electric buses.

9. Car-free developments.

10. Car sharing.

How they can inform a 10 year plan for Ithaca:

Some of these tools and strategies are more relevant to Ithaca than others, but implementing many strategies at once over a number of years is a good way to ensure gradual improvement in transportation. One very creative idea is the use of traffic lights to manage congestion and public transportation. A unified traffic control system that works with traffic rather than against it (which is what seems the case in Ithaca) would greatly reduce congestion on the residential and commercial streets downtown, which would in turn reduce pollution from idling cars. Creating a system where buses always have green lights would improve the speed with which public transportation serves Ithaca, thereby improving its desirability. Public transportation use at night might also be increased by allowing the buses to stop at an individual's house rather than a designated stop. This increases nighttime safety and convenience, a big factor in using public transportation. While Ithaca already uses hybrid electric buses, their use could be increased, and the ability to switch to purely electric power while downtown or idling at stops would improve the environment and air quality around public transportation hubs.

For land use policy, Ithaca may be able to exert more control over where new development takes place in order to locate it where it could be served by the existing public transportation network. Ithaca could also promote car-free developments by offering developers incentives for such products. The use of car sharing could be promoted by reducing the number of parking spaces allowed for new developments, and providing spaces specifically for cars that are part of the car sharing network. If there is a concerted effort to reduce the availability of parking, there will be more people willing to use the car share service simply because they would be guaranteed a parking spot at their destination.

Transportation in Toronto: Week 10/14

Being new to Ithaca and more familiar with issues of transportation in Toronto, Canada, I chose to look for strategies in Beatley’s Green Urbanism and Register’s Ecocities that I could apply to Toronto. I am also highly critical of Toronto’s past and most of its current public transit initiatives, so I thought it would be helpful for me to look for ways in which Toronto transit could be improved. Having lived in many other major cities besides Toronto, I can confidently say that, considering the population, Toronto has one of the worst public transit systems. Toronto has been developing into a super-sprawl city where residents are virtually forced into using automobiles because of poor planning and a strong predisposition toward car-scale development. Toronto needs help, and it had better be fast! I was grateful to learn of some concrete transit policies that Toronto could look at implementing over the next 10 years in order to help curb its reliance on the automobile. Because of the structure of this assignment, I chose to weave my synthesis into each section instead of putting it at the end.

1. Systematic Transit Priority
In chapter 4 of Green Urbanism, Timothy Beatley outlines how Zurich’s transit system gives priority to public transit vehicles. When dedicated lanes can’t be used, then all buses and trams use special transmitters to allow traffic signals to change in their favor. There is even a “zero waiting time” goal for all public transit at intersections.(p.117) Such a policy favors public transit travel and provides an extra disincentive to travel by car. All cities who are serious about increasing public transit and reducing automobile traffic should consider this tactic. Toronto streetcars and buses are constantly fighting with car traffic. The public transit vehicles are now given almost no priority over cars and it thus takes at least twice as long to get anywhere by surface public transit as it does by car. It used to take me three times as long to get to work by public transit as it would by car, so guess which choice I would usually make! I wanted desperately to take public transit to work, but when I could pass at least 6 buses on my way to work in my car, there is little to no incentive to travel by bus or streetcar.

2. Disincentives for Car Travel
In addition to giving public transit vehicles priority at traffic signals, Toronto needs to do even more to reduce the population’s love for car travel. Zurich and Freiburg have incorporated even more disincentives for car travel by reducing the city speed limits and manipulating traffic lights to reduce transit congestion. It is also deliberately very difficult to find parking in many European cities. In essence, these cities have made it very difficult to travel quickly and efficiently by car. The reduction of auto traffic, combined with increases in the efficiency and service of public transport means that the vast majority of people in Zurich and Freiburg, rich and poor, choose to take public transit. These strategies could work very well, over a 10 year period, in a city like Toronto where the vast majority own several cars and use them much more than public transit. If you make it less desirable to travel by car, then people will think twice before they use them.

