Posts Tagged ‘Traffic’
Freeways Without Futures
This Press Release from the Congress for New Urbanism landed in my email inbox yesterday. And despite the specification that the list was limited to US urban highways, I was pleased to see that the Gardiner Expressway in Toronto made the top 10. (By the way I have now discovered, thanks to one of his tweets, that Brent Toderian helped select them.)
The Gardiner has been a candidate for removal for as long as I have been in Canada – since 1988 – and they are still arguing about it.
No mention of the Georgia and Dunsmuir Viaducts which are also still standing as I write. I did do a quick Google search to see if I could determine their status. If I recall correctly the City is still consulting the neighbourhood. And, of course, no-one has actually accepted that the City’s projections were based on the false premise that traffic would continue at present levels just differently distributed, so of course the neighbours are really worried about the impact on their streets. In reality traffic will quickly adjust – in the same way that it has for the calming of Point Grey Road and the closure of lanes on the Burrard Bridge. As we have seen everywhere that urban highways have been removed, traffic contracts or evaporates or disappears – whichever is your preferred term.
We do not actually need to “serve roughly the same number of cars”. We can confidently expect that the people who currently are making these trips will adjust their travel patterns, and that there will be fewer car trips in future. And there is plenty of evidence to support that assertion.
|
||
Massive Mall near Abbotsford Interchange stirs debate
Of course this is exactly what opponents of the Gateway always said would happen.
Artist's rendering of a proposed $170-million, 600,000-square-foot shopping mall near Abbotsford's Mount Lehman interchange.
“The potential regional draw for that centre is enormous,” Abbotsford Mayor George Peary said in an interview about the $170-million, 600,000-square-foot Shape Properties development, dubbed Abby Lane.
“It’s huge and it’s got amazing freeway access. I think this will be the largest mall in the region. It will be relatively easy for people to get there from Langley, Chilliwack and Mission. Millions travel that freeway and they’re all potential customers.”
And for the Mayor that seems like a Good Thing. For many however, it seems like a very Bad Thing indeed. For a start the freeway between Langley and Abbotsford runs through what is currently green space. In many parts of the world that is seen as a desirable quality – and there has been legislation (in the UK and other places) to stop “ribbon development” and the gradual coalescence of places into “megalopolis”. That indeed has been one of the main principles in regional planning of both Metro Vancouver and the Fraser Valley.
But also very significant is the recognition of the traffic generation this kind of development produces – which is something that the Gateway proponents have tried to ignore or at least downplay: “it happens anyway”. Well you might try telling that to the stores that will close in those places. The amount of time and money that people have to spend shopping is finite. The money that gets spent in Abby Lane won’t get spent elsewhere. You can see this all over North America – in fact, thanks to the economic decline of recent years, the process has accelerated. There are already too many shops – and older malls and town centres have been in steady decline. Even in good times that happens – and one of the features of North American buildings is their very short design life. So when the two new plazas at No 5 Road and Steveston Highway opened, the shopping centre at Shell and Williams closed, was demolished and is now town houses.
Obviously if in future more people from Langley and Chilliwack decide to shop in Abbotsford that is a longer car trip than happens now. That means more pollution – both common air contaminants (the stuff that causes our current air quality advisory) and greenhouse gas emissions – that’s the stuff that means the glaciers melt and the pine beetle thrives. It is not only the polar bears that suffer! And note that this is happening beyond the reach of the Gateway project – which ends at the Langley boundary – although a new hill climber lane is being built westbound out of Abbotsford at present. So of course there will be even more pressure to widen the freeway through Abbotsford and upgrade the interchanges. That is the lesson of everywhere that has widened freeways – it creates the “need” for more widening and is never ending.
Well never ending up to now. Because the other thing that the Mayor is ignoring is that peak conventional oil has passed – and peak oil is close too. So there will not be lots of cheap gas for all those car trips. And maybe in future even the charms of yet another corporate clone big box “power centre” will be much less if if costs too much to get there. This development might not be such a good idea after all. It will certainly cause others to close – but in the not too distant future we may well not be quite so keen on shopping. We may prefer to find happiness in other ways – and relearn how to make things last longer.
It is certainly a choice – and the last election showed that most people are not yet willing to make that change voluntarily. Which means when it does come they are not going to be very happy about it at all. And George Peary could well be the target of their wrath.
The yield to the right concept
Not politics, but traffic regulation. And one of my hoby horses. A letter appears in the ITE Journal this month that is worth repeating here as it introduces information that I was not previously aware of. The author is Kenneth Todd, and while I do not have his permission to reproduce it I think he will be pleased that this idea is promulgated.
