Search Results for “tom vanderbilt” – Savannah Unplugged http://www.billdawers.com Mon, 16 Apr 2012 14:17:08 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.7 18778551 Tom Vanderbilt on NPR this morning: Americans should be walking more http://www.billdawers.com/2012/04/16/tom-vanderbilt-on-npr-this-morning-americans-should-be-walking-more/ http://www.billdawers.com/2012/04/16/tom-vanderbilt-on-npr-this-morning-americans-should-be-walking-more/#comments Mon, 16 Apr 2012 14:17:08 +0000 http://www.billdawers.com/?p=2679 Read more →

]]> I’ve already posted links, comments, and excerpts for Tom Vanderbilt’s 4-part series at Slate about the state of walking and pedestrianism in America.

This morning he talked to NPR’s Morning Edition about these issues — and made a compelling case for a renewed emphasis on the values of walking and the need for public spaces designed for it.

Read and hear Americans Do Not Walk The Walk, And That’s A Growing Problem.

From the NPR piece:

“Walking is really as natural as breathing,” Vanderbilt says. “We’re all born pedestrians.”

Talking with Steve, Vanderbilt cites a thought on walking from philosopher Soren Kierkegaard, who said, “I’ve walked myself into my best thoughts.”

“I think we’ve all had that experience, of just taking a walk to clear your head. And it lowers your stress,” Vanderbilt says — then adds, “hopefully, it lowers your stress. Some places we have to walk in the U.S., it doesn’t lower your stress.”

As he writes in the final installment of his series, “There is not a single dollar in the U.S. federal transportation budget dedicated strictly to walking.”

Later in the same paragraph, Vanderbilt writes: “As a Federal Highway Administration study noted, ‘In 2009, about 2.0 percent of federal-aid surface transportation funds were used for pedestrian and bicycle programs and projects. However, those two modes are estimated to account for almost 12 percent of all trips and represent more than 13 percent of all traffic fatalities.'”

]]> http://www.billdawers.com/2012/04/16/tom-vanderbilt-on-npr-this-morning-americans-should-be-walking-more/feed/ 2 2679 Tom Vanderbilt in “Slate”: “How America can start walking again” http://www.billdawers.com/2012/04/14/tom-vanderbilt-in-slate-how-america-can-start-walking-again/ Sat, 14 Apr 2012 13:53:20 +0000 http://www.billdawers.com/?p=2669 Read more →

]]> I’ve already posted a few Savannah-centric comments about as well as links to Traffic author Tom Vanderbilt’s 4-part series in Slate about walking in America. My posts are here, here, and here.

Why do Americans walk less than most other people around the world? And what can we do about it?

The final article in the series, Learning to Walk; How America can start walking again, begins with a story from Georgia (again) about mother Raquel Nelson, who was convicted of vehicular homicide even though she wasn’t driving — or even inside a car. She was walking her 3 children across a busy divided road from a bus stop. They didn’t make it across and her 4-year old son was killed.

Vanderbilt on that much-publicized incident:

The bus stop from which she’d alighted was directly across from the apartment complex that represented, in essence, its user base. And yet, transit users like Nelson were asked to walk one-third of a mile to the nearest traffic signal, on a narrow sidewalk abutting a street on which cars regularly drive 60 mph; to wait to cross at the intersection; and then to return another third of a mile. (To see for yourself just how daunting this is, head north from the apartment entrance on Google Street View.) At the time of the accident, Nelson and her family had been crossing directly at the bus stop, where there is no crosswalk. For this, Georgia prosecutors charged her with second-degree vehicular homicide. The driver, who was initially charged with “hit and run, first degree homicide by vehicle and cruelty to children,” later had his charges dropped to hit and run.

Vanderbilt goes deep into the failures of street design and transit access. He correctly notes that it’s simply not human behavior to walk far out of one’s way if there’s a shorter route. We once had a spate of pedestrian accidents here in Savannah on West Bay Street over the viaduct — those were directly related to the fact there were so no legal crossings in the areas where pedestrians needed them. We had a tragic death on Bay Street at Jefferson Street a number of years ago that prompted the city to put in a crosswalk, but that intersection had for many years been a key one for pedestrians on Savannah’s nightlife scene. Why did it take a death to make such a sensible decision? Why do we continue to ignore the blatant lawbreaking of drivers crossing Bull Street in the Historic District who do not yield to pedestrians already in the crosswalk?

