Keeping the Zombies at Bay

Our good friend Anna Zivarts has an Op-Ed in The Urbanist discussing how urban highways reduce most trip times for drivers and make using transit a slower choice. Additionally, investing in car infrastructure begets more cars. She asks that the new mayor make a directive that weaves the reduction of VMT into project planning and decision making. I applaud this ask and find VMT reduction and/or emissions reduction a valuable focus point to organize spending and priorities.

But one thing that I don’t think gets discussed enough outside of our circles is that the solutions need to give people a similar value to what people had before. That could be ease, speed, or convenience.  If not, people could perceive change as a loss and support for needed improvements are lost. And I don’t think it’s always chicken and egg because sometimes we can reduce cars and also it’s still slow or unsafe to get around with active transportation.

I believe this is part of what’s behind some of the backlash lately towards the amazing improvements we’ve made in bike and transit infrastructure. Legislators in states like Utah are trying to reduce the ability of cities to make safety improvements and are blaming bike lanes, lane width limits, and bus infrastructure for their inability to move a few miles per hour faster.

While I believe they are silly and wrong, you have to make sure that there are more people that vote that also think they are wrong in order to make sure progress continues. And to get people on your side, there needs to be tangible and social proof that any improvements are better.

From a bike perspective, this could be showing people how much easier and more convenient it is biking around a neighborhood. Proof that the travel times are comparable or faster and that it’s easier to park right next to your destination rather than on the other side of the block you circled for 10 extra minutes looking for car parking. Also proof that it’s safe to do so.

From a transit perspective, it’s huge travel time savings.  People bag on the Central Subway here in San Francisco and I will continue to believe it was the wrong investment when a Geary Subway would have been a better one, but I can’t deny that it’s infinitely easier to get to Chinatown now. I don’t get elbowed out or kneecapped by vegetable carts anymore like I used to on the 30/45 bus. I can’t deny that the Van Ness and Mission bus lanes made travel times way faster for people riding them. The proof is in the increase in ridership. The same with Caltrain’s electrification which increased speed and generated almost 50% more ridership.

I also think we’ll see with congestion pricing that both transit and car travel times have improved. They’ll get even better with bus lanes and investments in signal priority at bottlenecks.

So yes, I do want a public policy based on reducing driving, but I also want a public policy that increases accessibility by all other modes.  Because if we don’t, I can assure you zombie cars are waiting in the wings to take our mode share. And like the vehicles that preceded them, they are still taking up 250 square feet of precious urban real estate wherever they go to move just a few people.

***

For this intro post and more news in your inbox every morning, sign up for a two week free trial of The Overhead Wire Daily, our popular newsletter established in 2006.