It seems that there are two recurring themes echoed in the reading, which explain why cities in Europe are able to create “high-mobility-transit cities”. In European cities like Zurich, Dublin and Berlin there is public sentiment that supports public transportation as a necessary public good and essential aspect of promoting social welfare. In general residents in these cities are willing to entertain the notion of a car free society because improving the conditions of their communities is importance and, public transportation as a means of creating that improvement is thus important as well. In addition to public support of public transportation, local and municipal governments in European cities tend to set public transit as a high priority on the public agenda, which in turn has forced officials to be creative about ensuring that these priorities are met. Certainly, European cities face many of the same limitations that American cities face when it comes to the question of public transit. BUT, unlike American cities, European political officials are making commitments to improving their neighborhoods by using public transit. Instead, of abandoning progressive ideas of car free neighborhoods, these European city governments are stepping outside of the box and creating innovative solutions to land use problems. By making public transit “attractive and comfortable” as well as convenient and easy to use, cities such as Zurich are ensuring that its residents truly enjoy using public transportation. As native New Yorker I can speak from experience about what it’s it like to ride the Subway system. Like Zurich and Freiburg, the New York City transit system is fully integrated. Every subway station is connected to a bus route, which makes almost every corner of the city accessible. Because of this almost everyone rides the subway. New York, though, because of the high volume of residents, has packed subways and packed expressways. Thousands of people ride the subway but it still doesn’t free up the roadways. I digress: the reason that I mention New York and its subway system is that I want to draw attention to the lack of attention that the MTA pays to making public transit aesthetically pleasing. In New York there is a very visible bias related to the conditions of the subway stations. Subway stations located in poorer neighborhoods and consequently neighborhoods that are dominated by minority residents are in horrible conditions. There is no regular maintenance, so the stations usually look awful and smell even worse. As you move farther downtown on the subway to the more ritzy parts of the city the condition of the subway drastically improves. The stations are just short of immaculate. Its an interesting dynamic in that the city residents who use public transit out of necessity and have no other options cant enjoy their public transit experience, that is until they head downtown to work often times in the homes and offices of the more affluent. On the other hand, wealthier transit riders, who make the choice to ride the subway as a matter of convenience can sit back and enjoy their rides to work even further downtown. The problem with transit in New York City, among other things, is that many parts of the city are racially divided and services as well as conditions also vary along similar racial lines. The reading does not address equality of service or equality of access I assume that is because race is not as prevalent an issue as it is in the states, particularly New York. It would be extremely interesting to consider minority communities and how well they are serviced in these European cities. Is there equity in access and is there equity in services. If so, once again Europe would be surpassing America in the race to create sustainable communities committed to addressing the social welfare of residents. Furthermore, in comparing the New York transit system, which unlike other transit systems in the US is actually high utilized but still needs serious improvements, it also false to adequately accommodate elderly riders. Although buses are equipped to accommodate the elderly as well as the disabled, rapid transit systems in New York, such as the underground subway system does not at all accommodate the elderly or the disabled. It also definitely neglects the needs of parents with young children. I have seen many baby carriages get stuck in the doors of the subways cars as conducted attempt to speed to their next stop. I have also witnessed single parents struggle up or down a flight of stairs carrying their child and carriage in their arms as busy New Yorker wiz by. One extraordinary aspect of the tram system that many European cities are making use of is that it accommodates parents with small children, the elderly and the disabled. Timothy Beatley shares his observations in Green Cities in which he watch these disadvantaged riders easily make their way from point A to point B. Having a fully integrated above ground system really allows residents to have a comfortable, scenic, and convenient metro experience.
This week’s reading is extremely applicable. It can help us to re envision Ithaca and develop a sustainable 10 year plan for public transit in Ithaca. Ithaca as well as the surrounding cities and towns are extremely scenic. There is so much to see in Ithaca and so many places that could potentially serve as transit hubs. An above ground transit system that is fully integrated and non intrusive could be designed to fit the character of Ithaca and surrounding areas. It could connect Ithaca to surrounding hubs and make Ithaca a much more desirable place to be. As a college student I love the idea of incorporating a more developed transit system. I think that it would be extremely exciting to experience not only Ithaca but surrounding communities as well.
Monday, October 15, 2007
Europe vs. the US...
