Award-winning Canadian journalist Charles Montgomery's fascinating new book Happy City: Transforming Our Lives Through Urban Design
examines how lessons from psychology, neuroscience, and design can help
us fix broken cities and improve our quality of life in an increasingly
urban-centered world. Here at the Eye, Montgomery shares an excerpt
from the book.
Of every 100 American commuters, five take public transit, three
walk, and only one rides a bicycle to work or school. If walking and
cycling are so pleasurable, why don’t more people choose to cycle or
walk to work? Why do most people fail to walk even the 10,000 daily
steps needed to stay healthy? Why do we avoid public transit?
I was naive enough to ask that question of a fellow diner I met in
the food court of the bunkerlike Peachtree Center in downtown Atlanta.
Her name was Lucy. She had driven her car in that morning from Clayton
County (a freeway journey of about 15 miles), pulled into a parking
deck, followed a skyway a few dozen paces to an elevator, and then a few
more to her desk. Trip time: about half an hour. Total footsteps: maybe
300. She flashed me a broad smile.
“Honey, we don’t walk in Atlanta,” Lucy told me. “We all drive here. I can’t say why. I guess we’re just lazy.”
Lazy? The theory doesn’t stand up. Lucy’s own commute was proof. She
could not have made it to work any other way. Suburban Clayton County
suspended bus service in 2010. (The service had carried 2 million riders
in 2009 before it was shut down.)
No, the answer to the mobility conundrum lies in the intersection
between psychology and design. We are pushed and pulled according to the
systems in which we find ourselves, and certain geometries ensure that
none of us are as free as we might think.
Consider Atlanta. The average working adult in Atlanta’s suburbs now
drives 44 miles a day. (That’s 72 minutes a day behind the wheel, just
getting to work and back.) Ninety-four percent of Atlantans commute by
car. They spend more on gas than anyone else in the country. In a study
of more than 8,000 households, investigators from the Georgia Institute
of Technology led by Lawrence Frank discovered that people’s
environments were shaping their travel behavior and their bodies. They
could actually predict how fat people were by where they lived in the
city.
Frank found that a white male living in Midtown, a lively district
near Atlanta’s downtown, was likely to weigh 10 pounds less than his
identical twin living out in a place like, say, Mableton, in the
cul-de-sac archipelago that surrounds Atlanta, simply because the
Midtowner would be twice as likely to get enough exercise every day.
Here’s how their neighborhoods engineer their travel behavior:
Midtown was laid out long before the dispersalists got their hands on
the city. It exhibits the convenient geometry of the streetcar
neighborhood even though its streetcars disappeared in 1949. Housing,
offices, and retail space are all sprinkled relatively close together on
a latticelike street grid. A quart of milk or a bar or a downtown-bound
bus are never more than a few blocks away. It is easy for people to
walk to shops, services, or MARTA, the city’s limited rapid transit
system, so that’s what they do.
But in suburbs like Mableton, residential lots are huge, roads are
wide and meandering, and stores are typically concentrated in faraway
shopping plazas surrounded by parking lots. Six out of every 10
Atlantans told Frank’s team that they couldn’t walk to nearby shops and
services or to a public bus stop. Road geometry was partly to blame.
Frank and others have found that that iconic suburban innovation—the
cul-de-sac—has become part of a backfiring behavioral system.
When designers try to maximize the number of cul-de-sacs in an area,
they create a dendritic—or treelike—system of roads that feeds all their
traffic into a few main branches. The system makes just about every
destination farther away because it eliminates the most direct routes
between them. Connectivity counts: More intersections mean more walking,
and more disconnected cul-de-sacs mean more driving. People who live in
neighborhoods with latticeworklike streets actually drive 26 percent
fewer miles than people in the cul-de-sac forest.
The diagram below helps illustrate how a white male living in Midtown
(left), near Atlanta’s downtown, is likely to weigh 10 pounds less than
his identical twin living near Mableton (right), a sprawling suburb.
This is partly owing to road geometry and land-use mix: a 10-minute walk
from a home amid the traditional grid in Midtown will get you to
grocery stores, schools, bus stops, cafés, a bank, and the glorious
lawns of Piedmont Park. But the spread-out and homogeneous system of
Mableton pushes destinations beyond walking range, which means residents
are likely to drive whether they like driving or not. (Each bullet
represents a school, church, grocery store, dry cleaner, bank, day-care
center, police station, transit stop, or hospital. If restaurants,
cafés, bars, and other services were included, the Mableton map would
not change, but the Midtown map would be sprayed with dozens more
bullets.)