Vanderbilt gives here a great history of sidewalks generally — and points out that overly long blocks and high-speed traffic have proven huge barriers to walking. Comparisons:

It is true that Americans tend to inhabit lower density regions than people do in Europe, but as a study by transportation researcher Ralph Buehler and colleagues found, Germans who live in lower density regions travel by car about as much as Americans living in areas that are five times denser. Germans walk more for a range of reasons: better walking facilities, better connections with transit, better transit (which itself encourages more walking), stronger financial incentives (e.g., higher gas prices), better land-use decisions, and because it’s safer to walk in Germany than in the United States. Even Canada, whose broad geography might imply more car trips than in the United States, walks or cycles twice as much as we do.

He finishes with a great discussion of Complete Streets and how design can change behavior. This is a long series by internet reading standards these days, but well worth the time for those who are invested in any of these issues — which should include just about everyone in Savannah.

]]> 2669 Walk Score: Slate series on pedestrian issues weighs validity of widely used metric http://www.billdawers.com/2012/04/13/walk-score-slate-series-on-pedestrian-issues-weighs-validity-of-widely-used-metric/ Fri, 13 Apr 2012 17:30:43 +0000 http://www.billdawers.com/?p=2665 Read more →

]]> Tom Vanderbilt, in the 3rd part of his excellent 4-part series on pedestrianism and walking in America, focuses on Walk Score, “the company that tracks the “walkability” of locations around the world.”

From What’s Your Walk Score?; The company that puts a number on walkability:

Walk Score is a website that takes a physical address—enter yours here—and computes, using proprietary algorithms and various data streams, a measure of its walkability. More recently it’s started tracking how transit-friendly neighborhoods are too. What drives the score is choice and proximity—the more amenities (restaurants, movie theaters, schools) you have around you, and the closer they are, the higher your Walk Score.

As Vanderbilt discusses (while punctuating his piece with myriad examples), Walk Score makes assumptions about walkability based on its algorithms that might not actually be borne out by experience.

Still, I’d argue that it’s a useful number in terms of planning and neighborhood analysis.

My block of Thomas Square has a Walk Score of 83

My walk score (I live on 32nd St. near Bull) is 83.

BUT but but . . . the list of bars near me does not include the one that I visit the most, and is closest to me: the lounge at American Legion Post #135. And the bar next door at Local 11 ten (one downstairs and Perch upstairs) aren’t listed. The Sentient Bean has regularly entertainment but isn’t listed under those amenities. Bull Street Eatery and Cafe Florie aren’t listed, but they’re closer than most of the restaurants on the list.

My parents live on the south side of the river, so they only have a Walk Score of 77 (still "very walkable")

In other words, my score should probably be higher than it is.

My parents moved a number of years ago into downtown Frankfort, Kentucky from the rural area where they previously lived. My mother walks around downtown almost daily, but neither of them walks often to services. They live a tenth of a mile from a small grocery, but they routinely do their serious grocery shopping at a Kroger in the suburbs. Still, it’s clearly a walkable neighborhood — and it clearly has very easy car trips if residents are not willing or able to walk.

Out here at Armstrong where I teach, the Walk Score is 62 (“somewhat walkable”) but it’s hardly walkable given the way that Abercorn Street is designed. That’s something that the campus should address.

Savannah as a whole has a Walk Score of 47, far lower than even Armstrong’s.

Here’s what that looks like on the map — with the higher numbers in green.

Savannah's average Walk Score is 47

Ironically, with an average Walk Score of 53, Atlanta does better by these metrics than Savannah. That’s because many neighborhoods in the urban core are rated as highly walkable, even as the city has become widely known for its sprawl and car-dependency.

]]> 2665 Tom Vanderbilt on pedestrian habits in part 2 of “Slate” series http://www.billdawers.com/2012/04/12/tom-vanderbilt-on-pedestrian-habits-in-part-2-of-slate-series/ Fri, 13 Apr 2012 01:09:46 +0000 http://www.billdawers.com/?p=2663 Sidewalk Science; The peculiar habits of the pedestrian, explained:
[William "Holly"] Whyte, in his films of New York City street life, identified the street corner as an important factor in urban dynamics. Here was a zone of serendipity where people encountered one another beneath the blinking walk man, where they paused to chat before parting, where they formed small convivial islands just as pedestrian flow was surging most strongly.