Transportation has always been an interest in my life. When I was young, all I wanted to do was be an engineer on a train. Though I have now moved on to being an actual engineer, my interest in trains stays. This past summer, I was fortunate to have saved up enough money to afford to travel around in
My first gripe, which goes back to my youthful love of trains, is how pitiful the train system in the
My second gripe, though still on trains, is with city transportation. I grew up on
My third and final rant is on bicycle transportation. I would be terrified to ride a bike anywhere in
CRP Film Series THIS WEDNESDAY: "New York - A Documentary: the City and the World"
WHAT: Screening this week for the NEW CRP FILM SERIES
WHEN: Wednesday, October 17, 2007, 5-7pm
WHERE: Sibley 211
Pizza and Refreshments will be served!
New York – A Documentary: The City and the World
PBS documentary on the history of New York City, deals with Urban Renewal,urban decline and the role of Robert Moses, and includes the opposition to Moses led by people like Jane Jacobs. Focuses mostly on urban renewal, historic preservation and planning-related topics.
WHEN: Wednesday, October 17, 2007, 5-7pm
WHERE: Sibley 211
Pizza and Refreshments will be served!
New York – A Documentary: The City and the World
PBS documentary on the history of New York City, deals with Urban Renewal,urban decline and the role of Robert Moses, and includes the opposition to Moses led by people like Jane Jacobs. Focuses mostly on urban renewal, historic preservation and planning-related topics.
10 Policy Decisions and Some Unintended Consequences
One characteristic that I see is missing from many policy makers is their inability or unwillingness to point out the unintended consequences of their suggestions. This can and often does create the idea in the mind of those reading/hearing the proposal that the policy maker did not consider the consequences of what they are proposing. I believe that we are trained not to argue against our own ideas, but I have always felt that a person who is able to reflect critically upon their own idea is much more credible than one who is not. With this in mind, I will attempt to point out one key unintended consequence for each of the following 10 suggested transportation policy measures. Understanding the positives and negatives of any decision can only lead to better decisions. Many unintended consequences are clear, and are, in the eyes of many, worth the risk. This does not mean they should not be pointed out clearly en route.
UC = Unintended consequence
Creation/Extension/Modification of Heavy Rail
UC: Large investment = heavy commitment to the technology for a long time. Are we close to developing better technologies to heavy rail, or is it worth the large investment that may take decades to pay dividends?
Maglev Trains
UC: Incompatibility with existing rail structures. High upfront cost locks adopters into the technology for many years requiring us to ask, “If we are going to make a large upfront investment in a new technology, is this technology the best?”
Dedicated lanes/preferential treatment for trams and buses
UC: Creation of a situation where roads are freed up for drivers. The more successful the program becomes, the more enticing it is to drive, because the roads are becoming freer of cars. Policy potentially is limited in the effect it can have because its own success could work against itself.
Integration of payment among different modes of public transport in a city
UC: Other than a little extra administrative headache/cost, this seems like a wise idea without much downside.
Coordinating land use and transit
UC: Any restrictive land use policy runs the risk of being seen as anti-business. The use of categorizing land parcels to restrict parking for example may sit poorly with some business owners and may have a serious affect on that cities ability to attract and keep important businesses.
Use of low-carriage trams
UC: Difficult to see a downside here.
Restricting parking
UC: Restricting parking = expensive parking... yes always, unless gov't eminent domains all private parking. "Hmm mmm hummm mummm". Yes I'm humming the old Soviet National Anthem. Only the wealthy will be driving and parking. Earth-firsters don’t care, but what about you social justicers?
Graffiti zones
UC: Does allowing graffiti artists a legal palette for their work discourage graffiti from spreading, or are you creating more graffiti artists. Very difficult to answer. Best way is likely trial and error.
Restricting larger truck traffic
UC: Again, this measure comes at a cost of being seen as very business unfriendly. Quite probably, this puts downtown businesses at a further disadvantage to suburban stores that already have shipping/transportation/parking advantages over thier inner city competition.
General idea of making it more expensive to own a car
UC: Again, this puts the environment before concerns of social equality. Why do the suggestions that make the most sense always screw the poor?
The preceeding analysis can be seen as a glass-half-empty view. The intent is to the contrary. The more likely you are to ask yourself, "Self, can you live with this consequence of this policy?" and answer "Yes I can", the more credible the policy decision becomes.
