|
|
Do we need to remove highways and parking to improve transit?Some suggest that if we wait "until transit is better" before taking significant measures to restrict automobile traffic in cities, it will never happen. Consider the following editorial from the Toronto Star. What do you think? A way to create a better city Keep the Gardiner until transit better Editorial, Sept. 30. What is "better?" How much "better" does it have to get? Taking down the Gardiner is not just about traffic, it is about developing a great waterfront. It is about eliminating man-made barriers to link the city and, most importantly, it is about making a bold statement that the government and the people of Toronto are willing to take the necessary steps to create a world-class city. It is about the Toronto that we want to have in 50 or 100 years. As for the traffic, well, congestion is transit's best friend. The more congestion there is, the more pressure that will be put on governments to invest substantially more resources in improving transit systems. Congestion is also the best "driving force" to get people out of their cars and use other modes of transportation. As an example, in the last 30 years, Vancouver has not allowed any highway to be built through its city and is recognized for having the best quality of life amongst big Canadian cities. It all goes together. Gil Penalosa, President, Walk & Bike for Life, Oakville |
Comments
Private Vehicles or Transit
The standard traffic design response to large vehicle volumes has always been to add lanes or routes. Our vehicle centric veiw of what the public has demanded in the past has not changed even though city's across the country are riddled with examples of how this old style design philosophy becomes self defeating. As stated previously transit requires sufficient numbers and acceptance as a viable alternative to succeed. This requires hard choices of converting existing vehicle lanes to transit/carpool lanes and transit systems that are directed towards convienince and time saving. Park and ride options become critical requirements for transit success in outlying areas that feed into major centres. Transit will never win out over vehicle use as long as it is easier to drive a car to get where you are going.
An interesting phenomena has
An interesting phenomena has occured in San Francisco where there are substantial tolls on the bridges, which they refer to as "casual carpooling." The motivation was created by offering free passage over the bridge to high-occupancy vehicles, but the casual carpooling has taken a life of its own as it is not organized or monitored by any government or corporate entity and it is now 30 years old. There's an article about it here:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/0...
BC may have to face tolls soonest
Interesting conundrum re tolling. I understand that BC and Lower Mainland Gateway strategy have been looking at tolling all the main arteries/bridges. So sooner or later we are going to have to face the governance issue in BC.
Gridlocked in the Fraser Valley :-(
Which of course is a stupid
Which of course is a stupid rule as tolling should be used to encourage people on to alternative modes transport - although there isn't much of that either!
There is currently a rule in
There is currently a rule in Canada, I believe, that a road can only be tolled as long as there is a "free" alternative. So it is difficult to add tolls in regions where there is only one major route.
Removing Highways and Parking
I wonder if part of the solution is orienting our work more towards not necessarily needing to go into city centres as much. At my workplace, we recently moved to a compressed work week whereby we work extra time each day for nine work days and then take the tenth day off. What this does is delay a lot of people leaving the city centre during rush hour and reduces the number of trips by 10%. The motivation was really in order to attract and retain employees yet there is an environmental benefit as well.
Also, what about the idea of setting up satellite offices in the suburbs. For example, a space that would normally be occupied by a store in a mall could be used as an office and a number of companies could lease the space together with part of their monthly payment going to cover the salary of the person managing the space. Some people don't like working at home and this could be a good in between option. This may seem not a very viable option for many. However, my point is really that we need to consider our traditional work models with a view to opening ourselves up to new possibilities.
We are also starting to see restrictions on access to city centres like London, England where you can only take your vehicle in on certain days (I think it's based on your license plate number).
In terms of transit, Calgary is very frustrating. Our light rail transit system (which is wind powered) continues to extend further and further north and south to meet the urban sprawl yet there hasn't been any attempt to start a west line. There isn't transit access to my home so driving to a transit stop (where there isn't a park and ride anyway) and taking the bus would likely take me about three times as long and wouldn't allow me to carpool my children to school. Personally, I wouldn't mind paying tolls to have the luxury of driving on a highway (like the Kokahalla in B.C.) but given that use of our highways is traditionally free in Canada, that would likely be a very difficult thing to make happen.
Also, I think that downtown business groups would have a hard time with removing highways and parking.
LAURA
It's a bit of a moot point,
It's a bit of a moot point, don't you think? If the majority of the population and their elected officials drive, why would you expect any serious consideration of removing highways? Whether or not they are the best way to get around, they are what most of us know, and will be here for a long time to come.