ON COMPLETE STREETS

The road is frequented by a variety of users – drivers, public transit vehicles, cyclists, and pedestrians. However, as each of these users, there are many obstacles, which typically involve the other users getting in the way. This is most common for drivers – since the typical North American road design is oriented towards easy mobility for cars, drivers have adjusted to a culture of innate entitlement for the road. This makes it more difficult for pedestrians and cyclists to get around, less likely for people to use transit, and increases the likelihood for a collision.

It is no longer uncommon to hear about cyclist deaths in the City – and it’s not always one person’s fault. It’s the way our streets are designed. There are definitely careless drivers, cyclists and pedestrians, that cause accidents. However, if the road was designed to cater for everyone equally, in a way that prevented anyone from feeling like they ‘own the road’, then everyone would naturally look out for each other.

A ‘ghost bike’ commemorates the death of a fallen cyclist in a roadside accident.

There is a fairly modern transportation policy and design approach called ‘Complete Streets‘ that advocates the ‘share the road‘ mentality. The goal for the Complete Streets approach is to achieve and maintain safe, convenient and comfortable travel and access for users of all ages and abilities regardless of their mode of transportation. In many cases where the Complete Streets approach has already been implemented, the designs have proven to improve safety, health, economic and environmental outcomes.

 Since automobile dependence has been engrained into American city designs from the start, many regions are interested in adopting Complete Streets policies into their own Official Plans, in order to move forward in a more sustainable and safe manner through design. This is part of the reason why roundabout, public transit and bike lane funding have become such hot topics, for example.

This rendering illustrates a person’s idea of what Yonge street could look like if it was redesigned under Complete Streets standards. Notice a few things – wider sidewalks, bike lanes, interlock pavement for drivers (the more detail in the paving, the more likely people are to slow down, reducing the likelihood of a collision), and seating.

Complete Streets means everyone shares the road. Complete Streets means everyone gets equal respect. Complete Streets means everyone gets to where they are going safely.

SOUL OF THE COMMUNITY: What Makes People Happy With Their Communities?

Why do we live where we live?

What factors make the place where you live the place where you want to live?

You’re probably thinking because it’s pretty, with a great beach, a thriving art scene, or a great night life. Perhaps good schools for kids, or amazing job opportunities.

A recent study looked at significant drivers which make people love where they live. They are:

• Basic Services
• Economy
• Education
• Leadership
• Openness
• Civic Involvement
• Social Offerings
• Safety
• Social Capital
• Aesthetics

Of all the drivers studied, the 3 most important stayed pretty much consistent across the US, with 43,000 people interviewed.

• Openness: How open or welcoming a community is to different types of people
• Aesthetics: How visually appealing it is (such as physical beauty and green spaces)
• Social Offerings: What types of opportunities there are for people to interact with one another (such as entertainment venues and places to meet)

Drivers like these cause what’s called resident attachment, which is how emotionally connected someone is to where they live. Attached residents have a strong pride in their community, a positive outlook on its future, and the sense that it’s the perfect place for them. And the more attached a person is, the less likely they are to leave, and this makes for a more talented workforce, a growing population, and general satisfaction and pride in community. In addition, residents who like where they live are generally more successful, which leads to a growing local neighborhood.

The researchers found the results of their study to be surprising because they expected that people would value things like basic services more than aesthetics. But as Richard Florida notes in his book The Rise of the Creative Class, “[The] findings actually make a great deal of intuitive sense…Because we expect basic services to be provided, we end up valuing aesthetics a little higher.” They also expected that people would be intolerant of living around people unlike themselves, however, as the level of tolerance rose towards groups such as families with children, racial/ethnic minorities, gays, immigrants, the poor and young singles, the overall happiness of the community increased. The one group that communities were the least open to was recent college graduates looking for work – isn’t that splendid! -.-

The following video outlines what the Knight Foundation hopes to achieve with their research –

<p><a href=”http://vimeo.com/44252805″>Soul of the Community – Overview</a> from <a href=”http://vimeo.com/knightfdn”>Knight Foundation</a> on <a href=”https://vimeo.com”>Vimeo</a&gt;.</p>