UC = Unintended consequence
Creation/Extension/Modification of Heavy Rail
UC: Large investment = heavy commitment to the technology for a long time. Are we close to developing better technologies to heavy rail, or is it worth the large investment that may take decades to pay dividends?
Maglev Trains
UC: Incompatibility with existing rail structures. High upfront cost locks adopters into the technology for many years requiring us to ask, “If we are going to make a large upfront investment in a new technology, is this technology the best?”
Dedicated lanes/preferential treatment for trams and buses
UC: Creation of a situation where roads are freed up for drivers. The more successful the program becomes, the more enticing it is to drive, because the roads are becoming freer of cars. Policy potentially is limited in the effect it can have because its own success could work against itself.
Integration of payment among different modes of public transport in a city
UC: Other than a little extra administrative headache/cost, this seems like a wise idea without much downside.
Coordinating land use and transit
UC: Any restrictive land use policy runs the risk of being seen as anti-business. The use of categorizing land parcels to restrict parking for example may sit poorly with some business owners and may have a serious affect on that cities ability to attract and keep important businesses.
Use of low-carriage trams
UC: Difficult to see a downside here.
Restricting parking
UC: Restricting parking = expensive parking... yes always, unless gov't eminent domains all private parking. "Hmm mmm hummm mummm". Yes I'm humming the old Soviet National Anthem. Only the wealthy will be driving and parking. Earth-firsters don’t care, but what about you social justicers?
Graffiti zones
UC: Does allowing graffiti artists a legal palette for their work discourage graffiti from spreading, or are you creating more graffiti artists. Very difficult to answer. Best way is likely trial and error.
Restricting larger truck traffic
UC: Again, this measure comes at a cost of being seen as very business unfriendly. Quite probably, this puts downtown businesses at a further disadvantage to suburban stores that already have shipping/transportation/parking advantages over thier inner city competition.
General idea of making it more expensive to own a car
UC: Again, this puts the environment before concerns of social equality. Why do the suggestions that make the most sense always screw the poor?
The preceeding analysis can be seen as a glass-half-empty view. The intent is to the contrary. The more likely you are to ask yourself, "Self, can you live with this consequence of this policy?" and answer "Yes I can", the more credible the policy decision becomes.
ecocites ch 10
I read chapter 10 of Ecocities which is on “Tools to fit the task.” What the author was trying to do was to illustrate several ways in which to make a city more ecologically friendly. He began with first introducing the idea of ecocity zoning. This is the process through which a city is mapped out and particular attention is paid to green areas. Zoning is described as “simply a means of letting people know what they can build and where and what sorts of activities are allowed there.”(248) In other words, it’s a way of setting a basis for the control of development so that buildings and communities are built in the most supportive way possible. Poor zoning can be corrected in six ways: planning around making everything walkable and within walking distance, creating pleasant places for pedestrians to walk and congregate, 3-D thinking allowing buildings to go up rather than out, looking at the whole system instead of the singular building, long term results, and last but not least creating agricultural open spaces. These all point to shifting a community from a car dependent and covered landscape to a more useful one such as agriculture.
There are several ways to make a community more ecological. Most cities are just built up around a main street where people drive their cars to get to and take little account of the land they are building on. To a developer, as long as they won’t get sued for building on that land, it’s ok by them. They pay no particular attention to natural aspects such as streams or old trees and couldn’t care less if these sites were destroyed. To properly develop a city, however, these sites need to be observed and emphasized and will allow more spaces for people to wander around in and relax at and will bring more people into a place where they could spend money.
Along this same idea of preserving nature is the idea of “transfer of development rights.” This is basically a land trust and allows a property holder to sell off the land, but still keep the right to build on it even after it’s sold. This allows for a piece of land to be sold without fearing that this land will be developed on, not only creating more green areas but also promoting more dense buildings as the other structures will need to make up for this lost space. There is also the idea of using TDR as a credit system allowing a developer to allocate certain pieces of land in return for more lenient building restrictions such as building a few stories higher. I think this is a very good way of getting companies to realize the advantages of preserving natural space. It also provides a way of getting this land without actually having to fight for it because if providing this open space allows for denser construction, then the developer would opt to provide green space in return for a higher return on his construction.