Read more →

]]> From Tom Vanderbilt’s Sidewalk Science; The peculiar habits of the pedestrian, explained:

[William “Holly”] Whyte, in his films of New York City street life, identified the street corner as an important factor in urban dynamics. Here was a zone of serendipity where people encountered one another beneath the blinking walk man, where they paused to chat before parting, where they formed small convivial islands just as pedestrian flow was surging most strongly. Even today, corners offer new uses; one often finds people talking there on their mobile devices, either held up by the signal or forgetting to move after the signal has changed. Either way, the corner is urban punctuation, a place to pause, essential to the whole civic grammar.

In part 2 of this excellent 4-part series in Slate, Vanderbilt (author of Traffic) talks to key researchers in the habits of pedestrians — particularly Jeff Zupan.

Much of the discussion is focused on sidewalk congestion — a problem that many cities wish they had! — and on the mechanics of the body, of the wind, and of the trend of pedestrians to “minimize their dissatisfaction” through creating new paths, taking escalators, jaywalking, and the like.

By the way, on the subject of corners: One of the reasons that Savannah’s streetscape is so vibrant is that it has such short blocks — as Jane Jacobs noted, this trait gives city dwellers and visitors constant options. And the design produces more corners, more places for unexpected and creative engagement with new streets and passersby.

Here’s a video embedded in part 2. It’s not labeled as clearly as I would like, but it appears to be a pedestrian simulation near a transit stop — the blue dots leaving the train come in floods that threaten to overwhelm the walkers headed into the station.


]]> 2663 Tom Vanderbilt, author of “Traffic”, on “The Crisis in American Walking” http://www.billdawers.com/2012/04/12/tom-vanderbilt-author-of-traffic-on-the-crisis-in-american-walking/ Thu, 12 Apr 2012 19:25:37 +0000 http://www.billdawers.com/?p=2659 Slate is in the midst of publishing a four-part series by Tom Vanderbilt, author of the acclaimed book Traffic, about pedestrianism -- or just plain old walking -- in America. Vanderbilt's opening from part one -- The Crisis in American Walking; How we got off the pedestrian path -- might be especially interesting to readers here in Savannah [. . .]

Read more →

]]> Slate is in the midst of publishing a four-part series by Tom Vanderbilt, author of the acclaimed book Traffic, about pedestrianism — or just plain old walking — in America.

Vanderbilt’s opening from part one — The Crisis in American Walking; How we got off the pedestrian path — might be especially interesting to readers here in Savannah:

A few years ago, at a highway safety conference in Savannah, Ga., I drifted into a conference room where a sign told me a “Pedestrian Safety” panel was being held.

The speaker was Michael Ronkin, a French-born, Swiss-raised, Oregon-based transportation planner whose firm, as his website notes, “specializes in creating walkable and bikeable streets.” Ronkin began with a simple observation that has stayed with me since. Taking stock of the event—one of the few focused on walking, which gets scant attention at traffic safety conferences—he wondered about that inescapable word: pedestrian. If we were to find ourselves out hiking on a forest trail and spied someone approaching at a distance, he wanted to know, would we think to ourselves, “Here comes a pedestrian”?

I remember when Vanderbilt was in town for that conference in 2009. We briefly corresponded after being jointly contacted by a mutual friend, and I tried to get the city to add him to a program that included walkability expert Dan Burden.

After delving into the etymology of the word “pedestrian” and noting its pejorative use, Vanderbilt continues his story from Savannah:

To this day, Ronkin was intimating, the word pedestrian bears not only that slightly alien whiff, but the scars of condescension. This became clear as we walked later that evening through the historic center of Savannah. As we moved through the squares, our rambling trajectory matched by our expansive conversation, we were simply people doing that most human of things, walking. But every once in a while, we would encounter a busy thoroughfare, and we became pedestrians. We lurked under ridiculously large retroreflective signs, built not at our scale, but to be seen by those moving at a distance and at speed. Other signs reinforced the message, starkly announcing: “Stop for Pedestrians.” I thought, “Wait, who’s a pedestrian? Is that me?”

