Continuing
with my New Year’s “Intro to Urbanism” (previous posts were one, two, three, four, five, six, and seven),
today, I’ll offer a few words about how streets should function in urbanist
places.
Roads were never
fully egalitarian places. We’ve read too
many accounts of peasants being splashed by mud thrown up by the passing carriage
of nobility to believe that. (Yes, most
of the accounts are fictionalized, but the fiction was surely based on real
incidents.)
But with the
mass production of the automobile, the roles of streets moved even further from
equal access.
Goaded by
the American Automobile Association and other pro-automobile groups, the design
function of streets changed to make cars the primary users. More lanes were added, often consuming places
were bikes previously traveled. Sidewalks
were narrowed. Speeds were increased. Routes of pedestrian travel were limited.
Under the
encouragement of the AAA, jaywalking was specifically made a crime. (A former North Bay Planning Commissioner
recently asked me about the etymology of “jaywalking”. In the early 20th century, “jay” was a
synonym for “rube”, an unsophisticated person from the country. The original coinage was “jaydriver” for someone
who was unfamiliar with cars and therefore drove poorly. “Jaywalker” followed shortly and was the
coinage that stayed with us.)
The result
of the changing philosophy was that streets became places, not for living, but
solely for traveling quickly between destinations. Streets were created where bicyclists were
threatened by traffic and pedestrians, even if safe, felt uncomfortable and out
of place. And few found streets reasonable
places to chat with neighbors.
Jeff Speck,
the author of “Walkable City” calls one-way streets, designed to deliver
commuters to and from places of business with little opportunity for personal
interaction or local commerce, “sewer streets”.
Urbanism
argues for a reversal of that philosophical direction. The suggested changes can take many forms,
from fewer lanes (“road diets”) to better delineated bike lanes to changed
sidewalk configurations, such as intersection bulb-outs, to improve the
pedestrian experience. There are even
more esoteric ideas such as “woonerfs”, local streets where cars and
pedestrians has equivalent status, forcing the cars to travel at pedestrian
speeds.
There are
groups that advocate for specific goals and street changes. The Vision Zero program in New York City,
recently implemented by Mayor De Blasio, argues that pedestrian deaths should be
eliminated, with one step toward that goal being a 25 mph speed limit in much of
the city. Twenty is Plenty, mostly in
Europe, but also with proponents in the U.S., argues that the general speed
limit should be 20 mph. The Twenty is
Plenty program incorporates the desire for fewer pedestrian deaths, but seeks the
broader social goal of turning streets back into public places.
This de-emphasizing
of cars, often described by urbanists as making cities less “auto-centric”, is
a point on which supporters of suburbia often attack urbanism. In the classic strawman approach, they take
the proposed reduced emphasis on cars, suggest that urbanists prefer to
eliminate cars, and then ridicule urbanism on that basis.
But it is
truly a strawman argument. Even while
acknowledging that current model for car use is unsustainable on financial and
environmental grounds, urbanists don’t expect personal transportation systems
to go away. That would be a lifestyle
that would work neither for me nor for most of my urbanist acquaintances. Instead, it’s a matter of making places where
cars serve us, rather than building cities that serve cars.
And changing
the emphasis of streets is an essential part of that transition.
Next up, I’ll
take a break from the “Intro”, which is soon winding to a conclusion anyway,
and offer a recent set of overlapping anecdotes that show the social need for
non-automobile options.
As always,
your questions or comments will be appreciated.
Please comment below or email me.
And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)
No comments:
Post a Comment