It won't come as a surprise to anyone to hear that I'm a pretty brazen pedestrian. When I'm in a crosswalk, I don't always wait meekly on the curb for cars to stop as they ought to but often don't; many times, I'll step -- with care -- into the crosswalk and bully drivers into yielding to me as the rules of the road require. I have been known to knock on the windows of cars that have stopped in the middle of crosswalks to point out to the driver that he or she is blocking my way, and once or twice, I have used my newspaper to whack the windshield of a car that ignores the crosswalk in order to save a few seconds. I don't necessarily advocate for others doing the same, but it is important to me that users of all modes share the streets, and when I'm on foot, I consider crosswalks my domain.
Still, though, when I'm out and about in and around Boston, I see a lot of incredibly bad pedestrian behavior. Over the weekend, I was driving along the Riverway in Boston around 9PM, and a couple of young guys crossed in front of me. They were in a crosswalk, at a light ... but crossing against the light. In the dark. On a fast-moving street. After screeching (literally) to a halt on the wet pavement, it was all I could do not to jump out of my car and yell at them. No driver wants to hit a pedestrian, and that moment of a close call is terrifying.
One of my mantras about safety is that everyone is 100% responsible for being safe all the time. Stepping into a crosswalk without looking and attending to oncoming cars makes me 100% responsible for the accident, just as the driver who fails to pay attention and yield is also 100% responsible. In that case, the law is on my side, which would, no doubt, make my stay in the hospital exactly the same as if the law weren't on my side.
I also abhor bad pedestrian behavior because I think it makes other users less respectful of pedestrians in general. I'm not going to tell people not to jaywalk -- there are times when the design of a city or roadway makes it nearly impossible not to, and many more times when the design makes it extremely impractical. But do you really trust strangers to care as much about your life as you do? If you're going to jaywalk, do it with care -- for everyone's sake.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Monday, November 23, 2009
What factors lead to this accident?
Last Monday, my colleague Kate came to work with news from near where she lives in Revere of a pedestrian struck and killed. We haven't found the story in the Globe, yet, but here are a couple of small pieces about it:
WHDH
FOX
Obviously, these are pretty sketchy and preliminary, and there's more information to be had, but I have some questions:
Was the pedestrian in a crosswalk? How fast was the car going? What was the speed limit?
The WHDH article includes a quote from a witness:
"Between the car being black, the pedestrian being dressed in black, with the weather being what it is and the poor lighting...it was just a tragic accident," said Keith Donnelly, a witness.
While wearing black at night does reduce one's visibility to cars (at a week-long festival I attend, people who don't make themselves visible at night are called "darkwads"), there are other factors at work in this -- and other -- accidents, and which we often take for granted and forget to consider:
Design speed: We all know what a speed limit is, and we all know we break it at least some of the time. This is because the speed that a section of roadway is engineered to handle gives us cues that tell us we're safe at higher speeds. Studies have shown that drivers recognize and understand the subconscious clues of roadway engineering and limit themselves by design speed rather than posted speed at least some of the time. Is the design speed for this stretch of road appropriate for the pedestrian use it gets?
If the pedestrian was in a crosswalk, how well-signed and -lit is the crosswalk? Especially if this is a fast stretch of road where pedestrians are relatively infrequent, it's important to call attention to crosswalks and make them as visible and noticeable as possible.
If the pedestrian wasn't in a crosswalk, is it because pedestrian needs aren't served here? Where was the nearest crosswalk?
Yes, drivers are responsible for being attentive to other road users, and pedestrians are responsible for the same, but sometimes the deck is stacked against all users. Whenever I read about a pedestrian accident, I want to know if this was one of those times.
Traffic accidents -- both lethal and non -- are a tragedy for us all.
WHDH
FOX
Obviously, these are pretty sketchy and preliminary, and there's more information to be had, but I have some questions:
Was the pedestrian in a crosswalk? How fast was the car going? What was the speed limit?
The WHDH article includes a quote from a witness:
"Between the car being black, the pedestrian being dressed in black, with the weather being what it is and the poor lighting...it was just a tragic accident," said Keith Donnelly, a witness.