3. Very Slow Automobile Speed Limits
Beatley gives several examples of European cities that have made 30km/hr (or less) the speed limit within their urban zones. With Beatley, I got the impression that this reduction of speed limits made the streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists and also made public transit systems seem more attractive. While slowing down car traffic to under 30 km/hr may help to deter people from using their cars in cities, Richard Register made slow speed limits also seem attractive to the car driver. He implies that speeds over 15 miles/hr not only damage the outside environment, but also prevent drivers from properly seeing and appreciating their surroundings. In Toronto, there are hundreds of fatalities due to automobiles. In fact, from 2000-2006, exactly 220 of the 440 total traffic fatalities were of pedestrians.(www.andrewspicer.com/article723.html) Given that 220 of the deaths were pure pedestrians, this still doesn’t account for the number of deaths for people on bikes who were struck by cars. This means that more than half the people who were killed weren’t even using cars at all, but were killed by them anyway. These sorts of scary statistics are part of what kept me from using a bicycle to get to work in Toronto. I would be no match for the 60-80 km/hr traffic that I would have to face on the way there and back. Only with radical reduction of car speeds would most major Toronto roads be made safe for bicyclists and pedestrians.

4. Referenda & Public Input
I was very impressed by the amount of input that Amsterdam and many other European cities have been granting to their citizens when it comes to facilitating public transit. In chapter 4 and 5 of Green Urbanism, Zurich, Bologna and Amsterdam are listed as examples of cities using referenda to directly involve the citizens in all major public infrastructure projects. In fact, these cities actually attribute many of the successful car-curbing transit initiatives to the public impetus, and not just good city planning. The idea of letting the citizens choose their transit options and have input in public capital expenditures is quite foreign to municipal planning in North America. When possible, Toronto and other North American cities should try to involve the public in more large transit projects. This would allow for more accountability and overall public support for public transit projects. It was interesting to read that surveys indicate that the public is generally much more supportive of public transit initiatives than municipal decision-makers, but in our current municipal structure, it is often only those few people who have the time and money to lobby for what they want who get their voices heard at town council meetings. It was also suggested that the municipal decision-makers are predominantly white, between the age of 20-60 and therefore the demographic group most predisposed to travel frequently by car. Considering this, Ernst Joos, deputy director of the Zurich transit authority, points out that municipal decision-makers are often the least likely to vote in favor of public transit over car transit planning.(p.119) Instead of municipal officials having almost total control over public transit, Toronto should let the public have a say in planning and prioritizing transit initiatives. Anyone who has sat through a municipal council meeting to try to voice an opinion or effect a change in a public policy knows that, aside from voting for representatives, our current system does not really provide a true forum for public input nor accountability in decision-making.

5. Car-Free Developments & Acess by Proximity
One of the worst aspects of many of Toronto’s car-centric residential developments is the fact that tract housing goes on for miles and miles with hardly no amenities that are walkable or even accessible by bicycle. In Chapter 5, Beatley looks at how the GWL-terrein project has been built to de-emphasize cars and has placed schools, shops, and cultural centers very close to the residential areas. While we were touring the Ithaca Ecovillage, I was likewise struck by how nice it was to be in a residential neighborhood where cars are not welcome. By having amenities close to housing, the need to use cars can be greatly reduced. Even if Toronto’s bedroom communities could allow the strategic placement of corner stores at key crossroads, this slight shift away from mono-zoning could reduce the need for people to drive to far-off shopping centers to pick up basic staples. Register also summarized this point well when he said “[i]nside the city, the best transportation is the least: access by proximity should be the objective.”(p139)

6. Increasing Public Transit to Popular Recreation Sites
One of the seminal duties of all Canadians is to love the great outdoors. One of the most standard consequences of our love of nature is a prerequisite ownership or frequent visitation to a cottage. Cottages range from modest timber shacks in the woods to opulent multi-million dollar lake-side properties, but around Toronto, they almost all require driving 2-3 hours (often in an S.U.V.) to get there. Freiburg is given credit for integrating its long-distance train system with its urban transit system to allow people to get to recreation zones outside the city. Toronto must also drastically increase its public transit options to its cottage and recreation areas. As it stands now, the cottage traffic is just as bad if not worse than standard commuting traffic, and the auto traffic is exerting huge pressures on wildlife and the environment. It is ironic that by seeking out the natural areas that we love and crave to much, we are also destroying them! Only by increasing train and other public transit options can Toronto ensure that its areas of wilderness remain for future generations.

