Jarrett Walker comes up with another brilliant post on Sprawl Repair – a process by which utterly car-dependent landscapes could be transformed into something more walkable and transit-friendly, and thus more resilient.
A process of “sprawl repair” should start, perhaps, with a series of steps aimed at repairing the arterial, starting with the realisation that the arterial’s straightness and speed become an asset if transit can operate reliably….
Instead of waiting until it’s really expensive, as Los Angeles did, what if we take early, gradual, inexpensive steps to make our arterials safe and attractive for transit? That doesn’t mean ripping up our single-family neighborhoods, but it does mean rethinking our arterials so that they’re safe and attractive places for pedestrians, and so that they provide appropriate levels of priority to transit. …
Mostly, we just need to stitch things together so that people can walk and cycle more safely, both to complete local trips and to get to transit stops. It means making sure that at every transit stop, there’s a protected way to cross the street, because you can’t use transit for a round trip unless you can use stops on both sides of the street.
It means adding pedestrian links to cul-de-sac neighborhoods, so that they are through-routes for bicycles and pedestrians while remaining cul-de-sacs for cars. And it means making sure that the design of bus stops and transit priority conveys a clear message that transit riders are valued as citizens, and appreciated for the contribution they make to a sustainable and functional city.
Jarrett then gives a case study on how to do it, using Fresno, CA, as an example – a city that could boom in the event of a high-speed rail connection, and has the chance to do it right before congestion makes anything else expensive and politically impossible.
“… our priority is basic safety, functionality, and civility. We’ll incorporate quality design wherever we can do so affordably. But our first focus is on improvements that will scale to the size of the problem. And there’s a whole lot of sprawl to repair.”
“It means making sure that at every transit stop, there’s a protected way to cross the street, because you can’t use transit for a round trip unless you can use stops on both sides of the street … it means making sure that the design of bus stops and transit priority conveys a clear message that transit riders are valued as citizens, and appreciated for the contribution they make to a sustainable and functional city.”
Main Street’s easy-crossing, bus shelters and transit priority would be great for all of Vancouver. I wonder what the hold up is.
One of the things he talks about in the article is stop spacing of 400 meters, not 100 meters or sometimes less as exists in most of Vancouver. I think it’s time Translink took a close look at stop spacing throughout the region on all the local bus routes, and at least increased the average to 200 to 300 meters or so. We could start having a discussion around that, and if necessary try it out on a single route first, so we can get some hard numbers on what kind of speed and reliability improvements and cost savings we might see. Especially considering the financial bind Translink is in right now, this could help them free up extra cash, as faster buses mean less buses are needed to provide the same level of service.
I completely agree Tessa. I used to live within a 5 minute walk of Brentwood Skytrain Station and worked out in Newton. The train would get me to Surrey in 25 minutes or so. Then I would wait for an overcrowded milk run to my office that would average 25-30 minutes for a 6km trip. I started ‘treating’ myself to one driving day per week, then two…
Another issue I have is the number of routes. Decrease the number of routes, decrease the number of stops and increase the frequency. Making the arterials reliable transit corridors allow this.
If one could one day, hug or feel cosier with the many downtown, one-way, 4-lane arterial roads here in Calgary..
Vancouverites and Torontonians should thank themselves for progress, no matter how slow/fast in improving several downtown streets for traffic calming, pedestrian and cycling safety, as well as encouraging livability with other forms of non-car transport. One really needs to live here in Calgary to understand.
The sad thing is that the fast flowing downtown car traffic volume only peaks for a few hrs. per day. The rest of the time, the road lanes are under-utilized. Not sure, but perhaps the situation here is a deeply embedded legacy of an oil-rich, energy-rich province.
Like Toronto and Vancouver, there is ongoing demand to improve and expand the transit system to meet an ever-expanding population –but lack of sufficient funds.
But the good thing is that there is a pedestrianized downtown street segment that is closed off to traffic. Something that downtown Vancouver has not yet achieved permanently.