Artículo: Pedestrian Survival Techniques

For the last few months, I've left my bike at home and made my way throughout town mostly on my own two feet. During this time, I've observed a clever strategy, used by countless walkers, for crossing two or three-lane streets. It's especially common among the regulars - the truckers of the pedestrian world - who have optimized their safety and efficiency by repeating the same trip over and over again. It's quite possibly the perfectly rational cross.


The way it works is simple: As you're walking toward your destination, you remain constantly aware of the vehicular traffic coming from either direction. Once a clear break appears, you cross at that moment. There's no wait time, because you continue walking while you watch for the opening. It's highly safe, or at least you have maximum control over your own safety. Before "jaywalking" was stigmatized and banned through a campaign by automobile lobbyists, this was a perfectly acceptable way to approach a typical dilemma.

Walkers are now supposed to wait until they reach the intersection before crossing, but for obvious reasons they do not want to do this.

1. Vehicles could be approaching from a number of directions and its impossible to simultaneously monitor all of these possibilities.
2. Turning lanes increase the total distance that must be crossed.
3. Stoplights encourage a certain number of drivers to speed to try and beat the red light. The severity of a hit would be much higher.

The only three times I felt my safety compromised over this period was while legally crossing. On one occasion, watching the walk signal I almost stepped out in front of a truck careening through the red light. On two other occasions, right-turning cars were not paying attention to the crosswalk and had to slam on the brakes to avoid hitting me. None of these were near-death experiences, but they underscore the tension pedestrians feel between trusting in official protection and using their own safety intuition.

When walkers must cross at intersections, pedestrian buttons can make things more problematic. In Charlottesville and many other towns, a walk signal will not be displayed unless the button is pressed. This means that if you push the button one second after your cycle begins, you will need to wait for another entire cycle before your signal is given. Research shows that only half of pedestrians press buttons at all, and most folks who do press will not wait unnecessarily. They attempt to cross anyway, only deprived of information about how much time remains in the cycle. Unless the button is "hot" and adjusts signal timing or activates lighting, there's no reason to have it at all.

Pedestrians should be empowered by engineering solutions to follow their own safety intuitions. They have a huge incentive to protect their life, and the truly reckless (or inebriated) will ignore signals or legalities anyway. FHWA sponsored major studies of various pedestrian safety devices in high-crash intersections and last year released a treasure trove of information about what techniques proved effective. In many cases, focusing on modifying driving yield behavior and speeds was more effective than attempting to herd pedestrians.

Engineering is incredibly important, but the best engineers will tell you that they offer sets of trade-offs not absolute solutions. The relative values between pedestrians' right to life, motorists' right to convenience, and costs of implementation cannot be calculated but must be provided subjectively by the ones who make the final decision. Hopefully in a democracy, that's you and me.

http://sustainablecitiescollective.com/Home/29623

Video: YikeBike - Urban Freedom

Blog: Metrocable: ¿posible solución de transporte?

En éstos días retomando mis documentos archivados di con un mensaje de un colega sobre los teleféricos en Medellín, Colombia y decidí averiguar de qué se trataba, semejante proyecto de transporte para las montañas habitadas por los mas desaforecidos.

Primero debemos conocer el sitio: la ciudad de Medellín. Esta es la capital del departamento de Antioquia, situada en el noroccidente de Colombia. Cuenta con 2.250.00 habitantes aproximadamente (3.300.000 en el área metropolitana de Medellín), por lo que se convierte en la segunda ciudad de Colombia. Medellín esta conformada por una zona urbana, dividida en 6 zonas y 5 corregimientos que la rodean. Estos últimos que proporcionalmente tiene dos veces la superficie de la zona urbana son habitados por la población con menos recursos.

Al igual que otras ciudades de América Latina como Caracas, Medellín es una ciudad fundada en un valle que contiene al río Medellín, esta condición de estar “encunada” limita su extensión horizontal.

En cambio ciertas comunas y muchos de los corregimientos están conformados principalmente por asentamientos urbanos informales y espontáneos, éstos se encuentran a lo largo de las laderas que rodean la ciudad formal. Algunas de estas laderas son bastantes escarpadas como son el caso de las comunas Santa Cruz y Popular.

Son precisamente en estas dos comunas de topografía complicada donde la compañía Metro de Medellín implantó una línea adicional en alturas para activar la movilidad en el transporte colectivo de este sector de la ciudad. El proyecto contó con la participación económica de la Alcaldía del Medellín (55%) y de la empresa Metro (45%). Este proyecto esta inscrito en el Proyecto Urbano Integral (PUI) que buscan la recuperación del espacio público para los habitantes de estas zonas tan deprimidas. Esta línea aérea de metro llamada Metrocable, no es pensada como una línea de metro aéreo, puesto que el terreno esta habitado y tiene una topografía bastante difícil. En cambio el Metrocable es más bien un teleférico (en dos tramos: línea K y línea C) que se enlaza con la línea principal del Metro.

