auto-free zone
April-June 1995 No. 11
The quarterly newsletter of Auto-Free Ottawa-a grassroots group,
whose mandate is to draw public attention to the full costs of
our car-dominated transportation system, and to point out
ecologically sustainable and socially beneficial alternatives.
auto-free zone is mailed to subscribers or members of Auto-Free
Ottawa (see form last page).
WOMEN, KIDS AND CARS: A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY
CONTENTS
I. WOMEN, TRANSPORT AND THE ENVIRONMENT - Women's Environmental
Network
II. 'MOM'S TAXI' COULD BE A DEATHTRAP - John Barber
III. SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL PROGRAM (SRS)
IV. IF CARS ARE HERE TO STAY THEN HUMANS AREN'T
V. OTTAWA IN 2020: A CAR-FREE DAY IN THE LIFE OF A SINGLE
MOTHER OF TWO
VI. AUTO-DEPENDENCE: A DRIVING FORCE FOR GENDER INEQUALITY
VII. WOMEN IN CITIES - Renata Brillinger
VIII. CARS ATTACKED AS ROOT OF MOST EVIL
IX. STEPS TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY
X. AUTO-FREE OTTAWA NEWS
XI. CYCLING CHALLENGE
XII. PEN IS MIGHTIER THAN INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE!
I. WOMEN, TRANSPORT AND THE ENVIRONMENT - Women's Environmental
Network
Safe, reliable and inexpensive transport is an essential part
of every woman's life. We need efficient, and ecological means
to travel from place to place. Transport is about people, not
machinery; it is about access to the places which we want, or
need to reach. Most journeys are very short, but transport
planners seem to assume that long-distance road travel matters
more than local access and the environment.
The quality of the transport available to us affects where we
work, where we shop, and how we spend our leisure time. Good
transport systems are essential to leading a full and rewarding
life. However, many women can find their lives limited by a lack
of reasonable transport provision.
Studies have shown that women make the majority of their
journeys by bus or on their own two feet. Yet these modes of
transport, both of which have a minimal impact on the
environment, are too often neglected and marginalized. The
funding and planning of transport systems is weighted heavily
towards car drivers.
The car is the largest air polluter in the world, using one
third of the world's non-renewable oil each year and producing
one half of the world's air pollution. Health risks linked to
this air pollution are well documented and known to cause
concern. Recent studies have shown that children's diseases such
as chest infections and respiratory illnesses including
asthma, are increasing at an alarming rate, and this has been
linked to the ever increasing amount of air pollution caused by
traffic.
Every day our children, who are down at car level much of the
time, and women, who make up the majority of pedestrians, breathe
in this pollutant cocktail containing carbon dioxide, carbon
monoxide, nitrogen oxides, ozone and lead.
The car's right to priority and domination of our streets
seems to be taken for granted even though half the UK population
does not own a car. Women are particularly disadvantaged in
areas specifically designed for cars, since only one third of
U.K. full driving licences are held by women. The expense of
buying and running a car is prohibitive for large numbers of
people, especially women, who still on average earn only 77% of
the average male income.
Out of town supermarkets are an example of thoughtless
planning. Women are responsible for 87% of the shopping, but they
are the very people least able to reach them! Without good
alternatives to the car, many people will continue to find their
mobility severely limited. Those who do not wish to drive, and
those who cannot (e.g. because of their age, or disability), lose
a great deal of independence in this car-dominated society.
Lonely Sidewalks
The condition of streets is important to women for whom walking
is a major form of transport. Walking is becoming increasingly
unpleasant; we suffer from air and noise pollution, uneven and
damaged sidewalks, and sidewalk parking. Negotiating the
endless ups and downs of curbs is a draining chore that women
with pushchairs have to go through every time they venture
outside. Much of the damage to sidewalks is due to irresponsible
and illegal car parking; this is also a hazard to blind people,
and it blocks the pathway for prams and wheelchairs.
Depopulation of Sidewalks
Over 400 children were killed by car accidents last year in
Britain. Many parents are reluctant to allow their children to
walk alone on the streets. Children today are less likely to be
allowed to play outside unsupervised, walk to a friend's house or
go for cycle rides. Escorting children everywhere takes time.
Parents spend a staggering 900 million hours per year
accompanying children to various locations. Almost 30% of women's
journeys are made to accompany other people, including older
people and those with disabilities who are also intimidated by
the physical threat of cars and the difficulties of getting on
and off public transport.
Women and the Community
Much of the social support so essential to the health of the
community is carried out by women; visiting friends and
neighbours, shopping for an older person. Highway severance is
known to split existing communities, especially since dangerous
and dirty subways and bridges deter women from crossing busy
roads. The vast majority of women fear for their safety
travelling alone after dark. At least 25% will not go out at
all, and thus suffer greatly from isolation. Reasons quoted by
women for avoiding travelling in the evening included unreliable
public transport, poor lighting at bus stops and their location
near unfenced places riddled with hiding places for potential
attackers. [Women feel safer at times and places where there are
many people on the street. Every pedestrian is doing a service
to the community by making the street safer for others. --C.W.]