7. Car Sharing
To date, two car sharing companies, Autoshare and Zipcar, already exist in Toronto, but there is room for significant expansion of both these companies and for more car share companies to operate. It is encouraging to see that membership in similar car share organizations has taken off in many European cities. Indeed, I have heard nothing but positive comments from Torontonians that already use a car share service, and I know many more that would eliminate their cars if a car share service was available in their neighborhood. It is my understanding that the car share systems work best when members use them rather infrequently. Another limitation to the car share systems currently being used in Toronto is that they don’t function well for trips outside the city or for one-way trips. Perhaps when the car share groups expand, it will make it easier to use them for longer trips. Of course, having the option to use a car share service is only viable in conjunction with an efficient public transit system that can enable you to get around on a daily basis and then use the car share for special trips.

8. Creative Marketing by Public Transit Authorities
In chapter 4 of Green Urbanism, Beatley shows how many European cities are cosponsoring events so that price of public transit is included in the price of admission.(118) This is a great idea that can be easily applied in Toronto. Everyone knows that the traffic becomes deplorable when there are major baseball, concert and exhibition events at the Skydome stadium. It would be very easy for the TTC (Toronto Transit Authority), Via Rail (Canada’s heavy rail system) and the Go Train (commuter rail system) to sponsor large events because the main downtown station that links all three systems is connected to the stadium. The three main public transit systems that I mentioned could try to connect into a single-fare system, and once this is done it would make it even easier to have the price of public transit be built right into the admission price for large events. I think that the price of transit should be automatically (with no opting out!) included in the price of admission in order to encourage as many people as possible to use public transit. Of course, the price for parking at the events should also be prohibitive in order to further discourage car usage, and the transit systems must add extra trains and streetcars to accommodate extra people at special times.

9. Make Public Transit More Attractive
In chapter 6 of Ecocities, Register makes a great point about how trains and ferries used to be aesthetically attractive both from the inside and the outside. He waxed poetically about his boyhood train journeys when there were large viewing platforms and classy train interiors. People used to be proud to take the train because the trains looked good and felt civilized. Today’s trains and public transit vehicles could gain a lot from an increase in attractive features. The modernist move toward utilitarian design has left behind good old fashioned beauty. Toronto and all transit stakeholders should realize that beauty can be a great marketing tool. If we could travel in trains and streetcars that were perceived to be as good looking as our cars, then we might just be proud to take the train or streetcar again. The perception that public transit is ugly also feeds into the perception that public transit is for the lower classes. Perhaps attention to aesthetic details might be a crucial step in eliminating the public transit stigma and creating a socially just transit system.

10. Promote Bicycle Travel
While Beatley briefly touched on the inclusion of bicycles into many European city transit plans, Register looks more deeply into the benefits of bicycle travel. Bikes take up minimal space, travel at much lower speeds than cars, require only human energy inputs and do not pollute the environment. Register thinks that bikes will be around long after gas-powered cars have gone extinct, and thus cities like Toronto should start planning for the future and built more bike-oriented roads. There is a serious lack of bike-friendly zones in Toronto. While there are some nice bike paths along the lake and in many of the ravines, these almost never lead to anywhere I need to go. Toronto must convert many of its main corridors to make them more bicycle-friendly. There is talk that Queen Street, one of the oldest and most widely used shopping streets in Toronto, could be closed down to cars and made exclusively for pedestrians, streetcars and bikes. This forward-thinking scheme would be a great way to showcase the city’s exciting new de-emphasis of cars and support for sustainable public transit.

