I love how the author puts dignity over safety. So timely.
They go hand in hand; unsafe infrastructure is inherently undignified to use. It is both unsafe and undignified to walk in a dirt ditch due to lack of sidewalks.
If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity
41–50 of 713 posts
Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity
#42The thing is we (as an American society) really don’t want a shift to walking. We like the idea of walking more but won’t actually do it. Instead we’ll make up a million excuses about why we just can’t walk. I say this as someone who at 40 years old has never learned to drive and who has walked/bicycled/taken the bus virtually everywhere I’ve needed to go. And I’ve lived in very rural and very suburban areas, as well…
> I say this as someone who at 40 years old has never learned to drive and who has walked/bicycled/taken the bus virtually everywhere I’ve needed to go. I say this with no mockery or disrespect, just description . . . you are not normal. I mean in a statistical sense. Not only are you part of (maybe the last) generation who salivated over the thought of getting a driver's license at 16 and getting away from Mom and D…
> (...) salivated over the thought of getting a driver's license at 16 and getting away from Mom and Dad (...)
I'm afraid this mindset needs context. If you find yourself living in a place where everything is located tens of km away, and short drives are assessed in how many hours you spend in a car, and this is further compounded by the utter lack of a public transportation infrastructure, then gaining access to a car is a basic necessary condition for autonomy.
Contrast this with some European urban centers such as the Netherlands' Randstad, where a two hour train ride from your doorstep can get you anywhere everywhere, and can actually be an international trip.
Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity
#43The thing is we (as an American society) really don’t want a shift to walking. We like the idea of walking more but won’t actually do it. Instead we’ll make up a million excuses about why we just can’t walk. I say this as someone who at 40 years old has never learned to drive and who has walked/bicycled/taken the bus virtually everywhere I’ve needed to go. And I’ve lived in very rural and very suburban areas, as well…
Can you explain this to me? For example, my local supermarket is a 8 minute walk from my house. Driving there would take about 5 minutes, due to one way streets etc, so including the hassle of parking etc it takes about as long. Driving there seems positively insane to me, except if I’m shopping for a party or something and need to fill the trunk. Are you saying that Americans would choose the car here? Or that in Am…
The grocery store example is very helpful to illustrate how its not just the quality, safety, and practicality (e.g. time) of the walk that leads to most Americans driving- there is also the fact that the whole process and experience is predicated on the expectation that you will have a personal car.
Specifically: In the parts of W. Europe I have visited I observed mostly small grocery stores (esp in towns and cities) that folks visit daily or nearly so for food. People may stop on thei walk home to get dinner items each night! Contrast that with the U.S., where you are more likely to encounter a large grocery store- except perhaps in the densest inner city (but then maybe no grocery store at all, which is another story)- where people visit once a week or so. When people go to the grocery store, they stock up. Stores are optimized for buying multiple (more than you can carry at once) bags of groceries, which you then necessarily would load into your car and drive home.
Most folks would not willingly opt to take a long risky walk through unpleasant surroundings, traverse a giant parking lot not designed for walkers, then have to march through a large grocery store for many minutes to leave with just what one could carry. Sure, folks could bring a personal hand trolley or something but this really does not address other underlying problem.
So, in the case of grocery stores the basic culture of shopping at a very large center less frequently would also have to shift for people to leave their cars. And, I would argue, so it goes with many things. Shifts to a more pedestrian-oriented culture and environment may happen with time or in certain areas, but I don't think it would be simple, quick, or widespread any time soon in the U.S. for reasons that go beyond sidewalks.
Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity
#44If we want a shift to walking, we need cities to plant around 100x the number of trees they have. Ever walk through an old, mature neighbourhood? Usually there are tons of people on the sidewalks, and a primary reason is that there are mature trees providing plenty of shade. Then try walking in a new neighbourhood with barely any shade. It is awful.
100%l the lack of tree cover everywhere is criminal.