Public Transport
A Harris survey has shown that women are the main users (66%) of
public transport. Women know what they want from public
transport. Countless surveys have found the same requirements:
low fares, regular and reliable services, higher standards of
cleanliness, increased staff presence, more and clearer
information about services and, in large cities, an integrated
ticket scheme which makes movement between buses, tubes and
light rail affordable. Public transport is essential for those
who do not have access to a car. It's much cleaner than private
car transport and must be promoted for the sake of a healthy
planet. (Women's Environmental Network, Aberdeen Studios, 22
Highbury Grove, London, N5 2EA)
II. 'MOM'S TAXI' COULD BE A DEATHTRAP - John Barber
Last week Maria Bajc and a neighbour decided to meet a friend
at a community centre several kilometres distant from their homes
in Caledon, Ontario. So they did what thousands of other
Canadians do as naturally as they breathe air. They loaded four
kids into a minivan and hit the road.
Their trip ended abruptly in a horrifying crash that killed
two children in the van and sent a third to hospital with a
fractured skull, two broken legs, a broken rib and a damaged
spleen. The miracle is that none of the three children riding
in one of the two other minivans involved in the crash died as
well.
In the aftermath, public attention has focussed on the rear-
door latches of the Bajc van, which gave way during the crash.
Both fatally injured children were strapped to a seat that was
knocked out the van's rear door.
But it isn't faulty door latches that kill kids in Canada; it's
cars that kill them. Cars represent the single greatest threat
to the life of every Canadian under the age of 25, when the
chance of death from cancer overtakes the chance of death from
cars.
That fact was derived from a 1992 Statistics Canada mortality
study by Gordon Perks of Toronto's Better Transportation
Coalition. The extraordinary thing is that so few other people
have ever noticed it. Our society invests enormously in the
fight against childhood diseases, but we accept the even greater
hazards of automobility as if they were somehow natural and thus
unavoidable.
Ignoring the consequences of our dependence on cars--and you
can't get much more dependent than having to make a highway trip
to reach a community centre--results in some strange thinking.
Many middle-class Canadians continue to believe that the newest,
most socially homogeneous neighbourhoods are the safest places to
raise children. Yet these are the same neighbourhoods that
foster greatest use of the worst child-killer of all, the car.
On a more concrete level, parents are acutely aware of the
dangers of exposing children to traffic. (cont'd on page 3)
Their response is to prohibit their children from walking to
school or engaging in unsupervised play in their neighbourhoods.
Instead, they drive them everywhere, creating more traffic and
greater danger.
Researchers in England report that in 1971, 80% of children
aged 7 and 8 were allowed to walk to school on their own. By
1990, the same figure was 9%.
As a result, parents are becoming alarmed about the dangerous
amount of traffic congestion in school zones. It's a vicious
circle, and banning every last kid from the sidewalk isn't going
to break it.
''The victim is being removed from the street,'' says Tom
Samuels of the Better Transportation Coalition. ''The
perpetrator, the car, is being allowed to dominate it. The onus
for change falls on the victim, not the perpetrator.''
Mr. Perks and Mr. Samuels are trying to shift that onus by
promoting a traffic-calming program called Safe Routes to School.
They say that interest among parents, schools and municipalities
across North America is overwhelming. ''Parents are sick and
tired of being chauffeurs,'' Mr. Samuels says, ''and of being
nervous wrecks about their children playing outdoors.''
But making local streets safe is only the first step toward
freeing our children from the tyranny of the car. By allowing
our cars to dictate virtually every detail of our lives, even the
structure of our communities, we impose strict limits on the
lives of all those people unable to use them. That includes
everybody under 16.
It's ironic that the greatest aid to personal mobility ever
invented has had the effect of imprisoning our children. It
doesn't help that the only method of escape, affectionately known
as ''mom's taxi'', could be a deathtrap. (Globe and Mail, 8
March 1995)
III. SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL PROGRAM
The Problem
Cars are the single largest killer of Canadian school children
(cancer is second). Before the age of 14, 1 child in 10 will be
involved in a traffic collision. 1 out of 6 pedestrian traffic
fatalities is a child. 74% of child pedestrian traffic
collisions happen within less than half-a-kilometre of the
child's own home.
In response to this, our society has created a world for our
children in which traffic safety is promoted through fear, and
where parents have assumed the role of chauffeurs for their
children. According to a British study, in 1990, there were
proportionately 3.5 times more British children taken to and from
school by car than in 1971. Fear of traffic dangers was the
number one reason given by parents, twice as high as fear of
molestation.
Traffic speed is the decisive factor in determining the safety
of a street for children. For example, if a child is hit by a
car travelling at 50 km/h, there is less than a 10% survival
rate. At 40 km/h, the survival rate jumps to 55%. And at 30
km/h the survival rate is 95%.
The SRS Solution
The Safe Routes to School (SRS) program is a proven approach for
correcting this situation. Based on a Danish model, SRS involves
the redesigning of streets surrounding school zones to ensure
that traffic speeds cannot exceed 30 km/h. Key to a successful
SRS program is the proactive and extensive participation of the
community.