Week 10/14 Transportation Tools and Strategies

I decided to focus my tools and strategies for transportation on Pittsburgh, PA where I plan to return to when I complete my degree. My overall strategy was to break down the plan into phases, beginning with small changes that can immediately be implemented to make a large difference and ending with large-budget projects that would entail significant funding and planning.
Phase I: Renovations to Current Modes: Buses, Bikes, and Cars
1. The current bus system in Pittsburgh uses a series of busways combined with regular street use, busways and dedicated lanes already exist to deliver passengers to their destinations quickly. The biggest drawback to the busway is that it is isolated from the commercial and residential streets and often creates barriers between communities. Instead of adding any additional busway routes, a sensory system should be set up, such as the one in Zurich, so that buses do not wait at red lights. This addition to the system would allow for less wait time and give priority to buses, encouraging ridership. Fares should be reduced if possible, or they should be reduced for a time period to incentivize people to ride.
2. Bikes should be given greater priority on the road, with the addition of bike lanes and paths and increased signage making drivers aware that they are sharing the road. If the city invests in small safety measures at once, bicycle riders will increase and the increase in visibility should lead to increased riders as well as greater sensitivity on the part of drivers.
3. Car traffic in neighborhoods should be reduced using traffic calming measures. Overall speed limits should be raised to increase safety. Instead of penalizing drivers monetarily, giving buses priority at intersections, and implying the danger of the automobile by raising speed limits will hopefully induce people to try out the bus system.
Phase II: Rehabilitation of Current Modes
1. Buses should be energy efficient, electric or hybrid. Pedestrian bridges should be built over busways at more frequent intervals to increase connectivity between neighborhoods. Busway stops should be better integrated with surrounding neighborhoods through transit oriented development. Bus stops should include shelters that are dynamic spaces and contain maps, schedules, and other relevant information as well as digital updates on when the next bus will arrive. Shared taxis and car shares should be investigated as ways of linking the busways with the larger community.
2. Pittsburgh has two unique features that should be investigated for public transit: inclines and waterways. There are two inclines ("hill trams") still in existence in Pittsburgh, however historically there were more, many connecting neighborhoods to food sources and transportation hubs. These have largely been replaced by highways, which now cut through the neighborhoods and further isolate them. In particular, this has happened to the largely black community living in the Hill District. Pittsburgh should consider replacing some of its inclines, and give special priority to low income communities who need increased access to resources as well as transit.
3. Pittsburgh has attempted to implement a water taxi service that has existed as a trial and has largely served as a tourist attraction. Instead of linking almost solely recreation centers better attention should be paid in linking business centers.
Phase III: New Construction
1. Pittsburgh's small light rail system should be extended, with special attention to establishing connectivity between its surrounding suburbs. City government should consider an incentive based system for developers to build around any new planned transit corridors.
2. Downtown Pittsburgh is relatively isolated because it is surrounded by rivers. Currently there are no tolls to cross bridges into the city. Although it would be wildly unpopular, AFTER new and effective transit has been developed, or at least after Phase II is complete the city should heavily penalize traffic into the city monetarily.

Tools and Strategies

1. Expanded TCAT bus system. Having buses that run to and from the Cornell campus during class times is great. Having buses only come every hour, or even not having buses to many places from campus on weekends and nights is not so great. Not having a direct bus to Ithaca College cuts off a lot of potential connections as well. Weekends and nights are the times when people are free – yet they are the times that bus service is currently limited.

2. Car restriction zones. With the current level of car traffic within Ithaca, enforcing restriction zones, maybe starting with school areas, major pedestrian shopping areas, parks, etc, would be a great start to creating a safer and more pedestrian friendly city. No one wants to wait to cross 3 lanes of traffic, and crossing 13 near the Farmer’s Market is like playing chicken!

3. Community taxi/car share. This seems like it would be a perfect option in Ithaca, especially considering the large number of college students! Even if Cornell were to start with one – over 13,000 undergraduate students would be a great test population, and would help to expand the university’s commitment to restricting cars on campus. I personally do not own a car, but would love to be able to borrow one for the occasional weekend or errand (say, at a time when the buses weren’t running on the weekend!).

4. Single ticket. The idea of a single ticket for car share rentals, a bus, a taxi is a great idea. Being able to arrange multiple forms of transportation ahead of time, or even being able to decide as you go without the hassle of cash, cards, and plan-ahead reservations would do wonders for lessening the hassle of travel.

