Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Slow transport?

Expand Messages
  • Huang Eu Chai
    Have you looked into the Radburn Principle yet? I m not sure if this may be of use to you since it s neither urban nor explicit, but personally I have always
    Message 1 of 10 , Jan 1, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Have you looked into the "Radburn Principle" yet?
      I'm not sure if this may be of use to you since it's neither urban nor
      explicit, but personally I have always felt that the theory had a
      subconscious but very major impact on the way come cities are planned
      and built (Singapore in my case).

      Radburn is a suburban residential estate in New Jersey planned by
      Clarence Stein and Henry Wright in 1928 which became a textbook
      example of "good" neighbourhood design ever since. The essential idea
      of the plan was the total segregation between pedestrian and vehicular
      traffic (like Venice), but to an extent that footpaths hardly ever run
      next to the roads (unlike venice).

      This is the indirect acknowledgment of speed as a factor in urban
      planning - the conflict between the two different speeds of the
      pedestrian and cars, and the need to keep them apart to achieve
      safety. Ironically, I believe it is the same principle which has
      brought about the reduction of safety in subsequent years - by
      encouraging cars to be faster now that pedestrians are out of the way.

      This is getting a bit long, so I'll stop here and see if any of you
      have comments to make about this.

      Happy New Year!
      Eu Chai

      --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, Carlosfelipe Pardo
      <carlosfpardo@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi,
      >
      > Does anyone know of any research or theory of urban planning or
      > transport planning that takes *speed* as a factor to be taken into
      > account? I have been searching for this and haven't found anything.
      > I thought about this because I've seen that transport planning
      normally
      > takes land use, modes, infrastructure and other factors into
      account,
      > but it doesn't seem to take speed as a component in its own right.
      > ....
    • Simon Baddeley
      Today s traffic policy started with managing the flow at intersections of urban streets, with traffic mechanisation around 1900 a need was felt to regulate
      Message 2 of 10 , Jan 1, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Today's traffic policy started with managing the flow at intersections of
        urban streets, with traffic mechanisation around 1900 a need was felt to
        regulate friction at junctions. The most striking examples is the roundabout
        in American cities, inspired by Haussmann's late 19thc traffic circles in
        Paris.

        I have been an urban cyclist for over 10 years and very interested in the
        thinking that informs transport management and street design. The concepts
        that especially interest me are the attitudes to time and space that
        underlie personal and institutional decisions about traffic management and
        human movement. The Radburn principle - as you observe - contradicts growing
        preference for shared space disrupted by the increasing speed of traffic.

        Railways became segregated. Trams did not - initially. Our new trams in
        Birmingham are, for a variety of reasons, running on old segregated rail
        lines except for a short couple of miles. When, recently, there have been
        collisions between trams and cars it is often the tram that is seen in the
        media as 'the problem'. As a cyclist I enjoy cycling with my dog on canal
        towpaths on the city as it is segregated - safe from motorised traffic, but
        in general I favour integration and am not a keen supporter of urban traffic
        segregation by speed.

        Below is an interesting set of reflections with illustrations arguing for
        the removal of controls on individualised traffic so all road users come to
        regulate their movement - walking or in or on different forms of transport -
        by using civility and intelligence. You can see the attraction of this idea
        to people of the right who trust the market and favour deregulation. This is
        also attractive to those who favour democratisation of road space,
        participation and the removal of a segregated traffic hierarchy:

        http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/category/speeding/

        This relates to roads. This shared space does not preclude a segregated
        rapid transit infrastructure running over or under roads. This seems
        contradictory but it seems to me that the argument here is about the way
        humans share road space in cities and smaller settlements and the
        implications of these decisions for where we build the places where we live,
        work, worship, take our leisure.

        There's a headline in yesterday's Birmingham Post which says there'll be no
        government funding for an extension of our Metro tram system unless the
        different municipalities of the West Midlands can agree on a credible system
        of road rationing or congestion charging. The West Midland's Councils
        struggle to agree this but want the cash. Deadlock and delay ensue. Any
        policy perceived as restricting the 'freedom' of motorists is politically
        very risky for local politicians. I understand this. I hear the vox pop.
        People love their cars. I've got rid of my car. I cycle and use public
        transport. My wife would never copy me. My daughter has just bought herself
        a car. My son does not have the means to keep a car. I am regarded as a
        harmless eccentric!

        Best

        Simon
        http://democracystreet.blogspot.com/
        http://www.inlogov.bham.ac.uk/staff/Baddeley.shtml



        > From: Huang Eu Chai <hng001@...>
        > Reply-To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
        > Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2008 09:21:06 -0000
        > To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
        > Subject: [carfree_cities] Re: Slow transport?
        >
        > Have you looked into the "Radburn Principle" yet?
        > I'm not sure if this may be of use to you since it's neither urban nor
        > explicit, but personally I have always felt that the theory had a
        > subconscious but very major impact on the way come cities are planned
        > and built (Singapore in my case).
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.