While wearing black at night does reduce one's visibility to cars (at a week-long festival I attend, people who don't make themselves visible at night are called "darkwads"), there are other factors at work in this -- and other -- accidents, and which we often take for granted and forget to consider:
Design speed: We all know what a speed limit is, and we all know we break it at least some of the time. This is because the speed that a section of roadway is engineered to handle gives us cues that tell us we're safe at higher speeds. Studies have shown that drivers recognize and understand the subconscious clues of roadway engineering and limit themselves by design speed rather than posted speed at least some of the time. Is the design speed for this stretch of road appropriate for the pedestrian use it gets?
If the pedestrian was in a crosswalk, how well-signed and -lit is the crosswalk? Especially if this is a fast stretch of road where pedestrians are relatively infrequent, it's important to call attention to crosswalks and make them as visible and noticeable as possible.
If the pedestrian wasn't in a crosswalk, is it because pedestrian needs aren't served here? Where was the nearest crosswalk?
Yes, drivers are responsible for being attentive to other road users, and pedestrians are responsible for the same, but sometimes the deck is stacked against all users. Whenever I read about a pedestrian accident, I want to know if this was one of those times.
Traffic accidents -- both lethal and non -- are a tragedy for us all.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Complete streets in the news
The concept of "complete streets" -- streets and roadways that are designed not primarily for cars and secondarily for everyone else, but designed right off the bat with all users in mind -- is gaining traction and attention throughout the fields of transportation and urban planning around the US and the world.
Yesterday, US Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood wrote on his blog a post titled "Report, petition call for safer roadway planning". In it, he cites Transportation for America's recent report, Dangerous by Design.
Bike and pedestrian advocates have been pushing this message for years, and it's pretty darn exciting to see the conversation really moving into the mainstream.
Does your neighborhood contain complete streets?
Yesterday, US Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood wrote on his blog a post titled "Report, petition call for safer roadway planning". In it, he cites Transportation for America's recent report, Dangerous by Design.
Bike and pedestrian advocates have been pushing this message for years, and it's pretty darn exciting to see the conversation really moving into the mainstream.
Does your neighborhood contain complete streets?
Monday, November 16, 2009
More on jaywalking
Continuing with the questions and answers that came up during my chat on the Boston Globe last month:
One of the participants in the chat (Kelly) commented:
And another commenter (Michael) said:
These two comments go together very nicely, and here's why: Michael is arguing that enforcement would solve the problem of jaywalking in Boston, and Kelly is pointing out that other cities have uniform systems for pedestrians.
If you've spent much time walking around Boston, you've probably noticed what Kelly did: sometimes there's a button for you to push to get a WALK and sometimes there isn't. Sometimes when you push the button, it works, and sometimes it appears to do nothing. If there's no button, you really have no idea if you just didn't find the button or if you'll get a WALK or what.
All of this says to people on foot that their needs have not been strongly considered in the design and construction of the city. And if their needs aren't being met, why should they obey the law? I don't think jaywalkers are like bank robbers and going out of their way to break the law. They're just people trying to run errands and get things done over the course of the day.
So then if I'm a person who crosses when it says DON'T WALK but I'm walking with the green light, fine, that's jaywalking, even though it's probably pretty reasonable from a traffic flow and safety perspective in most cases (lots of intersections all over the state, country and world are set up with pedestrians getting the WALK along with the parallel green), but it's a small chip in the block of the habit of obeying laws that pertain to walkers.
So, where does that leave all of us? We want the streets to be safe for drivers, for cyclists, and for walkers. AND we want people in cars, on foot, and on bikes to be able to get their errands done. Does simply enforcing existing laws succeed in doing that?
One of the participants in the chat (Kelly) commented:
Also I've noticed, there is no uniform pedestrian system in Boston. In cities like New York, the lights always cycle through pedestrian walk signs. At the intersection of Beacon St. and Park where dozens of pedestrians cross every cycle, you have to push the button, the walk sign will not appear unless you do. Many people aren't used to that-they expect the walk signal to cycle through because that happens automatically at many other intersections.
And another commenter (Michael) said:
Some how In Seattle, pedestrians and motorist obey the laws in a very civil manner which tells me that enforcement is the issue here in MA. People in Seattle will wait for the light to change before walking even if there are no cars in site.