5. Transit-oriented development. As we’ve seen in most of our readings, and with the ConnectIthaca plan, transit-oriented development makes tons of sense, especially in an urban environment. The ABC plan explained in Green Urbanism is a model that Ithaca could use, especially in light of the new planned development behind WalMart. That portion of 13 could become a pedestrian hub, with the expansion of bus routes, and possibly a train service running down 13 in the future.

6. Package deals for new developments. Along the lines of #5, transit could be “part of the deal” for the new Southside developments. If there were a car share program, a train system, expanded bus system, and discounts for residents to use public transit (and maybe even an agreement not to own cars), perhaps the WalMart parking lot could be converted to a park area for the residents in the new development?

7. Small electric trucks for distributing goods. This makes a lot of sense for a place like Ithaca, with many small restaurants, grocery stores, shopping malls, and already crowded streets, the use of small, electric trucks would mean easier navigation for the truck drivers, and quieter streets with less congestion for Ithaca residents.

8. Electric carts. During much of the bicycle/pedestrian walkable city sections, I would find myself wondering about the elderly or disabled – how could we expect them to walk everywhere or ride bikes? The idea of golf-cart like, small electric vehicles could be a perfect way to solve the problem. They would not only be useful for getting from point A to point B easily, but for hauling groceries and other goods to and from home.

9. Street narrowing. I thought of State Street when reading about narrowing the streets. On our walk, I noticed the nonexistence of seating areas or places to socialize, along with areas for kids to play (and right near the Commons would be a great place for small green spaces!). If State Street were to be narrowed, or even made one lane, and sidewalk areas were widened, there could be streetside cafes and pedestrian spaces galore, along with some benches to sit in the shade of the street trees, great assets for revitalizing some business and nightlife.

10. Trams and planting. Restoring the historic tram (trolley) service to the Cornell campus would, I’m sure, please many Cornellians, especially if it were to extend down to the Commons and then perhaps down State Street and down 13. (Right along the proposed ConnectIthaca routes?) Planting along the tram routes would be nice as well, and keep them from being an eyesore to people living along them, in addition to helping to quiet the noise of a tram.

Week of 10/14: 10 Tools and Strategies

10 Tools/Strategies for Sustainable Transit

1. Land use policies and incentives that encourage sustainability vis-à-vis transportation. This is a broad “tool” that captures many of the practices in recounted Green Urbanism (GU), specifically the act of reserving the land that is near natural transit nodes for appropriate high-density or transit-oriented uses. An example is the Dutch A-B-C system (p113).

2. Lifting parking space requirements in new, urban developments. Most of the parking space requirements in zoning ordinances are incredibly egregious. As pointed out in GU and elsewhere, preserving space for automobiles merely engenders greater automobile usage. If it were impossible to find parking in Ithaca, people would (probably) find other ways to transport themselves.

3. Creation of transit villages. Going along with points 1 and 2, clustering goods and services as well as residences near public transit hubs makes car-free or car-reduced living much more convenient.

4. Frequency of public transit. No one in NYC ever has to memorize the subway schedule—you just go down to the platform and wait a couple of minutes until the train comes. Then you get on and get where you’re going, fast. TCAT is at the far opposite end of the spectrum, in terms of frequency and speed. The T-burg bus comes about 8x per day, and takes 35 minutes to get to Ithaca! Sorry, dude, life’s too short and my life in particular is not nearly predictable enough to make busing feasible.

5. Ease of use. Love the idea of “smart cards,” where you pay the fare on a bus or tram or train by using a declining-balance debit card. The ability to use it across different modes of transit is particularly appealing.

6. Tying into existing rail lines. Ithaca has a non-intensively used railroad running right through the main business corridor. By using wide-carriage tram cars as one German city did, we could tie light rail into the heavy rail and have a Rte. 13 passenger train.

7. Public transit itinerary creation services. Like the trip planning you can get by calling an operator in the Netherlands (and then arranging a taxi to meet you somewhere if need be), this could help take a lot of the headache/fear out of itinerary planning. Hopstop.com is an automated example of this, and allows you to create a route that is a combination of subway, bus, and walking. Way better than a street map and a bus schedule.

