Recently, I was interviewed by The Tyee, BC’s leading online news publication, regarding cycling culture and infrastructure in Metro Vancouver. I’ve pasted the article below.

———

Cyclist demand could help improve infrastructure

Last night, I had the chance to speak at a ubc alumni event entitled “Is there a light at the end of the tunnel: solutions to Surrey’s transportation quagmire.” The event was a panel discussion where myself, along with Mr. Clark Lim, a former transportation planer with TransLink and current PhD student at UBC, fielded questions and comments about both surrey’s and the larger fraser valley’s transportation woes. We had a great turn out of around 60 people who were very engaged and excited to talk about the subject (always a great thing to see).

At the onset I was able to give a brief overview of some of the local transportation research coming out of UBC. I touched on the idea that many of our transportation problems are the product of our daily travel behaviour which, in turn, is directly influenced by the way we plan and built our town and cities.I highlighted some key findings of recent research coming out of UBC that has explored the link between land use and travel patterns, physical activity and travel-related emissions. Of note:

• Adults living in the top 25% most walkable areas in Metro Vancouver were between 2 and 3 times more likely to walk or take transit for any home-based trip compared to those in the least walkable neighbourhoods;
• Adults living in the top 25% most walkable neighbourhoods drive approximately 58% less than those in more auto-oriented areas;
• Residents living in the top 25% most walkable areas in Metro Vancouver and Greater Victoria were half as likely to be overweight than those in the least walkable neighbourhoods;
• Persons who felt they had many shops within easy walking distance were more than twice as likely to meet recommended physical activity requirements compared with those who did not.

The first two points are from a study entitled “Active Transportation Benefits of Walkable Approaches to Community Design in Metro Vancouver” which was completed by myself and Dr. Lawrence Frank with funding from the BC Recreation and Parks Association. The last two findings are found in “Promoting Physical Activity through Healthy Community Design,” a study funded by the Vancouver Foundation and prepared by Dr. Frank, Megan Winters, Brian Patterson and Cora Craig.

This work and others like it are helping to shape a local evidence base that supports the notion that encouraging less driving and increasing alternative forms of travel starts with planning and building places that make walking attractive, convenient and appropriate. 

You can download a copy of my presentation here. The event was also recorded as a podcast that can be downloaded at the iTunes Canada store

every year, vancouver is drenched in praise from around the world for it’s leadership in sustainability, urban design and quality of life. certainly, a key element helping contribute to many of these achievements is the city’s equally well-recognized built environment. the downtown core is one of the most walkable and livable neighbourhoods in all of north america. a lack of freeways and heavy investment in traffic calming has helped discourage car use and foster a culture of active transportation and public transit. the introduction and spread of citizen planning committees in the 1970s gave residents an outlet to be engaged in the growth and development of their own neighbourhoods and molded strong community pride and ownership.

vancouver’s reputation, and the means that have helped to shape it, did not happen by accident. they are the products of visionaries who were not afraid to challenge more dominant but by no means appropriate paradigms of the time. two big ones that come to mind are the urban renewal policies of the 1960s and the stifling, top-down, and unbureacratic planning approaches of the 1970s. surely, if vancouver followed the lead of cities like atlanta or buffalo, i would not be sitting here writing this today.

this acknowledgment, however, yields a very important observation. the foundations of vancouver’s success today is in large part due to the actions of the past. and so, it is logical to ask, then, where is vancouver and the greater vancouver region headed today? or, better yet, are we doing enough to maintain the understructure laid by those before us? does creativity and ingenuity continue to play a key role in the maturation of our city or the growth of the city’s outlying areas? or has the city or region as a whole fallen victim to a sort of apathetic mentality that in turn fosters a similar attitude in its people and development patterns?

these are important questions that need to be tackled if vancouver and it’s surrounding areas are to remain sustainable and livable well into the future. i’d like to explore this idea over the course of this year. while i don’t have a ‘game plan’ on how to tackle it just yet i am leaning towards breaking the question down into smaller, more workable parts like themes. of course, i would love to hear any feedback you might have on the topic of vancouver’s future as well.

stay tuned.

the globe and mail is reporting that the freshly-minted obama administration will soon push through policy allowing individual u.s. states to control their own tailpipe emissions. the announcement comes after years of lobbying by california and 13 other states that fell on deaf ears in the bush administration.

there’s no doubt that such an announcement will ruffle some feathers. i can already hear the arguments that  the policy will force vehicle manufacturers to spend billions of dollars and countless other resources to meet dozens of different emission standards from michigan to florida to oregon. but looking at the policy from a more rational and economic perspective what’s more likely to happen will be that the highest common denominator will become the de facto national standard and the one that car manufacturer’s will likely plan and design for (here’s looking at you california).