These two comments go together very nicely, and here's why: Michael is arguing that enforcement would solve the problem of jaywalking in Boston, and Kelly is pointing out that other cities have uniform systems for pedestrians.
If you've spent much time walking around Boston, you've probably noticed what Kelly did: sometimes there's a button for you to push to get a WALK and sometimes there isn't. Sometimes when you push the button, it works, and sometimes it appears to do nothing. If there's no button, you really have no idea if you just didn't find the button or if you'll get a WALK or what.
All of this says to people on foot that their needs have not been strongly considered in the design and construction of the city. And if their needs aren't being met, why should they obey the law? I don't think jaywalkers are like bank robbers and going out of their way to break the law. They're just people trying to run errands and get things done over the course of the day.
So then if I'm a person who crosses when it says DON'T WALK but I'm walking with the green light, fine, that's jaywalking, even though it's probably pretty reasonable from a traffic flow and safety perspective in most cases (lots of intersections all over the state, country and world are set up with pedestrians getting the WALK along with the parallel green), but it's a small chip in the block of the habit of obeying laws that pertain to walkers.
So, where does that leave all of us? We want the streets to be safe for drivers, for cyclists, and for walkers. AND we want people in cars, on foot, and on bikes to be able to get their errands done. Does simply enforcing existing laws succeed in doing that?
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Walk rather than T!
Getting around Boston by T and on foot? Check out these10 MBTA trips you should walk instead. Our own Wendy Landman helped identify these!
Thursday, November 5, 2009
A defense of jaywalking
Monday, Slate published an article by Tom Vanderbilt (of Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do fame) titled A defense of jaywalking. In it, Vanderbilt addresses some of the complexities of data available about pedestrian behavior, the history of street-use paradigms, and biases in crash reporting.
This is a great article, and if you're interested in jaywalking, walking in urban areas, or mode-sharing paradigms, I think you'll find it worth reading. Check it out!
This is a great article, and if you're interested in jaywalking, walking in urban areas, or mode-sharing paradigms, I think you'll find it worth reading. Check it out!
Friday, October 30, 2009
Why we need pedestrian advocacy ...
Do you walk around your neighborhood and think to yourself, "Hey, this isn't so bad. I can walk from my house to the store to the bus stop and it's really not so hard ..."? Or does your neighborhood look more like this:
(From There, I Fixed It.)
(From There, I Fixed It.)
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Jaywalking in Boston
As I posted earlier in the month, Boston pedestrians were featured in an article in the Boston Globe a couple of weekends ago. As a followup to that, the Globe asked me to participate in an online chat on the topic the week after the article came out. I did, and the result was a pretty interesting Q&A discussion between me and a variety of Globe readers. For the next few posts here, I'll be adapting some of the questions and answers from that session for us to read here.
First, a bit of introduction. What's the story with jaywalking, anyway?
Jaywalking is kind of a way of life around here. But there's more to it than people just disregarding laws and sometimes their own safety.
When you're in a car, you're pretty much limited to moving along a few limited paths -- streets. But when you're on foot, you have a lot more flexibility, and the way a city is built and designed can encourage you or discourage you from obeying laws that apply to you. And the infrastructure of the city can work well for cars, or for pedestrians, or both (and let's not forget bikes!). When a lot of people are breaking the law, that's a sign that the existing structures aren't working, not merely that people are profligate rule-breakers.
Why would I, as a pedestrian, wait to cross lawfully if it's going to take me 3-5 minutes to cross an intersection that I can see I can cross safely during a break in traffic? It doesn't make sense for me to do that, and it reflects an infrastructure that says in various subtle ways that my needs are not part of the equation, which encourages me to disregard them entirely.
On the other hand, in cities where pedestrians feel like they count, you'll see them waiting at a corner for the WALK light to come, even if there's no oncoming traffic. So, we know it can be done.
First, a bit of introduction. What's the story with jaywalking, anyway?
Jaywalking is kind of a way of life around here. But there's more to it than people just disregarding laws and sometimes their own safety.