8. Congestion pricing. As London has shown, congestion pricing works. Soon NYC will be another example. If implemented in Ithaca, revenues collected could subsidize investment in public transit.

9. “Nurturing and growing a transit ethos.” So important in a place like Ithaca where it s perceived that only poor people, hippies, and noisy college students ride the bus. Key to a justice-driven (pardon the pun) system, where public transportation is not stigmatized.

10. Using sheep to calm traffic. OK, this is a little in jest, but I just loved the idea. I hate getting stuck in traffic or slowed down on the road, but on my drive in I often have to stop to let turkeys, ducks, and deer cross the road. The turkeys in particular take forever, but I never mind. They make me smile. My main point is the recognition that “no single strategy” will work, and that creativity and perseverance are critically important to reaching the goal.

Transportation and Baltimore

1. Coordinating Transit and Land Use
I live in Baltimore, so for a city that already experiences a lot of sprawl, integrating transit and land use pose a bit of a challenge. However, Baltimore also possesses areas that are the victims of blight, which have the potential to be redeveloped into transit-oriented communities. For example, there is a new mixed used development being constructed in Westport, Baltimore. The main feature is that this development will be centered on a previously unused light rail stop. Perhaps a new rail transit line could help with redevelopment efforts and steer the locations of higher density projects.

2. Trams with traffic priority
I like using Baltimore’s one light rail line, but I would sure like using it a whole lot more if it ran quicker. It’s frustrating to be stopped at traffic lights downtown when the whole point of taking the light rail is to avoid dealing with the congestion.

3. High speed rail
Why is there not a high speed rail line running between Washington and Baltimore?!?! Or all of the east coast cities for that matter!!!!!! Register is right, we need to invest more into our country’s rail infrastructure rather than encouraging more highway growth.

4. Car-free developments
These could definitely work in some areas, and I have to agree with the authors- owning a car gives you incentive to use it. I do not have a car while I am up at school, and as a result, I walk or take the bus. I imagine that if I had a car, I would give up walking to places across campus and simply drive. Car-free developments in Baltimore would boost bus ridership and lower congestion.

5. Car Sharing
See above.

6. Road Pricing
This policy I am somewhat more skeptical about using in a city like Baltimore, because we are still struggling to reinvest in the downtown and get people excited about working and living there. New York or LA, yes- there is high enough demand for access downtown that a road pricing system would not harm activity. Perhaps in a couple years this would work. I like this idea a lot, I would just be afraid of implementing it prematurely.

7. Shifting investments toward public transit vs. highways
There are currently millions upon millions of dollars being spent right now reworking the 695-195 connection in Maryland (basically, how commuters get from Baltimore suburbs to the city). I spent this summer taking the bus to my internship (I live in a suburb and worked in the heart of downtown), and I discovered a vastly underutilized resource. Why couldn’t those millions be used to promote and upgrade the bus system, which provides a great express service at peak traffic hours, instead of feeding into the cycle referenced in the readings?

8. Dedicated public transit lanes
Related to number 7, oh how I would have loved it if the #3 Express service was able to zoom past the rest of stalled traffic. At least 10 minutes could have been cut off my morning ride into downtown Baltimore. And imagine what that would do to cut down on car traffic! If people found out that they could get downtown faster using the bus than driving their own car, I bet that would change some minds.

9. Designated bike paths
I really wanted to avoid using my car this summer. I told myself I would get back into riding my bike to get places and I would use the bus when possible. While I did use the bus to get downtown, mobility within my suburb was another story. The truth is, I was afraid to ride my bike along the busier streets because I always thought I would get hit (and I probably would have considering my lack of coordination). If there were actually bike paths, I could have biked to pick up the item I forgot at the grocery store, or used it to run to the photo store to pick up my prints. The time it would take to bike to my nearest commercial district really isn’t long, but the journey could be a lot safer.

10. Motivating the senior lobby
My grandma depends on my mother to take her to all of her doctor appointments and to the grocery store. When my mom has to work on their usual Thursday date, my grandmother either has to forgo her errands that week or call a cab. She votes religiously and is a member of the AARP. Perhaps that lobby should start pressuring local and national legislatures to address their transportation needs as well as healthcare.