The yield to the right concept originated in France. Charles-Marie Gariel, a professor of physics at the School of Highways and Bridges, proposed it in 1896 as a rule when two cyclcists arrived at an intersection at the same time (source: Gariel, Charles Marie. “De la Règle à adopter en cas de Rencentre sur deux Routes qui se croisent” Revue Mensuelle du Touring-club de France July 1896 pp. 246-247) The rationale was that the cyclist on the left had no need to stop or slow down too much when yielding to the one on the right. Gariel only considered the conflict between two cyclists, not three or four.
Paris, France adopted the rule in 1910 for intersections where two roads of equal width met, and another rule gave drivers on wide roads priority over those on narrower ones. The League of Nation’s International Convention relative to Motor Traffic adopted the rule in 1926, as did the US Uniform Vehicle Code. It remains valid in all US states and by international convention in all countries where traffic drives on the right side of the road.
As William Phelps Eno, the American “father of traffic control,” and others pointed out in the 1920’s, the rule paralyzed traffic when drivers entered an intersection from all directions and obstructed others from leaving. (sources: Eno, William Phelps Simplification of Highway Traffic Saugatuck CT USA Eno Foundation 1929 p.15 McClintock, Miller Street Traffic Control New York NY USA: McGraw Hill 1925 pp 126-127 Lefferts, E B “Giving Man on Left Right of Way” National Safety News December 1922 p40) The rule is rarely in force today, but it shows that early law-makers lacked the most elementary understanding of the intersection problem. Reversing the rule so that the driver on the right gives way to the one on the left would make an intersection function like a mini-roundabout and avoid the installation of countless traffic signals.
The problem is that the ITE Journal is not read outside of the profession – you have to be a Member to get hold of it. I doubt that it is in many public libraries. So I am taking this bold step of doing more than a brief quotation in the hopes that this idea will spread.
The Day to Stop Gateway
The Day to Stop Gateway
Saturday, September 29th, 2007
http://www.stopgateway.ca/
3 Events: Non-stop Inspiration and Entertainment
Send a strong message to Premier Campbell that Gateway is the wrong way. Rail and buses not highways.
The Spirit of Sustainability
Connecting Spirituality and Ecology in the context of the Gateway Program
3:30 to 5:00 pm
The Unitarian Church
949 West 49th at Oak, Vancouver
(parking very limited: car pool, bus, or bike)
Entertainment by Erratica & Port Action Theatre Troupe
Speakers include Derek Corrigan, Gordon Price, Dr Bill Rees, Stephen Rees, Jim Houlahan and Donna Passmore.
The Ride to Stop Gateway
A mass ride from the The Spirit of Sustainability Rally to Hello Al, Goodbye Gateway Rally.
5:00pm
The Unitarian Church
949 West 49th at Fremlin (1 block east of Oak)
Meet by the bike parking
The ride will arrive at the Bayshore in plenty of time to catch the speakers and entertainment.
Hello Al, Goodbye Gateway Rally
Welcome Al Gore to Vancouver
5:00 – 7:30 pm
Cardero St. at Coal Harbour (East of the Westin Bayshore)
Entertainment by Timothy Wisdom, Raging Grannies, Ned Jacobs and the Port Action Theatre Troupe.
Speakers Adriane Carr, Suzanne Anton, David Cadman, Heather Deal, Joe Foy , Harold Steves, Michael Sather, Peter Julian, David Fields and Betty Krawczyk.
Demand Action on Climate Change and Have Fun Doing It
Bring your signs and banners.
BRING YOUR FRIENDS! BE THERE FOR CLEAN AIR!!
And, by the way there are some excellent pieces in today’s Richmond News . News coverage includes Harold Steves on the event above and an opinion piece by Tracy Sherlock “Gateway to more traffic woes”.
Public transport first
China Daily September 28, 2007
The city fathers of Beijing seem to have come to an understanding that has escaped Kevn Falcon
That municipal government authorities are treating the policy as a long-term prospect rather than a matter of expediency indicates that they have finally identified where the real problem is – that the city’s increasingly congested traffic and pollution from car emissions have become pressing hazards.
…
Many Chinese cities have in recent years gone out of their way to widen their roads to encourage residents to drive their own cars. But the craze has yielded bitter fruit. Local governments are finding it hard to accept the increasingly congested traffic.
We hope that the trail Beijing has blazed in prioritizing public transport will set an example for the rest of the country.
So it has not worked in US cities (see yesterday’s post) and now we know it is not working in Beijing either. So what on earth makes the BC Minister of Highways think it is going to work here?