When you're in a car, you're pretty much limited to moving along a few limited paths -- streets. But when you're on foot, you have a lot more flexibility, and the way a city is built and designed can encourage you or discourage you from obeying laws that apply to you. And the infrastructure of the city can work well for cars, or for pedestrians, or both (and let's not forget bikes!). When a lot of people are breaking the law, that's a sign that the existing structures aren't working, not merely that people are profligate rule-breakers.
Why would I, as a pedestrian, wait to cross lawfully if it's going to take me 3-5 minutes to cross an intersection that I can see I can cross safely during a break in traffic? It doesn't make sense for me to do that, and it reflects an infrastructure that says in various subtle ways that my needs are not part of the equation, which encourages me to disregard them entirely.
On the other hand, in cities where pedestrians feel like they count, you'll see them waiting at a corner for the WALK light to come, even if there's no oncoming traffic. So, we know it can be done.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Pedestrians in Boston
The front page article on this week's Sunday Globe was Crossing to their own beat: Injuries up, but jaywalking abounds on Hub’s busy streets, which had a few quotes from yours truly. That article also has a link to a video about the traffic monitoring setup at City Hall.
I'm sorry that the article focuses so much on the question of fines and enforcement for jaywalking, when I think that, ultimately, that's just a piece in the puzzle of safe street management. There's talk of increasing fines for jaywalking in Massachusetts (currently a laughable $1), which may make sense as a part of a larger strategy for making better use of our streets for all users, but seems to me the wrong place to start. Fines don't improve the street experience for anyone, after all, and what we'd really like to see is a change in how we think about and use streets, rather than a reentrenchment of the same old, same old.
I'm sorry that the article focuses so much on the question of fines and enforcement for jaywalking, when I think that, ultimately, that's just a piece in the puzzle of safe street management. There's talk of increasing fines for jaywalking in Massachusetts (currently a laughable $1), which may make sense as a part of a larger strategy for making better use of our streets for all users, but seems to me the wrong place to start. Fines don't improve the street experience for anyone, after all, and what we'd really like to see is a change in how we think about and use streets, rather than a reentrenchment of the same old, same old.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
I want this cop's job
The video in this post makes me so happy. I've been watching it from time to time just to give myself a lift.
Next step: Get some Massachusetts municipalities to do the same. At up to $200 per crosswalk violation, it would more than pay for itself.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Walking can be a game!
Friday, August 7, 2009
Hit by a bus
Yesterday, the daughter of a friend of mine was hit by a bus in Davis Square. She's okay, thankfully, but it makes me think about how vulnerable pedestrians are every day. Of course, this is one of the reasons that WalkBoston and other advocacy organizations are so important, even in areas like Davis Square that are reasonably pedestrian friendly.
I don't know the details of what happened beyond what's reported here in the Somerville Journal. And to some degree, I don't need to know the details, because all the issues are the same with pedestrians, vehicles, and crosswalks. And here's what they are:
Pedestrians, we have the right of way in crosswalks in Massachusetts. But, because we're walking around in our vulnerable skins, we should always remember that it doesn't matter whose right of way it was if we get hit -- the hospital visit is the same no matter what. Use care, don't assume cars see us or are prepared to stop for us if they do see us.
Drivers, I know that you're sometimes in a hurry, and driving is stressful, and frequently what you most want is to finish whatever it is that has you in your car so you can stop dealing with traffic and the frustrations that go with it. Still, it's your job to stop for pedestrians in crosswalks, even if you had to stop five times already and are running late. But you really don't want to be the driver who hit a pedestrian, right? Right.
It's easy to be wrapped up in what we're doing, and in our agendas and the hurry and bustle of our days. Each of us needs to be responsible for our own safety, while also taking care of the people we're sharing our space with.
I don't know the details of what happened beyond what's reported here in the Somerville Journal. And to some degree, I don't need to know the details, because all the issues are the same with pedestrians, vehicles, and crosswalks. And here's what they are:
Pedestrians, we have the right of way in crosswalks in Massachusetts. But, because we're walking around in our vulnerable skins, we should always remember that it doesn't matter whose right of way it was if we get hit -- the hospital visit is the same no matter what. Use care, don't assume cars see us or are prepared to stop for us if they do see us.