Mas específicamente el metrocable funciona con un sistema tipo “Góndola monocable”. La longitud en la línea mas extensa que pasa por las comunas nombradas (línea K), es de 2072 m, hilando un desnivel de casi 400 m. La velocidad comercial del sistema 5 metros/segundo, por lo que no puede ser considerado como un teleférico turístico, los cuales tienen una velocidad media de 3,5 m/s. Además el metrocable de Medellín es el único unido a un sistema de transporte colectivo en el mundo, transportando 3000 pasajeros/hora aproximadamente.

Este servicio de transporte experimental ha servido para integrar al transporte público a estas comunas que habitualmente se encontraban marginadas y que tenían difícil acceso. Sin embargo, su implantación no data sino del 2004, y después de tres años sigue siendo un sistema nuevo, experimental, innovador; así que nada puede garantizar, por ahora, su viabilidad como medio de transporte masivo frente a otras posibles soluciones de movilidad. Siendo un sistema de costosa implantación y de difícil evolución.

Otros datos técnicos. Número de pilonas de sostenimiento: 20 Diámetro del cable y peso: 51 mm. – alma compacta – 42 toneladas Ancho de la vía: 5.7 m. Área construida total: 10.200 m2 Área total urbanismo: 9.000 m2 Número de cabinas: Se puede operar con 75, 80, 85 y 90 cabinas, con capacidad para 10 usuarios c/u. Distancia entre las cabinas: 60 m. Frecuencia: 12 seg Especificaciones técnicas: Cabinas fabricadas en aluminio y con iluminación interna e intercomunicación

http://ac.silvaruiz.free.fr/blog/index.php?2007/11/17/72-metrocable-posible-solucion-de-transporte

Video: L.A.’s Orange Line: Bus Rapid Transit (plus bike path!)

Link

Articulo: Johannesburg Fights Taxi Driver Opposition to BRT Project Necessary for 2010 World Cup

Johannesburg Fights Taxi Driver Opposition to BRT Project Necessary for 2010 World Cup

October 6, 2009

» Arguments over government’s involvement in transportation put into question the role of transit in cities dependent on taxis and private buses.

South Africa will host the continent’s firstWorld Cup in 2010, and in preparation for the event, the city of Johannesburg has been rebuilding its transportation system with afocus on a new bus rapid transit network. But threats and shootings by members of the city’s strong taxi drivers union suggests that the project’s full implementation will not come easily. In a city that desperately needs alternatives to its traffic congestion, this kind of opposition is counter-productive.

Johannesburg, the country’s largest city with a population of almost four million, already offers commuter rail service in the form of Metrorail, which carries two million passengers daily. The Gautrain project, currently under construction, will eventually connect downtown Johannesburg with the capital in Pretoria and the international airport. But it will provide fast intercity connections and it will not be open until after the World Cup concludes.

The BRT project, called Rea Vaya, fulfills a different role: more local service to dense areas of the metropolis. Its first phase began operations last month, and when World Cup rolls around next summer, it will offer 86 km of lines and 100 stations. By 2013, as represented in the map above, the system will be expanded to 122 km and 150 stations. Unlike most “BRT” lines, Johannesburg will be getting the real thing in Rea Vaya: bus-only rights-of-way, high-level platforms at stations allowing level boarding onto buses, and pre-boarding fare collection within stations. In other words, it will be efficient and rapid and give the areas along its route an alternative to existing modes of transport, which take too long too frequently.

But taxi drivers in the area see the BRT as major competition, and they’ve been making their opinion known throughout the system’s development period. Several bus drivers have been threatened by taxi owners, and this week a guard for one of the system’s planners was shot in what appears to be direct action by a rogue gang of something equivalent to a taxi mafia. The United Taxi Association Forum, the union of drivers, denies association with any of the violence but it is clear that individual members are threatened by the creation of the BRT system.

While the violence in South Africa may be beyond the international norm, the reaction of taxi drivers to the implementation of a competing government-run transit network is relatively standard. Plans in Lagos for a light rail system, similarly, have been received negatively by drivers of the yellow buses that take most people everywhere.

To some extent, this opposition is reasonable: the BRT system will eliminate the means to make a living for thousands of taxi drivers in Johannesburg. In a country where unemployment is rampant, creating “efficiency” through better transit ultimately means cutting a number of people out of the job market, at least in the short term. Compensation probably should be made to the city’s taxi drivers, just to ensure that they’re able to transition to new careers.

Yet the lack of better urban mobility for the people of Johannesburg is a limitation for the city as a whole, keeping millions of people in traffic when they could be doing more productive things with their lives. Opposing the system ultimately means denying the population of an alternative to most inner-city commutes; using violence to threaten the network’s completion is a disgrace.