that being the case, though, i can see the real potential for a real bureaucratic nightmare. letting individual states essentially compete to push forward the ‘golden’ standard may be a huge waste of resources, research and taxpayer dollars. given that, the more appropriate course of action may have been for the obama administration to enact nation-wide standards comparable to those in california or washington.

either way, it’s pretty good news. once the new standards are in place the united states will hopefully start to see some big improvements in air quality and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. so too will canada as the regulations start to trickle north of the border. clean fuel technology should become cheaper and more accessible as it is used in all new cars.

of course, these benefits will only be incurred if we haven’t outgrown our affinity with motoring and already switch to far cleaner modes of transportation like walking, cycling and public transit. without more walkable cities and efficient and accessible mass transit systems, though, this may be a long way off, what with the increased spending in roads and highways in the name of economic recovery, and we’ll have to just settle for cleaner (but still noisy and obstructive) cars and trucks.

cbc, bbc, and the times (uk) are all reporting on a recent study by harvard physicist Alex Wissner-Gross demonstrating, albeit probably through very painstaking calculations, that running two google searches releases the same amount of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere as boiling a kettle of tea, about 7g of CO2.

this is certainly interesting stuff, in a very nerdy, academic kind-of-way. but lets get real here. the fact that such minuscule pollution associated with ‘googling’ is making major headlines around the world represents a disheartening distraction from much more pressing emission-related issues that all too often go ignored in mainstream media. these are, of course, the fact that most of us drive too much, eat food from halfway around the world, live in bigger houses and consume way too much stuff.

if we want to make real headway in reducing emissions, we need to get people thinking about how they can change their behaviour and actions when it comes to these ‘big ticket items’, not whether or not they should open up google to peruse for a bootlegged copy of the new U2 single.

i’m a bit of a sucker for the small things, the fine detail. so i was mildly stoked when i came across a european design firm’s new concept for traffic and pedestrian signals.

the square design is supposed to help make the signals more easily noticeable and recognizable, with larger lit area for the same overall dimensions. i love the bright colour of the signal lighting and the sleek nature of the infrastructure itself. i could see these really fitting in with the urban fabric in downtown vancouver, especially were weather conditions (dark, rain and sleet) often make it difficult to see the existing traffic lights. what really strikes me, though, is the design attention devoted the pedestrian signals. i enjoy the clean and crisp crossing countdown.

more information and images at art lebedev studios.

does the north american auto industry deserve a bailout, a heaping lump sum of tax payer money delivered to their front door?

it depends.

this is stagnant, troubled industry, namely because of it’s seeming refusal over the last half century to want to change the way they do business. this is an industry that has made many north american’s believe that larger, gas guzzling cars and trucks are what every one of us needs. this is an industry that has spent millions of dollars lobbying against federal fuel-economy standards and are suing to overturn the emissions standards imposed by California and other states. this is an industry that let more progressive companies like honda and toyota walk all over them. if the industry maintains it’s present course, a bailout certainly won’t help fix this mess.

instead, what’s needed is a change from within, a shift in thinking about travel and transportation. at the most fundamental level, this change starts with the auto industry reorienting it’s operations to deliver transportation as a means, not as an end in and of itself. what might this entail? it could mean these companies partnering with other industries to help develop high speed inter-urban rail vehicles, energy and fuel efficient intra-city buses, and other systems that would improve travel options and alternatives for everyone, reduce global warming and our dependency on dirty fossil fuel, minimize accidents, and generally improve the way we live.it could also mean a new lobbying role for automakers – i mean transportmakers – pushing for state/provincial and municipal officials to plan for better, more compact and walkable cities and towns that are required to support alternative transport modes.

this shift in thinking should not need to translate into job loss. in fact, i believe new opportunities for re-training of existing staff and personal and re-tooling of plant operations may emerge. so to would new marketing and sales opportunities.

a financial bailout could certainly help kick start such a paradigm shift. but before any money is given away, the auto industry – i mean transportmakers – need to be serious about becoming progressive. business plans need to be developed and presented to government showing timelines for the development of new transportion options, re-tooling operations, re-training staff, etc.

this is a daunting but also exciting opportunity for the re-invetion of the transportation industry. surprisingly, i think things are so bad that the auto industry is perhaps finally up for the challenge. however, whether these actions are too little too late to help our crumbling cities and environment is another post for another day.

