Creating Livable Cities
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2010-09-16/creating-livable-cities
Cities in the U.S. and around the world are discovering the economic and social benefits of improved urban spaces. Diane and guests discuss how bike lanes, pedestrian plazas, and attention to scale can transform city life.
Guests
Thomas Murphy
senior resident fellow at the Urban Land Institute and former mayor of Pittsburgh, 1994-2006.
Jan Gehl
founder, Gehl Architects-Urban Quality Consultants
Kristina Ford
chief of staff, Office of Facilities, Infrastructure and Community Development, city of New Orleans
Barbara McCann
executive director, National Complete Streets Coalition
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Diane,
There has been considerable research effort going towards understanding the effect green spaces have on the psychology of those living in urban environments. Could your guests please comment on what they know about the future of incorporating green space in cities?
Thank you,
Eve Miller
Salt Lake City, UT
Certain U.S. cities have this now. What will need to be done so that more cities and counties in the U.S. can have 8% to 10% and maybe more peak period commuter traffic on bicycles, including bicycle/transit trips?
I'm excited every time I see and hear a new way to make space for bikes, but some of the ideas seem to not quite connect with the others. For example, the Pennsylvania Ave bike lane, which is reallllly nice, is in the center of the road and asks cyclists to turn left using the crosswalks -- which puts me on the wrong side of the street to continue. Not a big deal, but how are all the different ideas supposed to connect? Trying to follow the rules gets very confusing when they change from block to block, and I think the safEST thing a cyclist can do is be predictable to other traffic.
Hooray!!
One of your guest is right - the "planners" aren't the problem, it is the political will (both the public and the elected officials). Because the elected officials vote to adopt these standards and they as an elected body won't do it. Its partly vision and partly cost.
Thanks for a great show.
Tammara Tracy
Indianapolis, IN
The cities where the US will be raising children, living and working for the next hundred years are crucial to the well-being of the environment AND the social and mental health of the coming generations. Kids and elderly need somewhere to go and a way to get there that does not involve driving, or else, everyone will be living only thru TV and computer screens. I have heard and read livable cities advocates for decades, yet I am very disappointed that still this is virtually an invisible issue on the political and legal stages of the country
To bring some humor to this conversation, the Onion just wrote a hilarious article:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/84-million-new-yorkers-suddenly-realize...
Kevin
Detroit, MI
Such a great topic, and something I wish St. Louis was far friendlier about. This area is very unfriendly towards those not in four-wheeled cages. Bikers are viewed as pests. Walking to your destination is almost always impractical due to either distance or the fact that the streets themselves are incredibly dangerous to pedestrians.
It has gotten so bad here that there are areas, especially in some of the suburban sprawl in St. Charles, that are considering actually BANNING bicycles and pedestrians from using surface streets. I know that St. Louis is not alone in this. The reason given is that the streets are too curvy and hilly, and are already dangerous for cars... do your guests have any thoughts to this potential precedent? Does it not seem that instead of banning those not in cars, that perhaps the road should be redesigned... maybe even using some of that stimulus money out there?
Hi Diane:
I'd like to have your guests talk about the tug of war that planners find themselves in while trying to balance the push from the politicians to accomplish a certain agenda and the pull from the local NIMBY (not in my back yard) who are opposed to any change. As a planner for the past 10 years this has been my greatest challenge to implementing great neo-traditional ideas and moving in a more sustainable direction.
Tanya Sejour,
Cooper City
One of the gems of the city parks is Oglebay Park just north of Wheeling WV
Separating cyclists from other traffic (motorized) creates more problems than it solves, especially at intersections; a suitable solution is for bicyclists to be considered part of the traffic, which means cyclists must be predictable and must follow all the rules of the road, same as motorists.
Marvon
Lansing Michigan
Ms. Rehm,
It is my considered opinion that the key to creating pedestrian neighborhoods in the United States is to create sufficent activity supports within walking distance. For a neighborhood, the magnitude of sufficeint activity supports may be represented by the typical size of neighborhood shopping centers. The number of households that need to be within walking distance of these activity supports may be about same number of households within a typical neighborhood shopping centers market area. The residential density for a pedestrian neighborhood [ say a .25 mile radius] must reasonably amount to the same n umber of households in a neighborhood shopping center market area [say 1.5 mile radius].
Please solicit your guest's opinions on this observation.
Just came back from Portland, OR. It is an amazing, livable city. Large areas in the downtown with well preserved buildings with many new residential buildings with condos and rentals. Many green areas interspersed between buildings. Also, the city has taken the stimulus money and devoted it to major expansion of their public transit system...new streetcars tracks being built throughout the city; light rails, and buses. What a wonderful city. I sent an email to the mayor of St. Louis suggesting that he visit Portland to see what a city should look like. People are rightfully very proud of their city.
Ron Gorman
SteveCostello: Sorry about St. Louis. I use the old Soviet Union critique that Americans have (as a civil right) freedom of movement. To make Freedom of Movement a reality here we need pedestrian and bicycle trails, paths, lanes, whatever between every city and town and within each municipality. This infrastructure should always remain a strong focus of economic stimulus, community service, public works and volunteerism. This is one good way to teach people how to advocate for and work for freedom. I myself felt trapped except for car travel in my old home near Dallas, NC after I was struck by a protruding conduit on a truck while riding my bike on a two lane road. People are not ready to accept bicycle traffic and need to be actively informed, maybe by riding a bike themselves. It is no fun regaining consciousness in a ditch with multiple injuries.
After you read The Trouble with City Planning: What New Orleans Can Teach Us and Cities for People, check out the 1970's classic A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction, which will open your eyes to seeing in cities and buildings around you what is already working well.
