SWT Design Blog: Outside In

The City Needs a Car Like a Fish Needs a Bicycle…

February 26th, 2013

Today’s cities are designed for cars, and cars only. One hundred years of automobiles have transformed the way that our cities function and are laid out. Highways are cut through older and declining neighborhoods, downtown office buildings have been demolished for surface parking lots, and cities have become less dense and sprawl further and further into the countryside.

If we rethink our cities in terms of scale, we can work to design a diversified transportation network. Dense areas with greater numbers of people lend themselves to either smaller vehicles, such as bikes (and our feet), or shared vehicles, such as buses or trains. Areas with more open space and fewer users more easily accommodate larger numbers of cars and the requisite parking.  Thus, thought of as a continuum of scale, from the far suburbs to the dense city centers, we begin to organize a network.

Greenways, bike lanes and sharrows (shared lane markings) are some of the myriad ways that we, as landscape architects, are working to diversify the transportation network in our cities. Even within these design typologies, we think in terms of scale. Greenways serve as larger regional connectors (the highway for bicycles and pedestrians), bike lanes are designated lanes on larger streets, and sharrows tend to be used on low traffic neighborhood streets, where safety is not as much of an issue.

In addition to specific facilities, as we work to diversify the system, multi-user Complete Streets strategies help to make our urban areas more accessible. Complete Streets emphasizes streets and sidewalks that accommodate all users: people in cars and buses, bicycles, wheelchairs, and pedestrians.  Streets begin to be designed with designated bike lanes, flush curbs for accessibility and integrated bus drop off areas.  Whereas, in the past, the street would have been designed to maximize traffic flow and parking, we are now looking at traffic calming strategies to protect pedestrians, and we are willing to reduce parking if it means gaining areas for outdoor dining, street trees, green infrastructure and bike lanes.

This in turn, brings us back to the topic of scale. As parking is reduced, and roadways and traffic velocities are reduced in urban areas, biking and bike shares, carpooling and park and ride facilities start to make a lot of sense. Again, as we move inward from the far reaches of the city, we transition from larger, more space intensive modes of transport, to smaller ones better adapted to dense urban areas. We leave you with an interesting quote, perhaps more appropriate for more densely urban areas than our own, but interesting all the same:

“The city needs a car like a fish needs a bicycle.”
-Dean Kamen

Two Wheels or Four? Remember to Share the Road

February 13th, 2013

The bicycle as we know it has been around since 1885 and has changed very little since that time. Yes, materials and construction have improved, but the basic diamond frame of the bicycle has stayed virtually the same. During the end of the nineteenth and into the beginning of the twentieth century, the bicycle took the world by storm.

For more than 20 years, bicycles have changed the way cities function.  Its development marked the first time that people could move about freely, without relying on train schedules or the mood of a horse. It led to major changes in the city, as the first paved roads were advocated by pro-bicycle organizations. In fact, the rules of the road and even the pneumatic tire had their beginnings with the bicycle. However, in the early parts of the twentieth century, the golden age of pedal transport started to come to an end with the mass production of automobiles.

So why do we treat bicycles and cars in the same way? Bicyclists are expected to share the road with cars. It is not because cars and bikes are the same – anyone who has ended up riding their bike on a narrow shoulder of a state highway will tell you they are not.  It is because the laws of the road were largely established for bicycle safety, and then adapted to cars.

Today we have traffic signals, and lane striping has made busy streets less of the free-for-all that they would have been in the early twentieth century. But the rules are virtually the same.

Thus, for the casual rider who suddenly decides that February’s “Shift Your Commute” challenge is a great opportunity to get on two wheels, the rules are simple:  Riding a bike on the street means following the same rules you would in a car. Signal when you turn. Stop at stop signs and lights. Have a front and rear light on your bike. Ride in the same direction as traffic.

Here is a summary of Missouri Bicycle Laws as provided by MoDOT:

http://www.modot.org/othertransportation/bike_ped/documents%20/biketips_statutes05_000.pdf

“Eating is an agricultural act.”

January 29th, 2013

Wendell Berry has a knack for distilling big ideas into small points and making a big point with a small idea.  This quote from his 1990 collection of essays, “What Are People For?” cuts to the heart of why we might want and likely need to grow a little food of our own.  Many people are engaged in small scale alternative forms of agriculture, from tending herb gardens to raising urban chickens.  These small acts of agriculture are an important step forward to a more sustainable and ultimately more secure future.  They may seem insignificant, but we should never underestimate the power of how little things aggregate to form big movements.  Alternative agriculture is about participation.

Not everyone wants to be a farmer.  True, but we would also suggest that providing some part of our own dietary needs is critical to our health, hearts, and social structures.  Not everyone wants to be a mathematician or novelist, but we as a culture aspire to the idea that everyone should be able to read, write, and do basic math.  Should growing a little food or raising some chickens be any different?  We all must eat food; shouldn’t we know a little something about growing it?

Cities can be difficult places to grow food.  While St. Louis has a wealth of open land in urban areas, we are also plagued by low population density and an often contaminated land base.  As opposed to cities like Seattle that have waiting lists for spots in their community gardens, urban farming proposals in St. Louis are often met with a healthy dose of skepticism, most often questioning who will be the people that will do the work.  This is certainly a fair question.

While a lot of attention has been given to ‘urban’ agriculture, it is important to remember how many people in our country also live in suburban, peri-urban, and rural areas.  In many cases, small acts of agriculture might be more easily incorporated into the landscape of these non-urban areas.  With less soil disturbance and more land area per dwelling unit, the suburbs may be the perfect place to participate in small scale alternative forms of agriculture.  Wendell Berry also suggests that an average family of four can grow a good portion of their annual dietary needs on 2400sf of well managed land.  Outside of the city, this is but a small portion of the average suburban back yard.

The places we grow food should be as beautifully designed as the food grown in them.  This is an especially important point for those of us in the design profession.  More than appearances, the beauty of design in alternative agriculture might be found in how these places work, both ecologically and socially.  As more people begin to participate in alternative forms of agriculture, we need to find new ways to collaborate on projects that cross between social work, environmental justice, landscape architecture, nutrition science, civil engineering and water management, botany and ethnology, not to mention cooking!  Get out and grow something.