I love this picture comparison. I saw it in a previous class
and still enjoy it as a great depiction of bike, car, and bus. It really paints
a great picture of the efficient use of space for the same amount of people –
be it in a 300 horse power automobile, a man powered bicycle, or a large bus.
Also, as we discuss more in class about this topic, including the corresponding
reading, I begin to like it even more. The Dutch government’s national location
policy called the A-B-C policy, is an excellent example of ways to reduce auto
use and support public transit. Here is an example of each of the types of
locations:
A-locations:
Public
transit locations that are situated I city-centers close to the main railway
station that are not easy to reach by car and that have limited parking
facilities.
B-locations:
Public
transit locations that are easy to reach both by public transport and by car
and that are often situated close to a suburban railway station or near other
high-quality public transport modes.
C-locations:
Locations
that are situated on the outskirts of the city with a direct connection to the
trunk road network and that are more difficult to reach by public transport.
This is important for land use and developing infrastructure
to support those uses.
Also, in our
reading and discussions in class, I am learning a lot about European countries
being the driving force of transit cities that are excellent examples for
American cities to follow. I think there is a lot we can learn from Zurich,
especially their marketing through sporting event tickets including transit
cost in the price. As previously described in an earlier blog entry, Freiburg
is a pioneering example for sure of a green city, not just with transit. However,
it is interesting to learn this complementary information to my earlier blog
entry about Freiburg’s current traffic development plan. It was adopted in
Parliament in 1989 and its four aims are:
1.
Reducing motor car traffic in the town;
2.
Giving priority to environmental friendly
traffic: bikes, public transport, and pedestrians;
3.
Promoting traffic calming everywhere, except for
a few main roads; and
4.
Restricting parking for cars.
It really is amazing how integrated the transportation
system is in Freiburg and the thought of visiting such an amazing and beautiful
place excites me. Someday I hope I can travel there and stay for at least a
week or so. Hopefully I can make do without knowing hardly any Dutch.
As my thoughts wander and I gather them, today’s discussion
and reading were intriguing and encouraging. A quote I really like from the
reading was in Green Urbanism on page 125, “Many of these European cities
illustrate a concern with not simply improving and enhancing transit, but also
providing it in the least ecologically damaging way.” This goes to show that
while efficient transportation systems are important to these nations, they
also want to find the best ways to optimize them for the highest efficiency
while mitigating their effects on the environment. UTA really needs a crash
course slap in the face with that concept!
Also, I learned about the “energy-efficient features” of a
new braking system that recovers and stores energy from braking. This new
system is shocking but really awesome! And it points towards the idea in our
Ecological Design book that we need to change in EVERY single aspect. I think this is a great idea of a
transition strategy.
I really like the quote on page 129, “Public transit will
never be attractive unless it’s fast and reliable.” It’s true – we need to have
public transit be just as amazing and exciting as the automobile. It’s amazing
to think that “One third of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions are
transportation-related” (pg. 130 in the Ecology of Place). Wow, that means that
transportation plays a huge role in climate change and the greenhouse gas
effect from CO2 emissions into the atmosphere.
We need to design public transportation in a way that makes
it cheap, fun, and more appealing than driving around in the car.
No comments:
Post a Comment