Diane,
A local columnist in Lansing has suggested that legislators should facilitate the City of Detroit being redefined as Wayne County to expand the tax base and save the City, as is the case in other large and vital cities. He states there will be an initial increase in the tax burden of the surrounding areas, but argues it will save Detroit. Is a viable solution for Detroit?
In Reidsville, NC, the local hospital has a foundation which offered Reidsville the "All-American City" $900,000 to use to build and extend a greenway trail 3 miles to it's municipal lake, which would double our greenway trails. The foundation was offering it as a health awareness project. The city decided to divert the funds to curb, gutter and sidewalk a street that gets little or no foot traffic and pay raises. I and others of interest in greenway trails wrote the city councel members with our concerns as well as the foundation to warn of the mis-use of the intended use of the funds. As a result, the city rejected the offer from the foundation to add to our greenway trails.
It is sad to see small towns wanting to improve the lives of it's citizens ignoring what larger cities are doing to improve their community.
Twenty years ago, a group of citizens of the city of Scottsdale, Arizona went to the city with an offer to save the McDowell Mountains and the surrounding Sonoran Desert from the cities explosive development. They suggested the creation of an urban preserve, and offered to provide the volunteers to maintain the preserve if the city would purchase the land. The citizens of Scottsdale twice taxed themselves to purchase the land, As a result,today we enjoy 16000 plus acres of mountains and hiking trails which are cared for by only 3 city employees and over 400 plus volunteers of the McDowell Sonoran Conservancy. In the 2010 fiscal year, the Conservancy provided the equivalent of over $800,000 in volunteer service.
In near future we hope to expand the Preserve to 35000 plus acres with the purchase of State Trust Lands.
I think this is an example of people willing to pay for a healthy life style through self taxation and a city farsighted enough to make it happen.
Cities need to consider people with disabilities, no matter how contentious the arguments about it get. The population is aging, and this population's bodies will begin to break down as time goes by. If you think it is difficult to get around on a bike or walking with an able body, imagine what it is like to try to get around in a manual wheelchair. For example, every intersection that has a curb cut on one side and not on the other means I have to travel in the street until I find a sidewalk I can get back on to.
Many disabled people do not drive, and our lives suffer for it. As anyone who uses public transit knows, it can take an incredibly long time to get where you need to go. People with disabilities often have pain and fatigue issues, and it is difficult to travel for a long time with these conditions.
Positively rethinking public space requires an understanding that streets are public space - in cities, as much as 80%+ of assets are dedicated almost exclusively to the use of people in cars and to the exclusion of people on foot, on bicycles or in wheelchairs.
New York City has demonstrated an exceptional understanding of this and is making NYC 'livable' by repurposing what they already have. Every city has public streets and therefore, every city can have more parks (even temporary ones like Summer Streets) and more connectivity (through bicycle facilities, crosswalks). NYC's exceptionalism is not an excuse for other cities to not learn from their example.
An important byproduct of getting more people in the streets but also out of cars is a reduced dependency on social services. 'Eyes on the street' help law enforcement, physical activity combined with transportation reduces congestion and, eventually, taxes less our public health services. It could hardly make more sense to invest in improved urban spaces.
I wonder how many people who comment will drop an email to their local DOT and/or policymaker/s with a line of support for investing in urban space for people outside of cars? Here's my pledge to do just that.
Thank you for the effective programming.
I heard this segment this morning and cheered on the discussion of encouraging alternative modes of transit, but the idea of putting parked cars between bike lanes and traffic, which Diane and guests all thought was brilliant, would be an extremely bad idea for many reasons. (1) The lane would have to be very wide to allow room for bikes to pass outside the door zone. Being doored can result in very serious injury and is a major hazard, especially for inexperienced cyclists who are tempted to ride too close to cars. There would need to be enough room for cyclists to pass slower cyclists without entering the door zone. Bike lanes are rarely anywhere near that wide in this country. (2) As marvinw noted, having cyclists pop out from behind the cars into traffic is very dangerous at intersections. Poorly designed bike lanes have resulted in many deaths, including one in DC only a few years ago, as cyclists find themselves in a right turn lane where they can be nearly invisible to turning cars. The parked car barrier would exacerbate this risk. (3) Inexperienced cyclists will be tempted to ride too close to the curb, especially if the lane is not wide enough. When they hit the curb, they'll fall. (4) This bike lane design would be very dangerous to passengers in the parked cars. I'm sure Diane and her guests are thinking of weekend cyclists puttering around at 10mph, but serious cyclists cruise at 20-25mph or faster. Unless people exiting the parked car are very attentive, they risk serious injury to themselves and the passing cyclists.
Transportation cyclists can easily ride at speeds of 15-25+ mph. Recognizing a hazard and braking can take more than two car lengths on clean dry pavement. Cyclists need to ride 5 feet away from parked cars to avoid running into a car door suddenly in their path.
Most car/bicycle wrecks result from cyclists riding against traffic, on sidewalks, too close to parked cars, and motorists and cyclists turning across each others paths. Some bikelane designs actually increase the risk of these incidents.
Cycling in the road, following the same rules as motor vehicles is the cheaper, safer alternative in many cases. All you need is a little education.
What a fantastic program and guest lineup! These questions are the reason I became a planner--it is true that there are lots of fantastic ideas out there, and much that is already working that we need to notice and build upon. As a native Michigander now living in a car-heavy Sunbelt city, I see civic action and political will as essential to making towns more livable. I even wrote a thesis on public spaces, inspired by Gehl's ideas--thank you for bringing him to the American public!