Three sticking points in my experience trying to help manage street trees in a neighborhood of 400 homes:
1. Planter strips are too small. This leads to infrastructure conflicts that are costly like lifting sidewalks and exploding irrigation lines. The problem is many municipalities simply have standard streets too wide and planters too narrow.
2. Maintaining trees is an ongoing expense and if not managed by an HOA or municipality the costs explode as individuals have to pay a crew to drag out equipment for just a few trees.
3. Lack of mandatory diversity- my neighborhood is 60% ash because the builder got a good deal 15 years ago after the emerald ash borer was found out east and wasn’t top of mind in the west yet. If the EAB makes a strong foothold entire blocks will be starting from zero again.
Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity
#45I love how the author puts dignity over safety. So timely.
The pyramid structure is used to illustrate that upper layer concepts are supported by the bottom layer concepts. So, in this case, dignity is less essential than safety. Given safety, one can begin to develop dignity.
Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity
#46The thing is we (as an American society) really don’t want a shift to walking. We like the idea of walking more but won’t actually do it. Instead we’ll make up a million excuses about why we just can’t walk. I say this as someone who at 40 years old has never learned to drive and who has walked/bicycled/taken the bus virtually everywhere I’ve needed to go. And I’ve lived in very rural and very suburban areas, as well…
How do you get toddlers to daycare, preteens to soccer practice, etc.
I also live car free, in London. When we had a kid all my car owning friends were telling me that I would absolutely need one now.
Nope, we just walk, or take the bus, or tube, or take an Uber if necessary. Really isn't as needed as most people think if you live in an urban area.
Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
We had trees, they ripped them out in the name of safety. "A drink driver might swerve off the road" killed so many old growth trees in the US.
Wouldn't that be safer? I would rather the drunk driver hit the tree and deal with his/her consequences, than hit my house or my neighbors during our sleep.
You've discovered a core disagreement point in safety, "good for everyone" versus "good for the individual".
Yes if I live near a road I want trees/big fence/whatever so drunks don't take out my house. Yet if everyone does that, the number of traffic fatalities increases.
Of course it's a much harder stat to deliver who died and why versus just optimizing a single fatality count.
This problem ruins a lot of really nice things.
Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity
#48This lens is underutilized in the discourse, but people feel it acutely. Even a lot of the anti-cycling stance comes down to, “What am I, poor?” When you are using transportation infrastructure that’s designed with contempt for you, you know, and you don’t want to be there. See also: rail slow zones, buses that shimmy and rattle violently on imperfect pavement, how Muni trains close their doors and pull one foot out…
A great post. My only nitpick is that Amsterdam isn’t a particularly good example of active travel in NL.
Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity
#49The thing is we (as an American society) really don’t want a shift to walking. We like the idea of walking more but won’t actually do it. Instead we’ll make up a million excuses about why we just can’t walk. I say this as someone who at 40 years old has never learned to drive and who has walked/bicycled/taken the bus virtually everywhere I’ve needed to go. And I’ve lived in very rural and very suburban areas, as well…
Can you explain this to me? For example, my local supermarket is a 8 minute walk from my house. Driving there would take about 5 minutes, due to one way streets etc, so including the hassle of parking etc it takes about as long. Driving there seems positively insane to me, except if I’m shopping for a party or something and need to fill the trunk. Are you saying that Americans would choose the car here? Or that in Am…
I'm half a mile from a grocery store. Perfect walking distance, but to do so I have to walk along a street without a sidewalk, cross at an unsigned intersection and then walk around a mall to get to the grocery store.
The latter is the perfect illustration of the problem. The mall was designed with a nice cut-through for pedestrians, but it got bricked up because teenagers used to hang out there and smoke.
Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity
#50I love how the author puts dignity over safety. So timely.
In the "pyramid" style graphic the author uses, dignity being above safety implies that dignity is less essential than safety, not more.