All these ideas center around policy changes. The rational behind enacting policy changes is that they should be able to enforce productive and sustainable development without having to sacrifice much or anything. They not only provide increased business but also can create a more lively atmosphere and improve the lifestyles of the community’s residents. It would be great if developers would do this on their own, but the trend is to build in the least difficult way possible and often there is a sacrifice in quality for profit. Policy makes it unlawful to violate the building code and forces developers to build ecologically and the result should be a more vibrant city.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Week 10/14: Ten Tools for reshaping St. Cloud, Florida
St. Cloud Florida rests at the southern tip of the Orlando metropolitan area and boasts a modest population of 30,000 residents. Like most cities in the southeastern United States, the automobile dominates the urban framework of the city as residents pay very little attention to sustainable practices or the consequences of reckless consumption. Consequently, the city perpetuates both unsustainable practices and the uninformed ideologies that encourage such practices. I have listed below several strategies for combating this feedback cycle and for introducing sustainable practices into the urban framework of the city.
1) Educate the population about sustainability. The residents (and government officials) of St. Cloud operate with very little awareness of sustainable practices. Consequently, we must educate the population and then encourage them to think holistically about issues of sustainability. Perhaps the best place to start educating the residents is within the public school system—a school system which, up until now, has paid very little attention to the natural environment. Residents must hear about sustainability on a regular basis before they can begin to make lifestyle changes or support sustainable policy.
2) Stop developing on the periphery. Period.
3) Do not allow developers to build new subdivisions without paying large impact fees and providing sufficient infrastructure. Under the current operating system, companies can develop incredibly large areas of land without having to provide any sort of additional infrastructure (parks, schools, services, etc) within the community. We should heavily tax these developers and force them to provide new infrastructure.
4) Market mass transit to the middle class. Although St. Cloud boasts an ingenious layout that would be perfect for some sort of light rail or trolley system, the city currently supplies only one form of mass transit—an unreliable and undesirable bus system. Not only should the city look into alternate forms of transportation, but it should also launch extensive marketing campaigns to encourage residents to use them.
5) Stop allowing big box businesses to enter the community. Although St. Cloud does a great job of finding new uses for abandoned big box facilities, we should not allow large corporations to dominate the physical and economic framework of the city any longer.
6) Provide free recycling for residents. The city of St. Cloud still charges its residents if they wish to recycle.
7) Find creative ways to bring the population out of commercial establishments and into public space. St. Cloud already boasts an outstanding park system that stretches two miles along the shore of Lake Toho. We simply need to market this park system to the residents and promote active living instead of mindless consumption.
8) Encourage bicycle use amongst residents who live within the city limit. Although most homes within the city limit are located very close to commercial facilities and schools, residents usually choose driving over bicycling or walking around town. Perhaps there is a creative way that we can encourage residents to stop using cars to make these short- distance trips.
9) Create some sort of carpool incentive. Many residents of St. Cloud commute to the same areas of Orando every day. These residents could easily join together in a carpooling effort.
10) Plant trees along the US 192 corridor that stretches through the heart of the city. This 5 mile strip provides a prime location for new tree plantings. Not only would such trees encourage drivers to slow down (current speed limit 45) but they would also remind residents of the importance of the natural environment.
1) Educate the population about sustainability. The residents (and government officials) of St. Cloud operate with very little awareness of sustainable practices. Consequently, we must educate the population and then encourage them to think holistically about issues of sustainability. Perhaps the best place to start educating the residents is within the public school system—a school system which, up until now, has paid very little attention to the natural environment. Residents must hear about sustainability on a regular basis before they can begin to make lifestyle changes or support sustainable policy.
2) Stop developing on the periphery. Period.
3) Do not allow developers to build new subdivisions without paying large impact fees and providing sufficient infrastructure. Under the current operating system, companies can develop incredibly large areas of land without having to provide any sort of additional infrastructure (parks, schools, services, etc) within the community. We should heavily tax these developers and force them to provide new infrastructure.
4) Market mass transit to the middle class. Although St. Cloud boasts an ingenious layout that would be perfect for some sort of light rail or trolley system, the city currently supplies only one form of mass transit—an unreliable and undesirable bus system. Not only should the city look into alternate forms of transportation, but it should also launch extensive marketing campaigns to encourage residents to use them.
5) Stop allowing big box businesses to enter the community. Although St. Cloud does a great job of finding new uses for abandoned big box facilities, we should not allow large corporations to dominate the physical and economic framework of the city any longer.