It was at just such a crossing in 2009 where a Swedish visitor, Nils Eric Svensson, was killed in a crosswalk as he walked north across Oglethorpe Avenue at Bull Street. He was part of a group of 30, who clearly had the right of way, according to state law. But no charges were ever filed against the driver, and the Savannah metro police department responded with a draconian crackdown on pedestrians rather than a crackdown on drivers who routinely ignore the law regarding rights of way.

Back to Vanderbilt’s experience in Savannah:

we would gingerly step into the marked crosswalk, that declaration of rights in paint, and try to gauge whether approaching vehicles would yield. They typically did not. Even in one of America’s most “pedestrian-friendly” cities—a seemingly innocent phrase that itself suddenly seemed strange to me—one was always in danger of being relegated to a footnote.

Vanderbilt’s series is excellent (parts 2 and 3 have also been published — I’ll post excerpts and links soon), and explores some big questions:

This question—what is walking for—is one of the many I will be exploring this week. There is a dual pedagogical imperative here: I aim to explore not only how people on foot behave as a class, but also how America lost its knack for walking, only now taking some stumbling steps in the right direction.

]]> 2659 Minimizing the delays caused by left turns — a key to improving traffic flow http://www.billdawers.com/2011/08/29/minimizing-the-delays-caused-by-left-turns-a-key-to-improving-traffic-flow/ Mon, 29 Aug 2011 22:31:29 +0000 http://www.billdawers.com/?p=1174 Read more →

]]> A few days ago I posted about Traffic author Tom Vanderbilt’s thoughts about the ineffectiveness of warning signs on streets.

Earlier this month in Slate, Vanderbilt wrote a fascinating piece about diverging diamond interchanges: Don’t Turn Left! A new kind of intersection eliminates dangerous, time-wasting left turns.

Georgia is about to get its first DDI at the intersection of I-285 and Ashford-Dunwoody in the Atlanta metro area. There are still only a handful in the entire country, but there seems to be a lot of optimism out there that DDIs will be relatively inexpensive ways to reduce congestion at some large intersections. Check out the demonstration video here:

Crazy, right? Essentially, you’re looking at the elimination of dedicated left turn lanes that require their own lights when a highway meets a major arterial street at another grade. To achieve that, the main lanes of traffic have to crossover each other and then cross back. Cars from two directions can then go straight or turn left simultaneously, thus eliminating the time spent waiting for dedicated left turn lights.

Here’s another DDI simulation:

And here’s a similar configuration — the continuous flow intersection — for two major arterial roads that meet each other at grade. From the Utah Dept. of Transportation:

Again, the idea is to minimize the amount of time that through drivers have to waste waiting for drivers to make left turns.

As Vanderbilt suggests, the biggest drawback to these configurations probably has to do with the sheer scale of these intersections. You really have to be talking about major traffic congestion — like that of metro Atlanta — before you’re likely to find many intersections that need such a dramatic fix.

The problem of left turns is significant in many places, however.

Here in Savannah, dedicated left turn signals were added not long ago for east-west traffic at Stephenson and White Bluff at the entrance to Hunter. The extra time of the light cycle has significantly increased the odds of north-south drivers getting stopped by the light at that intersection.

Inbound traffic on Middleground Road has two left turn lanes at the new-ish intersection with Abercorn (at Montgomery Cross Road), but it’s pretty common for cars to have sit through an extra cycle before they can turn — that delay makes the Middleground route a much less effective alternative to the streetlight-laden Abercorn.

The exits off the Truman Parkway have always been cluttered by the problem of left turns — at multiple points there seem to be inordinate delays because of the long light cycles.

For what it’s worth, I wish Savannah was looking at more roundabouts for streets that meet at grade. Middleground Road would be a perfect spot for several roundabouts rather than the three traffic lights that were added when the road was widened.

The problematic intersection of Abercorn/204 and King George is one that might eventually demand some form of congestion relief. Traditional thinking would require a hugely expensive bridge, but a continuous flow intersection like the one seen above might work just fine — for a fraction of the cost.

I know people complain all the time about roundabouts, but there’s ample reason to think that Savannahians would adapt to them decently well. Savannah’s squares are essentially rotaries after all. They slow all the traffic down but keep everybody moving.

