Do people drive slower when the streetscape is beautiful?
Are “complete streets” beautiful? Or can they be? Or should they be?
I’m wondering because I’m chairing a sub-committee of the STAR Team that will, if successful, help encourage the City of Springfield to adopt a complete streets policy. More on this as our work progresses.
Would beauty be a selling point for the general public?
Here are the benefits as listed on the National Complete Streets Coalition website:
Complete streets make economic sense. A balanced transportation system that includes complete streets can bolster economic growth and stability by providing accessible and efficient connections between residences, schools, parks, public transportation, offices, and retail destinations.
Complete streets improve safety by reducing crashes through safety improvements. One study found that designing for pedestrian travel by installing raised medians and redesigning intersections and sidewalks reduced pedestrian risk by 28%.
Complete streets encourage more walking and bicycling. Public health experts are encouraging walking and bicycling as a response to the obesity epidemic, and complete streets can help. One study found that 43 percent of people with safe places to walk within 10 minutes of home met recommended activity levels, while just 27% of those without safe places to walk were active enough.
Complete streets can help ease transportation woes. Streets that provide travel choices can give people the option to avoid traffic jams, and increase the overall capacity of the transportation network. Several smaller cities have adopted complete streets policies as one strategy to increase the overall capacity of their transportation network and reduce congestion.
Complete streets help children. Streets that provide room for bicycling and walking help children get physical activity and gain independence. More children walk to school where there are sidewalks, and children who have and use safe walking and bicycling routes have a more positive view of their neighborhood. Safe Routes to School programs, gaining in popularity across the country, will benefit from complete streets policies that help turn all routes into safe routes.
Complete streets are good for air quality. Poor air quality in our urban areas is linked to increases in asthma and other illnesses. Yet if each resident of an American community of 100,000 replaced one car trip with one bike trip just once a month, it would cut carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 3,764 tons of per year in the community. Complete streets allow this to happen more easily.
Complete streets make fiscal sense. Integrating sidewalks, bike lanes, transit amenities, and safe crossings into the initial design of a project spares the expense of retrofits later. Jeff Morales, former Director of Caltrans, said, “by fully considering the needs of all non-motorized travelers (pedestrians, bicyclists, and persons with disabilities) early in the life of a project, the costs associated with including facilities for these travelers are minimized.”
Hmmmmm… nothing about beauty.
Comments 3
Beauty is nice, but complete streets are where your family can be together as a family. And meet other people in a human manner.
Togther, that allows the beauty to emerge which continues the process…
Posted 24 Nov 2009 at 12:40 pm ¶Steve… I suspect you’re right — sort of a form-follows-function thing, i.e. if it’s useful for the purposes you mention then it likely also beautiful. I’m thinking I’d like to see beauty mentioned specifically.
Posted 24 Nov 2009 at 5:56 pm ¶I think that one of the key challenges to making streets more person-friendly is to slow traffic down. This can be done by landscaping – even in areas where existing layouts might seem to exclude this.
That’s an example from the not-terribly-bike-friendly North East of England. But if you look over at David Hembrow’s blog (sorry – can’t get the link from inside the office’s firewall!), you’ll see a lot of pictures of streets that are definitely beautiful.
Posted 25 Nov 2009 at 6:34 am ¶