Drivers, I know that you're sometimes in a hurry, and driving is stressful, and frequently what you most want is to finish whatever it is that has you in your car so you can stop dealing with traffic and the frustrations that go with it. Still, it's your job to stop for pedestrians in crosswalks, even if you had to stop five times already and are running late. But you really don't want to be the driver who hit a pedestrian, right? Right.
It's easy to be wrapped up in what we're doing, and in our agendas and the hurry and bustle of our days. Each of us needs to be responsible for our own safety, while also taking care of the people we're sharing our space with.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Lunchtime Walk and Street Talk
I have two great events to announce! First, last week's "Little Lanes" walk was a huge hit, with 73 people joining, so we're doing it again tomorrow:
On Thursday, July 16 join WalkBoston for a half-hour walking tour of the "Little Lanes of Boston." This walk takes you through the charming pedestrian passageways of Old Boston, still very much in use as modern shortcuts. During this walk, you will see numerous 18th century lanes between Downtown Crossing and Faneuil Hall.
Join us at 12:15pm at the Information Kiosk on the corner of Washington and Summer Streets.
(Look for other lunchtime walks on Thursdays throughout the summer!)
And next week:
Event: StreetTalk: Mode shift: moving from driving to transit, biking, and walking
"free and open to the public, sponsored by Harpoon Brewery"
What: Lecture
Host: LivableStreets Alliance
Start Time: Wednesday, July 22 at 7:00pm
End Time: Wednesday, July 22 at 9:00pm
Where: Livable Streets Alliance Office, Central Square
To see more details and RSVP, follow the link below:
http://www.facebook.com/n/?event.php&eid=102706713699&mid=c82d78G27b0218bG2ee529dG7
On Thursday, July 16 join WalkBoston for a half-hour walking tour of the "Little Lanes of Boston." This walk takes you through the charming pedestrian passageways of Old Boston, still very much in use as modern shortcuts. During this walk, you will see numerous 18th century lanes between Downtown Crossing and Faneuil Hall.
Join us at 12:15pm at the Information Kiosk on the corner of Washington and Summer Streets.
(Look for other lunchtime walks on Thursdays throughout the summer!)
And next week:
Event: StreetTalk: Mode shift: moving from driving to transit, biking, and walking
"free and open to the public, sponsored by Harpoon Brewery"
What: Lecture
Host: LivableStreets Alliance
Start Time: Wednesday, July 22 at 7:00pm
End Time: Wednesday, July 22 at 9:00pm
Where: Livable Streets Alliance Office, Central Square
To see more details and RSVP, follow the link below:
http://www.facebook.com/n/?
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Boston Downtown Lunchtime walk: Thursday, July 9
On Thursday, July 9 WalkBoston join us for a half-hour walking tour of the "Little Lanes of Boston." This walk takes you through the charming pedestrian passageways of Old Boston, still very much in use as modern shortcuts. During this walk, you will see numerous 18th century lanes between Downtown Crossing and Faneuil Hall.
Join us at 12:15pm at the Information Kiosk on the corner of Washington and Summer Streets.
Join us at 12:15pm at the Information Kiosk on the corner of Washington and Summer Streets.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Livable Streets Alliance: What we can learn from Spain
LivableStreets Alliance StreetTalk
What we can learn from Spain: urban mobility planning in Barcelona
What are the results of implementing better transit networks, traffic calming zones, and a bike sharing program? Are these measures always environmentally-friendly? Are they enough to create better places to live and enjoy? Learn about the![]()
development of urban mobility plans in Greater Barcelona and Catalonia, Spain. See what the Catalan Government is encouraging municipalities to do. For more information, go to www.livablestreets.info/node/2154
What we can learn from Spain: urban mobility planning in Barcelona
by Marius Navazo, Urban Planner, Barcelona, Spain
Thursday, June 25, 7:00 - 9:00 pm
@ LivableStreets office space, 100 Sidney Street, Cambridge (directions: www.livablestreets.info/node/530 )
This event is free and open to the public, donations suggested, beer/sodas provided compliments of Harpoon Brewery and delivered thanks to Metro Pedal Power!