There are other ways of minimizing left turns, but the simplest is probably in New Orleans. Many significant intersections simply don’t allow left turns; drivers who want to go left go through the intersection, do a U-turn, and then turn right. It sounds cumbersome, but it’s still an effective way of reducing wasted time — and that translates into reduced congestion and fewer demands to expand road capacity.

]]> 1174 “Traffic” author Tom Vanderbilt on those dangerous “Children at Play” signs http://www.billdawers.com/2011/08/27/traffic-author-tom-vanderbilt-on-those-dangerous-children-at-play-signs/ Sat, 27 Aug 2011 22:42:23 +0000 http://www.billdawers.com/?p=1173 Read more →

]]> I write a lot about the interactions of pedestrians, drivers, cyclists, and various other modes of transportation here in Savannah.

Earlier today, in preparation for my Tuesday column, I rode my bike to take pictures of surface parking lots on Drayton Street. While I was out, I encountered other cyclists, a skateboarder, a skateboarder being pulled by two huskies, a pedicab, plenty of pedestrians, two horse-drawn carriages, one tourist trolley, and innumerable cars.

That’s sort of a usual trip in the neighborhoods around Forsyth Park.

One of the best writers in the country when it comes to transportation issues and dangers is Tom Vanderbilt, author of Traffic.

Among the most striking elements of Vanderbilt’s writing is his consistent questioning of assumptions. Take a look, for example, at this piece from Slate in May: Little. Yellow. Dangerous. “Children at Play” signs imperil our kids. He notes:

Despite the continued preponderance of “Children at Play” on streets across the land, it is no secret in the world of traffic engineering that “Children at Play” signs—termed, with subtle condescension, “advisory signs”—have been proven neither to change driver behavior nor to do anything to improve the safety of children in a traffic setting.

He continues:

One of the things that is known, thanks to peer-reviewed science, is that increased traffic speeds (and volumes) increase the risk of children’s injuries. But “Children at Play” signs are a symptom, rather than a cure—a sign of something larger that is out of whack, whether the lack of a pervasive safety culture in driving, a system that puts vehicular mobility ahead of neighborhood livability, or non-contextual street design. After all, it’s roads, not signs, that tell people how to drive. People clamoring for “Children at Play” signs are often living on residential streets that are inordinately wide, lacking any kind of calming obstacles (from trees to “bulb-outs”), perhaps having unnecessary center-line markings—three factors that will boost vehicle speed more than any sign will lower them.

There is much more in the piece.

]]> 1173 Do I have clout? or just Klout? http://www.billdawers.com/2011/06/29/do-i-have-clout-or-just-klout/ Thu, 30 Jun 2011 03:02:27 +0000 http://www.billdawers.com/?p=751 Read more →

]]> It was just last week that my friend Jason told me about Klout, a website that tracks online influence and comes up with a “Klout score”: “The Klout Score is the measurement of your overall online influence. The scores range from 1 to 100 with higher scores representing a wider and stronger sphere of influence. Klout uses over 35 variables on Facebook and Twitter to measure True Reach, Amplification Probability, and Network Score.”

Then on Sunday, the NYT ran this fascinating op-ed: “Got Twitter? You’ve Been Scored”, by Stephanie Rosenbloom. Parts of the op-ed are balanced, parts tongue-in-cheek, but she generally paints a dystopian picture of services like Klout:

IMAGINE a world in which we are assigned a number that indicates how influential we are. This number would help determine whether you receive a job, a hotel-room upgrade or free samples at the supermarket. If your influence score is low, you don’t get the promotion, the suite or the complimentary cookies. [. . .]

If you have a Facebook, Twitter or LinkedIn account, you are already being judged — or will be soon. Companies with names like Klout, PeerIndex and Twitter Grader are in the process of scoring millions, eventually billions, of people on their level of influence — or in the lingo, rating “influencers.” Yet the companies are not simply looking at the number of followers or friends you’ve amassed. Rather, they are beginning to measure influence in more nuanced ways, and posting their judgments — in the form of a score — online.

To some, it’s an inspiring tool — one that’s encouraging the democratization of influence. No longer must you be a celebrity, a politician or a media personality to be considered influential. Social scoring can also help build a personal brand. To critics, social scoring is a brave new technoworld, where your rating could help determine how well you are treated by everyone with whom you interact.