]]> http://therenewedcity.wordpress.com/2008/11/26/thoughts-on-bailouts/feed/ 0 therenewedcity http://therenewedcity.wordpress.com/2008/10/20/weathering-the-storm-where-are-the-safe-havens-in-urban-canada/ http://therenewedcity.wordpress.com/2008/10/20/weathering-the-storm-where-are-the-safe-havens-in-urban-canada/#comments Mon, 20 Oct 2008 18:56:45 +0000 therenewedcity http://therenewedcity.wordpress.com/?p=74 ]]>

it is apparent that a canadian recession cometh or, at least, an economic tailspin. to be fair, although government and business leaders are working hard to avoid such a scenario, certain areas of the country are likely to feel deep and prolonged economic wounds. the question is which areas of the nation are better positioned to cope with a pending economical ’shock and awe’ storm?

recent work in the united states, the epicenter of the current crisis, suggests the answer to this question lies in the make up of local economies. it’s the jobs, stupid! research by philadelphia’s reinvestmet fund in collaboration with policymap.com has identified the best places to live during a recession. their criteria? places where large portions of the population worked in anticyclical industries such as government, health care, education, agriculture, and legal services. the so-called “safe industries.” indeed, medical care is in demand in good times and bad. people might feel the pinch and avoid eating out in dreary economic times, but people stilll need to eat and so farmers and grocery stores should remain afloat. dido government and education.

looking at this list, what’s interesting is that most, if not all, may be classified as those ‘creative’ industries as identified by richard florida. of course, other creative sectors may suffer, namely visual graphic design, entertainment, and computing, just to name a few.

the philadelphia’s reinvestmet fund positions cities like arlington virgina, boston, and seattle as stable and sufficiently “rotected” to weather a rececession, albeit not a prolonged one.

but what about canada? where are the safe havens north of 60? urban areas like toronto, ottawa, victoria, and montreal should be well-positioned considering high employment in education, health, law and government. those areas reliant on manufacturing or resource-based industries may suffer, places like oshawa, windsor and thunder bay in ontario. edmonton in alberta. not too mention all the smaller towns in between. these are, of course, only my personal observations and inclinations. a more thorough and accurate list could be revealed by exploring census numbers from statistics canada. perhaps a project for the coming rainy weekend?

canadian cities and uban regions, if they haven’t already done so, need to heed warmings about a pending ecnomic crisis and turn their attention towards strategies and actions to help protect local employment at risk of collapsing and attracting more stable, creative industries.

the city of toronto is putting the pedestrian first. in a unique show of respect and support, the city began allow pedestrian scrambles on it’s busiest downtown intersection – yonge and dundas. read up on the news coverage here.

pedestrian scrambles allow pedestrians at all corners of the intersection to to cross in any direction — side to side, or corner to corner for close to 30 seconds while vehicle traffic comes to a complete standstill. pedestrians are also allowed to cross in the conventional way, in the same direction as traffic, when vehicles are using the intersection.

this gesture is a great move on the city’s part. they’re making it know that pedestrians and number one in this town and that the car is loosing it’s longstanding position at the top of the pedestal.

vancouver and other cities in the country really need to start thinking small in their plans to put pedestrians first. sure, large scale supporting infrastructure is important and required but the little things like this are those acts that really make us, the pedestrian, feel safe, important and respected.

the dire situation of increasing congestion, air pollution and squandered suburban land facing many canadian cities and regions begs the need for proactive solutions not complacency or band-aid action plans. perhaps surprisingly, toronto and it’s surrounding municipalities appear to be making the most headway in this regard.

the toronto star has reported numerous times over the past year that metrolinx, greater toronto’s transit authority, is detailing a series of scenarios for reducing car use, in the latest stage of developing a regional transportation plan. the most ambitious vision would cost $90 billion over 25 years. initiatives include a focus on making active transportation opportunities easier and more accessible, road tolls, parking fees and an influx in spending on creating a more cohesive and efficient transit network. together and, really only together, would these initiatives make it easier, more appropriate and cheaper to switch to more sustainable modes of transportation.

these types of action plans are controversial. that’s because they attempt to go beyond mere band-aid initiaties, those that strive to remedy a problem without tackling the real source or underlying cause. when it comes to air pollution and congestion, the problem is car use not highway capacity.

in this sense, metrolinx has the right idea. but what about vancouver? it too is suffering from increasing traffic congestion and air pollution. and translink’s (metrolinx west coast equivalent) solution to this? sweeping investment in new bridges and highways. their rationalization? give people more space to drive will means less congestion and less idling-related air pollution.

many studies have disproved that logic. yet it maintains a standard option for regions suffering from rising congestion and air pollution. and, really, why wouldn’t it? it’s an easy solution that keeps the voters happy. they get brand new highways that will be all but clogged again soon enough and the car maintains it’s status as the preeminent cheap, convenient and accessible mode of transportation.

air pollution and congestion are tough, intricate problems that require tough action plans to mitigate. the more we make vehicle use easier, the less headway we will make on creating a more sustainable region. toronto’s bold steps to tackle the problem at the source should be seen as a positive example that other governments could follow. hey, nobody said this would be easy ….