The ideology of "urbanism" among city planners often conjures up imagery of New York City, Tokyo, London, and other massive, extremely high-density megacities. However, urbanist concepts like...
The ideology of "urbanism" among city planners often conjures up imagery of New York City, Tokyo, London, and other massive, extremely high-density megacities. However, urbanist concepts like multi-modal transit; and dedicated infrastructure for pedestrians, cyclists, buses, trams/trolleys, ferries, and so on; curb extensions, raised crosswalks, and other traffic calming measures are applicable to nearly any city of even modest size. Walkability, accessibility, and safety don't require skyscrapers—just good design.
My city has been doing something that doesn’t seem to get mentioned anywhere but they started making laneways completely level so there is no gutter and no clear distinction between sidewalk and...
My city has been doing something that doesn’t seem to get mentioned anywhere but they started making laneways completely level so there is no gutter and no clear distinction between sidewalk and road. You’d think it’s actually less safe initially but because people walk all over the place, everyone drives slowly and it seems very safe.
Interesting! Probably closer to how roads used to be. Is your city in Europe? I'm curious if they install bollards or other barriers to stop drivers from driving out of a designated/painted...
Interesting! Probably closer to how roads used to be. Is your city in Europe? I'm curious if they install bollards or other barriers to stop drivers from driving out of a designated/painted lane—or is it really a free-for-all? I live in North America and most of the roads here are so wide that I would be hesitant to technically give drivers free rein; I've always had the impression that when drivers and pedestrians are on equal footing, the metal monsters win. However, I can imagine this concept working pretty well in a place with inherently narrow and bendy streets and lots of things on those streets, like marketplaces, seating, etc., because drivers wouldn't have a visual/spatial expectation to hit top speed.
Here's an example of one street https://i.imgur.com/5RHFHuz.jpeg There are several of these now which have been converted from two lane streets with parking and thin strip sidewalks to single lane...
There are several of these now which have been converted from two lane streets with parking and thin strip sidewalks to single lane single direction ones with no height difference for sidewalks. The result is people walk all over it and part to make way when a car shows up.
This is in Australia. There are not really any bollards or any physical barriers, but these lanes are only in between city blocks and their only real purpose is to access driveways and deliveries....
This is in Australia. There are not really any bollards or any physical barriers, but these lanes are only in between city blocks and their only real purpose is to access driveways and deliveries. Given they are only ~100m long and have plenty of people walking them, no one really drives faster than safe.
The ideology of "urbanism" among city planners often conjures up imagery of New York City, Tokyo, London, and other massive, extremely high-density megacities. However, urbanist concepts like multi-modal transit; and dedicated infrastructure for pedestrians, cyclists, buses, trams/trolleys, ferries, and so on; curb extensions, raised crosswalks, and other traffic calming measures are applicable to nearly any city of even modest size. Walkability, accessibility, and safety don't require skyscrapers—just good design.
My city has been doing something that doesn’t seem to get mentioned anywhere but they started making laneways completely level so there is no gutter and no clear distinction between sidewalk and road. You’d think it’s actually less safe initially but because people walk all over the place, everyone drives slowly and it seems very safe.
Interesting! Probably closer to how roads used to be. Is your city in Europe? I'm curious if they install bollards or other barriers to stop drivers from driving out of a designated/painted lane—or is it really a free-for-all? I live in North America and most of the roads here are so wide that I would be hesitant to technically give drivers free rein; I've always had the impression that when drivers and pedestrians are on equal footing, the metal monsters win. However, I can imagine this concept working pretty well in a place with inherently narrow and bendy streets and lots of things on those streets, like marketplaces, seating, etc., because drivers wouldn't have a visual/spatial expectation to hit top speed.
Here's an example of one street https://i.imgur.com/5RHFHuz.jpeg
There are several of these now which have been converted from two lane streets with parking and thin strip sidewalks to single lane single direction ones with no height difference for sidewalks. The result is people walk all over it and part to make way when a car shows up.
This is in Australia. There are not really any bollards or any physical barriers, but these lanes are only in between city blocks and their only real purpose is to access driveways and deliveries. Given they are only ~100m long and have plenty of people walking them, no one really drives faster than safe.