Showing posts with label bikable streets. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bikable streets. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 13, 2015

Lessons in Walking & Cycling from Western Europe

Most of the cities in the United States evolved alongside and/or took off because of the automobile. Cities were planned and built with the car as the main mode of transportation; suburbs made possible thanks to cars. As a result we get wider streets, bigger blocks, lower density; whole metropolis areas that are excruciatingly spread out. This leads to the destruction of natural land and habitats, unsustainable development, and quite frankly it's just a waste that generates physical inefficiency on a massive scale.

European cities have been around much longer, and developed much of their infrastructure prior to the automobile being a widespread mode of transit. This is why Europe boasts cities with some of the best public transportation systems in the world. Railways were built beginning in the mid 19th century, but you can imagine before that it was just smaller dirt roads for walking and eventually horses. Early settlements weren't formally planned, rather they would have evolved on a needs basis based on accessibility by foot. Hence, comparing typical European and American cities might look like this (source):



It's no wonder that European city residents walk and bike so much more - everything is relatively close together. Few US cities use space similarly to their European counterparts - New York City, San Francisco, Boston would be the closest examples. I was thrilled to find an article comparing walking and biking trends between these places, with of course a focus on the countries that do it exceptionally well: the Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany. I pulled some great visuals from the article to check out. 


Walking and even more so biking in most US cities is simply unsafe. In addition to infrastructure that is built for and around cars, our brains and habits have been wired for driving. We've adapted to car-centric environments that largely don't incorporate any other form of transit at all, depending on where we are. Feeling safe - and knowing that our loved ones are safe - while traveling from home to school or work is probably the biggest factor in choosing a mode of transportation. If we don't have confidence in getting from point A to point B by foot or bike in a reliable manner, we won't do it. Yet ironically enough, cars are far more dangerous to life. This disconnect between perception and reality only exists because of the type of physical environment we've built and continue to build today. The good news is that many American cities are starting to catch on to opening streets to more than just cars.

Countries home to bicycle-friendly cities like Amsterdam, Copenhagen, and Berlin, where a third or even up to half of the people commute by bike, have far fewer casualties and injuries when compared to the US where a measly 3 percent travel by bike. This is a difference in infrastructure as well as habits and behavior. It is also convincing that as more people hop on their bikes, the safer the commute will become. This very trend of the "safety in numbers" has taken place in Denmark and Germany.


The article cites a number of strategies that have worked well in European cities and can encourage more walking and cycling in the US. This includes cracking down on safety; policies that promote walking and cycling but also restrict car use like auto-free zones. Bike infrastructure can look different depending on the place as long as it includes elements of comfort and safety, clearly marked bike lanes or separate paths, allowing width for more sociable rides. Right-of-ways and separate bike traffic signals, or even cycle super highways like this new one in Copenhagen, called the "Cykelslangen" or "cycle snake." Additional techniques for more biking and walking include traffic calming, integrating these trips with other methods of public transit, compact mixed-use development, introducing these concepts from an early age, more training, traffic regulations, and broader policies like road capacity, limiting park spaces, and taxes on cars and fuel. Finally it's necessary to keep in mind that a combination of techniques are needed to have successful rates of walking and biking, and no one strategy should be used. American cities have a few fantastic models, but we shouldn't expect to get the same results by duplicating something else. Each city must formulate what will work best for its people, because only those people come first... and last!


Sources:
The New Climate Economy / Chapter on Cities
Transportation Research News / Walking and Cycling in Western Europe and the US 

Another interesting opinion:
Yale Environment 360 / On Biking, Why Can't the US Learn Lessons from Europe 

Friday, May 1, 2015

Early Observations of San Francisco



It's hard to believe I visited San Francisco this past January 2015 before taking the real plunge in moving to the city the following month. I had been here once before in September 2011 for a tournament with my college soccer team (doesn't count, right?). Little did I know I would be back to stay, and so quick to fall in love with this place for so many reasons. The above picture was taken in January because I was so exited to finally be here and to start making observations on the minute details of the city that I have such an eye for. Unfortunately, I haven't had many pictures to follow this (hence my falling behind on intended posts). And there was also the whole "finding a place to live in the most expensive and housing-competitive city in the country" that was a distracting priority. It's almost as if I've stopped noticing many of the details that make this city amazing, and maybe that was okay too, because that's exactly what makes life in here that great. Natives or people who are accustomed to this lifestyle may not understand what makes this place tick. People who just experience living here shorter term question why they would ever leave and ask what was so wrong (different) about back home.
On a different note, that may be the best part: the chance to be and become a part of the routine, because I notice these things. I won't ever fail to recognize that I am living in what is quite possibly the closest to my dream world, every single day. These realizations have created the opportunity for me to be more conscious and mindful of what I do and see on a daily basis, with the goal of sharing my experiences here on this blog.

Some of my first observations of this city:
  • The "Green Wave" that has traffic signals set for 13 mph - the average speed of a bike. Convenience for bikes is favored over cars.  
  • The density. San Francisco is 7 miles by 7 miles. It's a growing city. Everything must be built close, in between, or on top of something else.
  • That makes it really easy to walk, bike, transit, etc. places (the most you would ever need to travel to get from one end of the city to the other is... 7 miles!)
  • Suburban sprawl doesn't and physically cannot exist. Therefore big box stores and parking lots do not exist (my biggest eyesores!)
  • Public transportation is almost too easy. So much variety! The electric buses are cool and it shows that the city cares about air pollution.
  • It's annoying and expensive to own a car here. Parking? Traffic? No thanks. 
  • Then again people love their benz and beamers...money. But there are also many homeless people - the whole range is present.
  • I expected more bicyclists. In my opinion, not enough people bike and/or the city could be doing more for bike commuters. Catering for hobby cyclists and tourists?
  • The neighborhoods (!!) filled with contrasting vibes and people that allow the blending of diverse communities together.
  • Oh yeah, and the weather is phenomenal.

For those of you who still check back and follow, thanks for sticking with me! Much much more to come,

Kristin

Monday, December 8, 2014

The Bikeable Suburbs of Copenhagen and Munich

Suburbs in Munich and Copenhagen are designed around and for diverse means of transportation. In contrast to this, the trend in American suburbs has been design around and for automobiles; travel by car is the only means of transportation built into the infrastructure, creating dependency on cars, unsafe roadways and traffic. 

Since I have a strange obsession with urban cores and like to focus my attention away from suburbs (especially American suburbs, simply because I think they are characterless and ugly - wide, spread out lots and streets with cookie-cutter houses give me anxiety), I can't help but to notice how differently the suburbs in Europe evolved in terms of planning, design, and function.

A few pictures will help. 

Brøndby, Denmark (suburb of Copenhagen)


Peds, Bikes, Cars/Buses
Barrier between bike lane and street for added safety
Street obstacles force cars to slow down
Slower traffic increases safety to encourage bikers
One-car-at-a-time


Vaterstetten and Baldham, Germany (suburb of Munich) 

CLICK ME
Paths for Sunday afternoon walks
Roadway incorporates greenery
Smaller streets = slower traffic
Mirrors help see around corners
Designated "Play Street" - more on this later
Mixed streets, varying priority for people/bikes and cars
Several non-car "secret passage ways"
Watch for bikes
Watch for peds
Sidewalk for peds, street for bikes and cars
Cars never drive fast down these roads
This stoplights only purpose is to stop traffic for peds
Open for all kinds of traveling
Similar road blocks in the street as Denmark

Not many pictures are needed of American suburbs since they all pretty much look alike (images from Google).





How does one walk or bike around in this mess???