“Now you are being assigned a number in a very public way, whether you want it or not,” said Mark W. Schaefer, an adjunct professor of marketing at Rutgers University and the executive director of Schaefer Marketing Solutions. “It’s going to be publicly accessible to the people you date, the people you work for. It’s fast becoming mainstream.”

There’s lots of cynicism out there online about Klout too. I googled “klout who gives a shit” and ended up at the blog Blah Blah Fn Blah, on which owner Justin Baisden scathingly critiques our obsession with scoring and with lists — and that was after he made a list of the 150 most influential Twitterers based in Toronto:

Personally, I think the people who put their heart and soul into Twitter were the most upset and as you move down the list it turns into a “who cares?” or “oh shit I’m on the list.” I’m in the latter boat. I legit laughed seeing I made this list. I haven’t looked at my Klout score in six months? Longer? For a guy like me, I don’t really see the direct benefit. I mean if 70 Klout points got me a blowjob from Olivia Wilde I’d find new and more innovative ways to raise my score but otherwise who gives a shit?

“Why isn’t Social Guru #54321 in there? I stroke his dick on the regular so I know he’s got influence.”

Is it really worth getting bent out of shape over a list of compiled scores?

Katy, at don’t drink the kool-aid blog, critiqued the recent inclusion of Facebook in the Klout score, but generally seems to think scores like this have a role to play:

While I’m excited to see where this trend goes, I do hope that brands using this initiative to share their Facebook content are able to have more control in dictating who receives what. My personal recommendation would be for Klout to be cautious of the brands they partner with. Groupon only approves deals from brands if the value is in line with what subscribers want. Being selective will help this initiative stay relevant.

Alex Braunstein does an amazing job on his blog of arguing why your Klout score is meaningless , by doing statistical analysis of real-world examples that don’t add up. (And also critiques the inclusion of Facebook.)

And those are just a few of a huge range of opinions about Klout.

I have a pretty high clout score: 57, which makes me, comically, a “Specialist”. Folks, I’m a generalist if there ever was one.

But I’m a media figure — I’ve written way over 1,000 columns for the Savannah Morning News, I treat my Facebook page with over 1800 friends as a public forum, I post daily or even more frequent entries from this blog on Twitter. I’m out there, and if I didn’t have online influence, there would be something seriously wrong with the ways I spend my time.

But should one company have access to so much information about us? Well, they do if we have Twitter, the data for which is public. And if Klout users don’t add their Facebook accounts, they’re hurting their own scores, which seems a built-in incentive to lead many users to compromise their own privacy (and that of their “friends”, all of whom get scores the moment Facebook is linked to Klout). Btw, I just added my LinkedIn account to my Klout profile; it will be interesting to see if the score goes up.

But should any of us care about our scores? For those who are using social media for purely social and familial purposes, of course not. And services like Klout should create a mechanism whereby Twitter or Facebook users can opt out of the scoring.

I think there would be some real merit in this type of scoring if the real world examples made any sense. For example, Klout indicates that I am influential about business, economics, money, and — get this — religion and spirituality. Maybe it was my recent retweet of an article from The Onion about zombies attacking Pittsburgh that got me into that last category.

And my Klout score is higher than the scores of some Twitter users that I follow, including:

  • Frankfort, Ky.: 14 (I have more online influence than my hometown, the capital of Kentucky!)
  • Georgia.gov: 41 (more than the state of Georgia!)
  • Werner Herzog: 52 (OK, he’s only made 4 cryptic tweets, but I think he’s still more influential than I)
  • Tom Vanderbilt, author of Traffic: 51
  • Mitch Landrieu, mayor of New Orleans: 48
  • SCAD: 26 (and here I thought the Savannah College of Art and Design was on every cutting edge)

So this is obviously nonsense. I don’t have more online influence than any of those (except maybe the city of Frankfort and the state of Georgia . . .).

Interestingly, I’m dead-even at 57 with Jim Galloway, who writes the Political Insider blog at the AJC (and does a great job of it) and with Hal Thomas, content manager at BFG Communications in Hilton Head (BFG’s Klout score is 49).

And of course I trail all sorts of major media outlets like the AJC and HuffPost, major cultural figures like Stephen Fry and David Lynch, etc., etc.

In sum, I have some serious doubts about Klout. At least until I get some free stuff out of it.

]]> 751