Our responses to distance are quite predictable. Most of us will walk
to a corner store rather than climb in and out of the car if it’s less
than a five-minute walk—about a quarter mile—away. We won’t walk more
than five minutes to a bus stop, but we will walk 10 to a light-rail or
subway station, partly because most of us perceive rail service to be
faster, more predictable, and more comfortable. This is the geometry
perfected by streetcar city developers a century ago. It’s now being
rediscovered by planners who find that simply introducing regular
high-quality light-rail service can alter the habits—and the health—of
people nearby. Less than a year after the LYNX commuter light-rail line
was installed in Charlotte, N.C., people living near the line had
started walking an extra 1.2 miles every day because the system
changed their daily calculus. People who switched to the LYNX for their
commute lost an average of 6½ pounds during that time.
Kids move by a similar calculus. Frank found that if there is a park
or some kind of store within a half mile of their home, school-age youth
are more than twice as likely to walk. If destinations are farther,
they wait for a parental chauffeur. Think of the implications: a
community with one central mega-sports complex with several baseball
diamonds and soccer fields can actually be bad for children’s health if
it replaces small parks scattered every few blocks. In the finer-grained
community, instead of begging Mom for a ride to a league game, a
teenager might find it easier to organize her own game at the local
park.
“The way we organize most cities actually encourages individuals to
make choices that make everyone’s life harder,” Frank told me. “The
system fails because it promises rewards for irrational behavior.”
Put simply, most people do not walk in American cities because cities
have designed destinations out of reach. But they have also corroded
the experience of walking. Road engineers have not even bothered to
build sidewalks in many Atlanta suburbs. Try a Google search for
directions near, say, Somerset Road in Mableton, and the map engine will
offer a warning you would not expect in a first-world city: “Use
caution—This route may be missing sidewalks or pedestrian paths.”
Aesthetics matter. We walk farther when streets feel safe and
interesting. People who live in central New York or London typically
walk between a third to a half mile to go shopping. That’s a four- to
10-minute stroll. Even in Montreal, with its freezing winters and
sweat-soaked summers, people reported walking about a third of a mile
(six to eight minutes) between shops, bags in tow. The numbers are
almost as high for people arriving at enclosed shopping malls, which
mimic the downtown experience, at least once you’re in the building. But
dump us in a vast parking lot surrounded by big-box outlets, and our
inclination to walk evaporates. Even when people are equipped with
shopping carts, they won’t endure so much as the three-minute stroll
between retailers. Researchers observed that a third of the shoppers at
one Canadian power center (the north-of-the-border term for a big
shopping outlet) actually parked their cars three or more times during
one visit. They just hated trudging across the asphalt desert. It felt
ugly, uncomfortable, and unsafe.
You might speculate that these studies merely demonstrate the city’s
power to sort people by their preferences: Maybe Manhattanites walk
because they are walkers, while Atlanta’s big-lot suburbanites and
Canada’s power-center pilgrims drive because they prefer the
air-conditioned comfort and storage capacity of the family minivan. In
other words, just because urban designs correlate with travel behavior,
it doesn’t mean they cause it.
This view is partly true. People do self-sort in cities. In Atlanta,
for example, Frank found that people who said they preferred to live in
car-dependent neighborhoods tended to drive pretty much everywhere, no
matter where they lived. Not surprisingly, people who both liked and
lived in lively, walkable places drove less and walked more. But the
suburbs were full of people who wished they could walk places but
couldn’t. Nearly a third of people living in Atlanta’s car-dependent
sprawl wished they lived in a walkable neighborhood, but they were
mostly out of luck because Atlanta had gone nearly half a century
without building such places.
When Atlanta builds differently, people do change their movements.
Proof sits on the edge of a tangled freeway interchange three miles
north of the city center, where the 138-acre site of a former steel mill
has been redeveloped into a dense mix of offices, apartments, retail
stores, small parks, and theaters. Despite the fact that much of
Atlantic Station, as it is known, sits atop a three-level parking
garage, people who have moved there since 2005 have shaved a third of
the miles off their driving. Instead, they walk, because some of their
destinations have suddenly fallen within the range of a pleasant
sidewalk stroll.
Excerpted from Happy City: Transforming Our Lives Through Urban Design
by Charles Montgomery, published in November 2013 by Farrar, Straus and
Giroux, LLC. Copyright © 2013 by Charles Montgomery. All rights
reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please leave a comment-- or suggestions, particularly of topics and places you'd like to see covered