What are the results of implementing better transit networks, traffic calming zones, and a bike sharing program? Are these measures always environmentally-friendly? Are they enough to create better places to live and enjoy? Learn about the
Marius Navazo is a geographer who has been working for the last 10 years in town and regional planning, focused on transportation and its impacts to improve cities from a social and environmental perspective. He has been working at the Catalan Government for the last 4 years, and now he is a freelancer working for different municipalities in the Barcelona area.
(Photograph: a typical day on Les Rambles, Barcelona)
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
The evils of externalized costs and what it means for transportation in Massachusetts
Okay, this isn't WalkBoston specific but it is related to transportation in general, and I keep ranting the ears off anyone who will listen to me and I woke up in the middle of the night last night to fret about this, so I'm just going to get it off my chest.
This spring, Governor Patrick proposed a significant transportation reform for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, which involved a lot of absolutely essential elements like road and bridge repair. Like much of the rest of the country, Massachusetts' transportation infrastructure is aging and ailing, and we need to take care of it. This, of course, costs money, which no one has these days.
So, Governor Patrick proposed that we pay for these improvements by raising the gas tax 19 cents a gallon. This would have been the first gas tax increase in Massachusetts since 1991. Why a gas tax to pay for transportation improvements, though? No one wants to pay more for gas, after all!
I talk about this in terms of internalized and externalized costs. Internalized costs are costs that are reflected in the price we pay for things. So, for example, if we know that one out of every 200 oil tankers is likely to leak and cause environmental damage, and some smart economists figure out that $0.01/gallon would fully fund a program to clean up that damage, and we therefore tax gas at that rate, then the price of gas "internalizes" that environmental cost of gas. If, on the other hand, we decide that we're not going to clean up those spills, or we're going to let an environmental nonprofit do that, then we're "externalizing" that cost, either to the future or to the nonprofit and its donors.
When we drive, we cause wear and tear on roads. We create a need for traffic enforcement by state and local agencies. Our use of roads and other transportation infrastructure creates the need to spend money. Streets and roads are not free, even though they look free because so few of them are toll roads. The more we drive, the more wear and tear we create, and a gas tax is a fair way to figure someone's contribution to this. If I don't want to spend more money on gas, I can get smarter about how much I drive -- as many people have done in the last year when gas prices skyrocketed to more than $4/gallon. Because a gas tax internalizes the cost of roads, drivers can make smarter choices about how much it's worth to them to drive somewhere.
It additionally makes sense to use this money for things like public transit, because public transit is less costly per user in the long run, and a full bus is much less damaging on the infrastructure per capita than each person or family in their own car.
BUT. Public transit isn't popular, and paying for things we use isn't popular, so the citizens of Massachusetts made a big stink, and therefore the legislature dug in their heels, and someone came up with the brilliant idea of making these costs invisible again: sales tax. Now, there's no incentive for people to be calculated about their impact on the built environment, because we all pay sales tax (although it can be easy to dodge that through things like internet shopping) on things unrelated to transportation. Way to go, guys.
Now, of course, we'll raise less money for necessary improvements, it'll be more variable, and people will have no incentive to understand that their choices have consequences. If there's one great evil in our current system, it's externalized costs that create falsely deflated prices for goods and services with high costs. I'd hoped Governor Patrick could lead Massachusetts out of that system for transportation spending, but, instead, we're all going to pay higher taxes on cheap plastic trinkets while people who ride the T have to pay up to 25% more because some short-sighted jerk wants his roads to look like they're free.
This spring, Governor Patrick proposed a significant transportation reform for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, which involved a lot of absolutely essential elements like road and bridge repair. Like much of the rest of the country, Massachusetts' transportation infrastructure is aging and ailing, and we need to take care of it. This, of course, costs money, which no one has these days.
So, Governor Patrick proposed that we pay for these improvements by raising the gas tax 19 cents a gallon. This would have been the first gas tax increase in Massachusetts since 1991. Why a gas tax to pay for transportation improvements, though? No one wants to pay more for gas, after all!
I talk about this in terms of internalized and externalized costs. Internalized costs are costs that are reflected in the price we pay for things. So, for example, if we know that one out of every 200 oil tankers is likely to leak and cause environmental damage, and some smart economists figure out that $0.01/gallon would fully fund a program to clean up that damage, and we therefore tax gas at that rate, then the price of gas "internalizes" that environmental cost of gas. If, on the other hand, we decide that we're not going to clean up those spills, or we're going to let an environmental nonprofit do that, then we're "externalizing" that cost, either to the future or to the nonprofit and its donors.
