Walking & Biking: High tech understanding of low tech solutions
Who will you meet?
Cities are innovating, companies are pivoting, and start-ups are growing. Like you, every urban practitioner has a remarkable story of insight and challenge from the past year.
Meet these peers and discuss the future of cities in the new Meeting of the Minds Executive Cohort Program. Replace boring virtual summits with facilitated, online, small-group discussions where you can make real connections with extraordinary, like-minded people.
Sometimes smart cities have simple solutions at their disposal – if they just view their data slightly differently. Walk Score recently released their updated rankings of bikeable, walkable, and transit-oriented cities:
- 10 most bikeable large U.S. & Canadian cities (>200,000 people). The data on bike lanes, hilliness, and connectivity are all easily shown with elegant “heat maps”. An interesting inclusion in their scoring methodology is a “bicycle mode share” metric, which tries to capture the social network effect of biking. Rather than relying only on data about the built environment, the metric also attempts to measure actual cycling activity, often showing that there are “hot spots” in certain neighborhoods of cities aside from where the bike lane networks are.
- 50 most walkable largest U.S cities, as well as Canada and Australia. This ranking relies on an algorithm that gives higher weighting to proximity to amenities within .25 miles and zero weighting to amenities further than one mile. This metric is used by the real estate industry in promoting walkable, livable neighborhoods.
- 25 top-ranked public transit systems in the largest U.S. cities, measured based on “usefulness” of routes nearby, such as distance to the nearest stop, frequency, and type. Unlike the bike score, they don’t take into consideration riders’ satisfaction or effectiveness of the transit.
It’s hard to argue with Walk Score’s main conclusions on the benefits of walkability: residents average 6-10 pounds lighter in a walkable neighborhood, property values can be $600-$3,000 higher with each Walk Score point (and reduce the second largest household expense, your car), as well as the study that for every 10 minutes spent in a daily car commute, time spent in community activities falls by 10%. You can now even search hotels by proximity and travel time to the locations you’re planning on visiting.
Walk Score data is even being used now in urban planning using such metrics as average block length and intersection density. This is probably an improvement considering that the Project for Public Spaces calculated the Walkscore for every state’s Department of Transportation headquarters, and came up with an average 67 on a scale of 0-100. See the PDF list here.
Another clever use of data is the City of Hoboken, NJ, announcing a combined bike rental-and-sharing program that will greatly reduce costs of operating the system. Social Bicycles puts a lock and GPS on the bike so it can be locked to traditional bike racks and while serving to track where bikes travel at what time, thus gathering large amounts of data data to help guide investments in improving effectiveness and safety of the system. Now they just need an integrated payment system like the transit pass proposed in Sao Paulo’s 150,000 bike-sharing system.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.
Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
People seem frequently to assume that the terms “sustainability” and “resilience” are synonyms, an impression reinforced by the frequent use of the term “climate resilience”, which seems to enmesh both concepts firmly. In fact, while they frequently overlap, and indeed with good policy and planning reinforce one another, they are not the same. This article picks them apart to understand where one ends and the other begins, and where the “sweet spot” lies in achieving mutual reinforcement to the benefit of disaster risk reduction (DRR).
As extreme weather conditions become the new normal—from floods in Baton Rouge and Venice to wildfires in California, we need to clean and save stormwater for future use while protecting communities from flooding and exposure to contaminated water. Changing how we manage stormwater has the potential to preserve access to water for future generations; prevent unnecessary illnesses, injuries, and damage to communities; and increase investments in green, climate-resilient infrastructure, with a focus on communities where these kinds of investments are most needed.
A few years ago, I worked with some ARISE-US members to carry out a survey of small businesses in post-Katrina New Orleans of disaster risk reduction (DRR) awareness. One theme stood out to me more than any other. The businesses that had lived through Katrina and survived well understood the need to be prepared and to have continuity plans. Those that were new since Katrina all tended to have the view that, to paraphrase, “well, government (city, state, federal…) will take care of things”.
While the experience after Katrina, of all disasters, should be enough to show anyone in the US that there are limits on what government can do, it does raise the question, of what could and should public and private sectors expect of one another?