Link Articulo

What is Personal Rapid Transit?

ULTRA

ULTra is a battery-driven, 200-mpg-equivalent, elevated personal rapid transit system with many four-person vehicles. First deployment is scheduled for London Heathrow Airport in Spring 2010, to serve Heathrow's new Terminal 5. Working as circulator transit for airports, office parks, universities, and other major activity centers, ULTra is faster than a car. In these applications, ULTra solves the "last mile problem."
16 web pages of details on Heathrow ULTra PRT can be found at: http://www.ultraprt.com/

BAA (formerly British Airports Authority) is a private-sector firm that owns and operates 7 airports including London Heathrow, the world's third largest. The Heathrow ULTra system construction and operating costs are funded by BAA. This transit system is not government-subsidized.

Video:ULTra PRT sustainable transit 2

Articulo: Folding Electric Bike Rental at Bus Stops to Make Ultimate Commute

Folding Electric Bike Rental at Bus Stops to Make Ultimate Commute
by Brian Merchant, Brooklyn, New York on 09.17.09
CARS & TRANSPORTATION
(http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/09/bus-stop-e-bike-share.php?dcitc=daily_nl)

BUZZ UP!




















Folding Electric Bikes + Bus Stops = Perfect Commute?
Every once in a while, you see a proposed design and think, "there's absolutely no reason this shouldn't already exist." This is one such design--folding bike rental hubs combined directly with bus stops for a comprehensive public transit system. The system would allow users to rent folding e-bikes from a modular hub attached to each bus stop. Pics and details on how the system would work after the jump.

According to Tuvie, the system would work as follows:

This concept comprises a foldable e-bike that can be rode from the home and deposited to modular mobile hub, and board a bus. Upon arrival at destination, another hub will be there to rent another bike through using the unique Oystercard which can be availed by leasing the service on a per trip or monthly basis.





















Folding Electric Bike Design
The E-bike has been designed with airless tires, robust tubular construction and shaft drive, ensuring durability, while the luminated front bar and dazzling graphics increase the visibility and safety for the rider. E-bikes have designed to be folded quickly and intuitively by the user and deposit it into the storage modules after arriving to a transit hub. RFID technology has been utilized to charge the users on their Oystercard according to the amount of E-bike rental time. When docked, E-bikes act as hub seating and get charged for the next renter.
Not so sure if the 'dazzling graphics' are necessary--and the folding bikes probably don't have to be e-bikes, either. But the proposed system may have a better chance of being feasible if they are, unfortunately.











The transit hubs are designed to be iconic and recognizable, like subway stops. The hubs would also provide a "real time transit schedule" that users can access to help plan their commutes. And the e-bikes are evidently charged on board the bus as it drives: "During the time passengers board on a bus, its ultracapacitors get charged until next stop via a small arm extended from the hub. The buses collect and disperse E-bikes according to demand." This makes it possible for both bike share and bus to be operated by a public authority.









From Tuvie:

The electrical modular buses aim to optimize the needs of next generation commuters by providing ultimate convenience for public transit.










It's a great concept--if there were a system to provide bikes (electric or not) to commuters at every bus stop, it'd make urban traveling much easier. And hopefully, more attractive an option.

EMBARQ: Mexican Cities Take Lead on Sustainable Transport

…“I am convinced that the problems of traffic congestion, air contamination, the loss of time spent on excessively long trips, discomfort to transport system users, and transit accidents can be resolved through developing effective transportation mechanisms like Macrobus,” he said.

…“Without the governor’s leadership, a project like this, done in such a short amount of time, would have been impossible,” Lobo says.

…Macrobús was made possible through technical and financial support from EMBARQ – The World Resources Institute Center for Sustainable Transport, a non-profit based in Washington, D.C., and CTS-México, part of EMBARQ’s international network of sustainable transport organizations. CTS-México staff provided technical expertise during the planning and implementation stages, and will continue to support the start-up operations.

http://www.embarq.org/en/news/09/03/06/press-release-mexican-cities-take-lead-sustainable-transport

MACROBUS a la Mejicana

Bike vs. Car vs. Transit

Transportation Alternatives held its 7th annual Commuter Challenge pitting cyclist, driver, and bus/subway rider in the ultimate showdown of which mode of travel can be quickest (and cheapest!)

In the end, the bike proved swiftest over the 4.5 mile course which began in Brooklyn's Fort Greene and ended in Manhattan's Union Square. Jamie Favaro rolled up in just over 16 minutes and took home the gold and a bouquet of flowers for her efforts. Driver, Emmanuel Fuentebella (22 minutes) parked his car and sprinted to a surprise second place finish. Shortly after, disappointed MTA rider April Greene came in last at 29 minutes. But, as Wiley Norvell noted at the finish line, Transportation Alternatives also measured the carbon footprint of all the the riders and Greene came in a close second behind the cyclist.