Originally posted on the Adaptive Path Blog
In my mind, it seemed perfect: Technologists and transit-enthusiasts coming together to rethink the transit experience. A chance to bring the experience design gospel to an industry in need. Brimming with missionary zeal, my transportation planner husband and I headed off to the Bay Area TransitCamp.
I wasn’t prepared for the culture shock. My idealism was greeted by a ragtag bunch consisting of khaki-clad engineers, frumpy transit riders and suit-wearing transit officials. The engineers preached the possibilities of open-source data. White-haired transit riders screeched frustrations about their particular pet issues. And the transit officials defended cuts to bathroom-cleaning with the hard, cold facts of their bureaucratic reality.
Welcome to TransitCamp.
Could this possibly be the crowd that would transform transit? It felt like anarchy. “No complaints without solutions” was the only rule, and organizer Tara Hunt had to reiterate it again and again. Yet as idealism and realism collided, something impressive happened. We learned from one another. iPhone app developers learned that 40% of riders are below the poverty line. Cost-conscious officials learned that dozens of techies are eager to develop solutions–for free.
I realized that making a difference requires a humble and listening posture. Transit is an interdisciplinary problem that requires interdisciplinary understanding. While it produced interesting ideas, TransitCamp’s greatest triumph was fostering an atmosphere of learning and collaboration between unlikely bedfellows.
February 27th, 2008
I just read about an interesting measure that’s been approved by the Norwich City Council to set parking fees based on the length of cars. The measure incentivizes generally more fuel efficient and less space-consuming cars:
While I think it seems like a great idea, I can’t help but think about the people who feel they don’t really have any other choice. As street parkers in a high demand area, there are lots of times we wish we had a SmartCar so we could fit it in the non-spaces… but we can’t just run out and buy a new car. The tiniest cars are way out of our price range right now. (Of course the constant nagging would probably factor into our decision when we do need a new car.) But even more without a choice are, as people against the measure cited, families with children for whom cramming everyone into a Mini isn’t possible.
Reading about teachers’ struggle to find parking at a San Francisco school made me think as well:
“Every recess - and sometimes in the middle of class - teachers at San Francisco’s Buena Vista Elementary School dash outside to move their cars before a parking ticket appears on their windshield. Up to six times a day, they forgo a chat with a student, a sip of coffee or a trip to the bathroom to play musical cars among the one-hour spots around the school.”
Planners generally say, “Driving is not a right. Just take transit.” But “teachers said that such options are often impossible or inconvenient with bags full of lesson plans, books, students’ homework and art supplies.”
It’s easy for young, mobile, urbanites to look down on those who commute an hour to work from the suburbs or drive a minivan. But understanding the forces that drive people to do so — financial, practical, social — is the key to providing realistic options for everyone.
February 1st, 2008