When we drive, we cause wear and tear on roads. We create a need for traffic enforcement by state and local agencies. Our use of roads and other transportation infrastructure creates the need to spend money. Streets and roads are not free, even though they look free because so few of them are toll roads. The more we drive, the more wear and tear we create, and a gas tax is a fair way to figure someone's contribution to this. If I don't want to spend more money on gas, I can get smarter about how much I drive -- as many people have done in the last year when gas prices skyrocketed to more than $4/gallon. Because a gas tax internalizes the cost of roads, drivers can make smarter choices about how much it's worth to them to drive somewhere.
It additionally makes sense to use this money for things like public transit, because public transit is less costly per user in the long run, and a full bus is much less damaging on the infrastructure per capita than each person or family in their own car.
BUT. Public transit isn't popular, and paying for things we use isn't popular, so the citizens of Massachusetts made a big stink, and therefore the legislature dug in their heels, and someone came up with the brilliant idea of making these costs invisible again: sales tax. Now, there's no incentive for people to be calculated about their impact on the built environment, because we all pay sales tax (although it can be easy to dodge that through things like internet shopping) on things unrelated to transportation. Way to go, guys.
Now, of course, we'll raise less money for necessary improvements, it'll be more variable, and people will have no incentive to understand that their choices have consequences. If there's one great evil in our current system, it's externalized costs that create falsely deflated prices for goods and services with high costs. I'd hoped Governor Patrick could lead Massachusetts out of that system for transportation spending, but, instead, we're all going to pay higher taxes on cheap plastic trinkets while people who ride the T have to pay up to 25% more because some short-sighted jerk wants his roads to look like they're free.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
MetroFuture: From Plan to Action
Join the Metropolitan Area Planning Council and people from across the region for an evening of discussion, information and collaboration on how we can turn our vision of a Greater Boston into reality.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009 at 6 p.m. at The Colonnade Hotel, 120 Huntington Ave., Boston, MA 02116
Complimentary dinner and registration at 5 p.m.
Free and open to all
MetroFuture is a roadmap for shared prosperity and sustainable development in Greater Boston, crafted with input from thousands of area residents. There is a clear strategy for achieving the plan's goals, and a corps of supporters who are committed to putting them into action.
Now, we turn our focus to the action campaigns key to meeting MetroFuture's goals. Participants will have the opportunity to discuss one of four topics:
- Transportation Finance Reform
- Green Energy and Job Creation
- Local Smart Growth Planning
- Advocacy Tools and Techniques
To learn more, visit www.metrofuture.org, call 617-451-2770 x2057 or e-mail metrofuture@mapc.org.
Don't miss this exciting, interactive event!WalkBoston named Finalist in International Competition!
WE NEED YOUR HELP! WalkBoston has been named one of ten finalists in the "Global Competition for Innovative Health Nudges" which looks for small, innovative pushes that help people make better health choices for themselves and others.
WalkBoston's "Timed Walking Map" project is one of ten finalists among 281 entries from around the world. Now, we need your participation in the vote so that WalkBoston can become one of three winners who will receive $5,000 toward our work. This is a one-vote-per-person system, not one where people vote every day for a month, so it should just take a few minutes to register and vote for three of the ten finalists. To vote, go to http://www.changemakers.net/designingforbetterhealth before 6PM on Friday, May 28. Click on Vote Now, and then register and vote.
WalkBoston became a finalist because our low-cost, easy-to-read maps help people see their neighborhoods, towns and cities on a walking scale, which encourages them to choose walking over driving some of the time. Our inclusion among the finalists is a great honor and an opportunity to spread the word about our walking maps and our advocacy that makes walking easier, safer and more fun.
We hope that you will share this information with your friends and coworkers to spread the word, encourage everyone to vote, and learn more about all of the creative and effective health nudges among the ten finalists. Winners will be announced June 1, and we'll let you know how we do!
Thank you for your support of these innovative maps (and other pioneering projects we work on)! Now - please vote, and then go outside and take a walk!