6) Provide free recycling for residents. The city of St. Cloud still charges its residents if they wish to recycle.
7) Find creative ways to bring the population out of commercial establishments and into public space. St. Cloud already boasts an outstanding park system that stretches two miles along the shore of Lake Toho. We simply need to market this park system to the residents and promote active living instead of mindless consumption.
8) Encourage bicycle use amongst residents who live within the city limit. Although most homes within the city limit are located very close to commercial facilities and schools, residents usually choose driving over bicycling or walking around town. Perhaps there is a creative way that we can encourage residents to stop using cars to make these short- distance trips.
9) Create some sort of carpool incentive. Many residents of St. Cloud commute to the same areas of Orando every day. These residents could easily join together in a carpooling effort.
10) Plant trees along the US 192 corridor that stretches through the heart of the city. This 5 mile strip provides a prime location for new tree plantings. Not only would such trees encourage drivers to slow down (current speed limit 45) but they would also remind residents of the importance of the natural environment.
10 + 1
10 + 1 tools/strategies that could help shape a 10-year + plan for sustainably transforming the transportation (and land use) infrastructure in Denver, Colorado.
Initial conditions to acknowledge and accept as necessary for change to occur…
1.) First and foremost, continuous and dynamic education about how to break out of the “automobile-dominated mind-set” is absolutely critical. Change the planning language, for instance, “Improvements,” which people negatively associate with road work, becomes “modification” (Beatley, 163). Inform the citizens of Denver that “they are living in a special ecological project” that will over the next few years become increasingly “intentionally auto-limited” (Beatley, 145). In this way, the more residents are educated about the changes and how their lives will be affected and improved, they will feel more involved and ready to “sign-on,” (even literally, for example, to live in car-free developments).
2.) Secondly, adopt an incremental piecemeal approach. Much frustration seems to come from the “chicken-and-egg” conundrum; i.e., how can we do this without this already being in place, and this depends on this, and on and on… But if we can let go of our knee-jerk reaction to give up when the going gets too complex, and just do what we need to do, things will eventually start to come together with greater and greater ease. “No single strategy or approach will be successful on its own – it is, rather, a series of interlocking strategies that will have some effect” (Beatley, 140).
Steps within the next 10 years…
3.) Participatory planning. Take the decision-making power away from just the politicians whose opinions don’t represent the greater population consensus. Make sure many groups are represented, that their suggestions are sincerely considered, and that the community needs are met to as great an extent as is possible. One example I appreciated greatly from Beatley is giving local graffiti artists facades to paint without being persecuted, but instead, empowered through being celebrated for their talent and contribution. I can definitely see this working well in Denver.
4.) A-B-C policy. Connect the city center, “A,” to the Suburban areas, “B,” to the Rural areas, “C” with a variety of public transportation options. Provide affordable, safe, conveniently located park-and-ride lots at the edges of the city limits (at location “B”). An example of how this would greatly improve my life in Denver: In Coloraodo, one of the most popular activities for residents and tourists is to travel to the mountains, especially in the winter to go skiing/snowboarding. The traffic on Interstate-70 has becoming increasingly horrific over the years, to the point where what used to be a 45 minute drive, even in poor weather conditions, is easily a 4-5 hour bumper to bumper inch by inch creep and destruction of a perfectly wonderful experience of the mountains. If I could hop onto a bus from my home in downtown Denver at 8:00 AM to connect to a light rail that passes through a few major suburbs (which geographically, it would pass through 2 or 3) on the way to the ski resorts, I could have a nice cup of coffee while reading a book or take a nap and be at the top of the ski lift by 9:00 or 9:30, as opposed to 12:00 or later. And my “ride” home instead of my“drive” will be much appreciated as I am usually exhausted!
5.) Provide safe public transportation. For women, the elderly, and children, especially at nighttime, the sense and reality of crime can be a great deterrent to using public transportation. Over the two years that I worked at a non-profit for homeless families 30 minutes from my home, I contemplated taking the bus, but kept deciding against it after hearing stories of unpleasant-to-life-threatening-instances that occurred on the infamous “15” bus that would be my route to work. Poorly-lit park-and-rides are also notorious in the Denver ara for being dangerous to walk alone after dark or have your car at risk for a break-in.
6.) Provide accessible public transportation to intergenerational passengers with a variety of abilities. For elderly, disabled, youth, and persons with strollers or carts, getting on and off busses, subways, trams, lightrail, etc., can be difficult or impossible if poorly designed. Not to mention disempowering. Design floors of public transportation vehicles to be flush with platforms for boarding and unboarding.
7.) Single tickets/ single fair systems/ “eco-tickets”/ mobility smart cards (like a debit card) / “mobility packages/ etc. with access to an extensive network of transportation options; car-share, trams, buses, light rail, PRT. By purchasing one of the various options listed, commuters are able to let go of the stress of trying to figure out which transportation is the most affordable/ accessible/ comfortable/ reliable for their personal needs. The decision-making stress itself can be a deterrent to use. I have heard friends of mine in Denver talk about the inconvenience of switching from one bus to another with the ticket transfer time is up, which has discouraged their use of public transportation, not to mention if they were to need to transfer from one type of public transport to another.
8.) Provide affordable/incentivized transportation options. In order to insure equity, these fast, affordable, reliable transportation options must be available persons from all levels of the socio-economic strata. In the current state of things, many economically disadvantaged persons are discouraged from even considering certain jobs because they don’t have a way to get there, and can’t afford to pay for any type of transportation, even a bus pass. So, by encouraging employers to provide transportation-passes as part of employment-benefits, employment opportunities are broadened, and use of and access to public transportation is increased.
9.) Implement “Proximity Power” planning strategies. Build a diversity of activities all within close proximity to each other. Having choice and convenience is one of the most powerful methods of persuasion for change from current habits and making excuses to adopting new behavior. Within Denver’s city limits there are many areas that are already attempting to include employment, housing, “services, products, environments, people, and natural features close together,” (Register 167) however; the surrounding metro areas could greatly benefit from following the lead.
10.) Large corporations to decentralize. Companies should take advantage of the increasingly internet-based-business world to “break up their mega offices and centralized functions and scatter them to satellite offices in the suburbs and small cities” and even encourage employees to work from home as much as possible. The Denver “Tech Center” is the destination for the majority of commuter traffic in the Denver-metro-area every day. Luckily, a light rail system along Interstate-25 has just opened up to the great relief of many frustrated road-ragers that have to make this daily-trek. However, the internet could potentially eliminate the need to travel this great distance completely, and increase worker satisfaction by allowing them to work out of the comfort of their own home.
11.) Build/ convert apartment/condo buildings to be car-free. As Richard Register suggests, (p 170-171) new buildings can be built and thus sold at a much lower cost without having to provide parking areas, and parking areas in existing buildings can be converted over time into more apartments, and additional uses, such as art galleries or restaurants or shops. In Denver, I believe that offering owners (and subsequently residents) financial incentives to promote car-free-living would increase in popularity in tandem with the decline of the need for a car.
Initial conditions to acknowledge and accept as necessary for change to occur…
1.) First and foremost, continuous and dynamic education about how to break out of the “automobile-dominated mind-set” is absolutely critical. Change the planning language, for instance, “Improvements,” which people negatively associate with road work, becomes “modification” (Beatley, 163). Inform the citizens of Denver that “they are living in a special ecological project” that will over the next few years become increasingly “intentionally auto-limited” (Beatley, 145). In this way, the more residents are educated about the changes and how their lives will be affected and improved, they will feel more involved and ready to “sign-on,” (even literally, for example, to live in car-free developments).
2.) Secondly, adopt an incremental piecemeal approach. Much frustration seems to come from the “chicken-and-egg” conundrum; i.e., how can we do this without this already being in place, and this depends on this, and on and on… But if we can let go of our knee-jerk reaction to give up when the going gets too complex, and just do what we need to do, things will eventually start to come together with greater and greater ease. “No single strategy or approach will be successful on its own – it is, rather, a series of interlocking strategies that will have some effect” (Beatley, 140).
Steps within the next 10 years…
3.) Participatory planning. Take the decision-making power away from just the politicians whose opinions don’t represent the greater population consensus. Make sure many groups are represented, that their suggestions are sincerely considered, and that the community needs are met to as great an extent as is possible. One example I appreciated greatly from Beatley is giving local graffiti artists facades to paint without being persecuted, but instead, empowered through being celebrated for their talent and contribution. I can definitely see this working well in Denver.