(Click on map below to download a pdf of a timed walking map from our web page.)
WalkBoston's "Timed Walking Map" project is one of ten finalists among 281 entries from around the world. Now, we need your participation in the vote so that WalkBoston can become one of three winners who will receive $5,000 toward our work. This is a one-vote-per-person system, not one where people vote every day for a month, so it should just take a few minutes to register and vote for three of the ten finalists. To vote, go to http://www.changemakers.net/designingforbetterhealth before 6PM on Friday, May 28. Click on Vote Now, and then register and vote.
WalkBoston became a finalist because our low-cost, easy-to-read maps help people see their neighborhoods, towns and cities on a walking scale, which encourages them to choose walking over driving some of the time. Our inclusion among the finalists is a great honor and an opportunity to spread the word about our walking maps and our advocacy that makes walking easier, safer and more fun.
We hope that you will share this information with your friends and coworkers to spread the word, encourage everyone to vote, and learn more about all of the creative and effective health nudges among the ten finalists. Winners will be announced June 1, and we'll let you know how we do!
Thank you for your support of these innovative maps (and other pioneering projects we work on)! Now - please vote, and then go outside and take a walk!
(Click on map below to download a pdf of a timed walking map from our web page.)
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Crosswalk confusion
I was walking down Clarendon Street in Boston earlier this week with a friend. It was rush hour, and we were looking forward to having drinks at a new-to-us restaurant near Back Bay Station. Because there was heavy traffic, we did not pull the classic Boston jaywalking maneuver of just crossing when there's a break in traffic, but instead walked up to the crosswalk in front of what used to be the Hard Rock Cafe.
This crosswalk is faded, but clearly visible, but when we stepped into it, the car that was approaching did not slow, initially, and when he finally did, it was in a big huff with a lot of arm waving. My companion and I gave in to the temptation to yell, "It's a crosswalk!" to which the driver stuck his head out the window and said, "That's not a crosswalk!"
Now, I'm not writing this up to say I'm right and he's wrong (even though I'm right and he's wrong), but to point out one of the problems of faded crosswalks and other unclear traffic signs and signals: confusion is bad. When there's a conflict between cars and pedestrians, especially, the pedestrian always loses, no matter what the law says. The driver of this vehicle thought that the faded crosswalk indicated that it was no longer in effect, or at least thought that was a good argument to yell at a couple of pedestrians as they crossed in front of his car. If he was right about that, then we, as pedestrians, have been put at risk due to misleading infrastructure. That's bad for everyone.
So what do you do in a situation like this? Go to WalkBoston's advocacy page and download the "Reporting Form" (or download it directly by clicking here). Fill it out (which will probably involve a call to the relevant city hall to identify the person you should contact, or, if you prefer, a call to WalkBoston where one of us will find out for you) with as much detail as possible, and send it to the city. We'd also love for you to send a copy to us so we can help with followup and tracking.
Let's make walking better!
This crosswalk is faded, but clearly visible, but when we stepped into it, the car that was approaching did not slow, initially, and when he finally did, it was in a big huff with a lot of arm waving. My companion and I gave in to the temptation to yell, "It's a crosswalk!" to which the driver stuck his head out the window and said, "That's not a crosswalk!"
Now, I'm not writing this up to say I'm right and he's wrong (even though I'm right and he's wrong), but to point out one of the problems of faded crosswalks and other unclear traffic signs and signals: confusion is bad. When there's a conflict between cars and pedestrians, especially, the pedestrian always loses, no matter what the law says. The driver of this vehicle thought that the faded crosswalk indicated that it was no longer in effect, or at least thought that was a good argument to yell at a couple of pedestrians as they crossed in front of his car. If he was right about that, then we, as pedestrians, have been put at risk due to misleading infrastructure. That's bad for everyone.
So what do you do in a situation like this? Go to WalkBoston's advocacy page and download the "Reporting Form" (or download it directly by clicking here). Fill it out (which will probably involve a call to the relevant city hall to identify the person you should contact, or, if you prefer, a call to WalkBoston where one of us will find out for you) with as much detail as possible, and send it to the city. We'd also love for you to send a copy to us so we can help with followup and tracking.
Let's make walking better!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