4.) A-B-C policy. Connect the city center, “A,” to the Suburban areas, “B,” to the Rural areas, “C” with a variety of public transportation options. Provide affordable, safe, conveniently located park-and-ride lots at the edges of the city limits (at location “B”). An example of how this would greatly improve my life in Denver: In Coloraodo, one of the most popular activities for residents and tourists is to travel to the mountains, especially in the winter to go skiing/snowboarding. The traffic on Interstate-70 has becoming increasingly horrific over the years, to the point where what used to be a 45 minute drive, even in poor weather conditions, is easily a 4-5 hour bumper to bumper inch by inch creep and destruction of a perfectly wonderful experience of the mountains. If I could hop onto a bus from my home in downtown Denver at 8:00 AM to connect to a light rail that passes through a few major suburbs (which geographically, it would pass through 2 or 3) on the way to the ski resorts, I could have a nice cup of coffee while reading a book or take a nap and be at the top of the ski lift by 9:00 or 9:30, as opposed to 12:00 or later. And my “ride” home instead of my“drive” will be much appreciated as I am usually exhausted!
5.) Provide safe public transportation. For women, the elderly, and children, especially at nighttime, the sense and reality of crime can be a great deterrent to using public transportation. Over the two years that I worked at a non-profit for homeless families 30 minutes from my home, I contemplated taking the bus, but kept deciding against it after hearing stories of unpleasant-to-life-threatening-instances that occurred on the infamous “15” bus that would be my route to work. Poorly-lit park-and-rides are also notorious in the Denver ara for being dangerous to walk alone after dark or have your car at risk for a break-in.
6.) Provide accessible public transportation to intergenerational passengers with a variety of abilities. For elderly, disabled, youth, and persons with strollers or carts, getting on and off busses, subways, trams, lightrail, etc., can be difficult or impossible if poorly designed. Not to mention disempowering. Design floors of public transportation vehicles to be flush with platforms for boarding and unboarding.
7.) Single tickets/ single fair systems/ “eco-tickets”/ mobility smart cards (like a debit card) / “mobility packages/ etc. with access to an extensive network of transportation options; car-share, trams, buses, light rail, PRT. By purchasing one of the various options listed, commuters are able to let go of the stress of trying to figure out which transportation is the most affordable/ accessible/ comfortable/ reliable for their personal needs. The decision-making stress itself can be a deterrent to use. I have heard friends of mine in Denver talk about the inconvenience of switching from one bus to another with the ticket transfer time is up, which has discouraged their use of public transportation, not to mention if they were to need to transfer from one type of public transport to another.
8.) Provide affordable/incentivized transportation options. In order to insure equity, these fast, affordable, reliable transportation options must be available persons from all levels of the socio-economic strata. In the current state of things, many economically disadvantaged persons are discouraged from even considering certain jobs because they don’t have a way to get there, and can’t afford to pay for any type of transportation, even a bus pass. So, by encouraging employers to provide transportation-passes as part of employment-benefits, employment opportunities are broadened, and use of and access to public transportation is increased.
9.) Implement “Proximity Power” planning strategies. Build a diversity of activities all within close proximity to each other. Having choice and convenience is one of the most powerful methods of persuasion for change from current habits and making excuses to adopting new behavior. Within Denver’s city limits there are many areas that are already attempting to include employment, housing, “services, products, environments, people, and natural features close together,” (Register 167) however; the surrounding metro areas could greatly benefit from following the lead.
10.) Large corporations to decentralize. Companies should take advantage of the increasingly internet-based-business world to “break up their mega offices and centralized functions and scatter them to satellite offices in the suburbs and small cities” and even encourage employees to work from home as much as possible. The Denver “Tech Center” is the destination for the majority of commuter traffic in the Denver-metro-area every day. Luckily, a light rail system along Interstate-25 has just opened up to the great relief of many frustrated road-ragers that have to make this daily-trek. However, the internet could potentially eliminate the need to travel this great distance completely, and increase worker satisfaction by allowing them to work out of the comfort of their own home.
11.) Build/ convert apartment/condo buildings to be car-free. As Richard Register suggests, (p 170-171) new buildings can be built and thus sold at a much lower cost without having to provide parking areas, and parking areas in existing buildings can be converted over time into more apartments, and additional uses, such as art galleries or restaurants or shops. In Denver, I believe that offering owners (and subsequently residents) financial incentives to promote car-free-living would increase in popularity in tandem with the decline of the need for a car.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)