The benefits from SRS include:
- up to an 85%-reduction in traffic collisions;
- significant reductions in noise and air pollution;
- increased community and neighbourhood identity;
- discouraging of non-local, commuter traffic from speeding
through residential areas.
For more information, contact:
The Better Transportation Coalition, 517 College St., Ste. 325,
Toronto, ON M6G 4A2 416-961-5767 Fax: 961-5850
IV. IF CARS ARE HERE TO STAY THEN HUMANS AREN'T
ROAD SALT AND CANCER
In an original study recently published by the Journal of the
National Cancer Institute, Dr. Harold D. Foster of the University
of Victoria, BC, found a strong correlation between road salt use
and the incidence of gastrointestinal cancer. The proposed
mechanism of causality was interaction of emission gases with
sodium chloride, ferrocyanate and phosphates (all components of
road salt), triggering the release of carcinogenic heavy metal
into ground water. (Imagine, Fall 94)
ASTHMA ALERT
Deaths from asthma increased by 40% in the Us between 1982 and
1991, says the US Center for Disease Control in Atlanta.
The CDC reports that the frequency of attacks and deaths from
asthma is rising steadily.
The CDC says worsening air pollution is probably one cause of the
increase, and points out that in 1991 63% of Americans who had
asthma lived in areas that failed federal air quality standards.
(New Scientist, 14 Jan 95)
RISKS OF THE ROAD
Half of the truck drivers in the United States have fallen asleep
at the wheel at some time of their lives, according to a study in
New York State. The survey puts drowsiness on a level with
drunkenness as a cause of road accidents - a factor in 82% of
accidents in which vehicles leave the road and in nearly a third
of all fatal crashes. (Globe and Mail, 13 Dec 1995)
DEATH ON THE STREETS: CARS AND THE MYTHOLOGY OF ROAD SAFETY,
Robert Davis, Leading Edge, 1993.
(ISBN 0-948135-46-8)
Every group campaigning against a road scheme will need this
book. Although it draws on the British experience, it has wider
relevance for any part of the motorized industrial world. Robert
Davis cuts through the mythology of road safety to present a new
understanding of the subject, through which we can challenge the
current road safety paradigm which increases motor danger,
promotes the dominance of the car, and marginalizes and
victimizes those who cannot, choose not, or would prefer not to
be motorists. (Hamish Soutar, The Ecologist, July/Aug 1993)
TIRE DUST - Peter Montague
Rachel's Environment & Health Weekly #439
The automobile did not come to dominate American transportation
by chance or by public choice. It happened as part of a plan by
auto makers to buy up and destroy mass transit companies.
General Motors led the way. As recently as the 1920s, many
American cities and towns were connected by a network of electric
railroads and interurban trolleys. Within cities, electric
street railways, trolleys, and elevated trains, moved large
numbers of people easily and cheaply, with minimal congestion and
pollution. But steel-wheeled electric/rail mass transit systems
did not serve the needs of the automobile manufacturers and their
allies in the steel, rubber, glass, concrete, and oil industries.
Beginning in the 1920s, General Motors began investing in mass
transit systems. According to historian Marty Jezer (and
Congressional hearings held in 1974), between 1920 and 1955,
General Motors bought up more than 100 electric mass transit
systems in 45 cities, allowed them to deteriorate, and then
replaced them with rubber-tired, diesel-powered buses.[1] Buses
are more expensive, less efficient, and much dirtier than
electric/rail systems. (And of course automobiles are even less
efficient than buses, by far.) In 1949, General Motors,
Firestone Rubber, and Standard Oil of California were convicted
by a federal jury of criminally conspiring to replace electric
mass transit with GM-manufactured diesel buses; in a noteworthy
illustration of justice for corporations, the court fined GM
$5000 and forced H.C. Crossman, the GM executive responsible for
carrying out GM's policy, to pay $1.00.
Cities where GM managed to eliminate electric/rail systems, and
replace them with buses and private cars, included New York,
Philadelphia, Baltimore, St. Louis, Oakland, Salt Lake City, and
Los Angeles.
Many people think of Los Angeles as the original automobile city.
However, before GM converted the city to buses and private
automobiles, Los Angeles was served by the largest electric/rail
mass transit system in the nation. The Pacific Electric Railway
ran more than 1000 trains per day over 760 miles of rail lines,
carrying light freight as well as passengers. Its last line, to
Long Beach, was abandoned in 1961 --the same year the ingredients
of smog were first identified in L.A.'s toxic air.
During this same period, GM worked to convert electric-powered
commuter railroads to diesel-powered locomotives, which were far
more expensive, more complex, and less reliable than electric
locomotives, thus requiring more maintenance, and contributing
significantly to the demise of the nation's railroad system. For
example, the New York, New Haven, and Hartford line showed a
profit during 50 years of operation until 1956, the year it began
converting to diesel locomotives; by 1961 it was declared
bankrupt and a report by the Interstate Commerce Commission
censured GM for contributing to its demise.
We all know some of the consequences of converting the American
transportation system from electric/rail to rubber-tiredvehicles.
The threat of global warming from combustion of fossil-fuels (oil
and gasoline) is one part of the problem. Lung cancer from
diesel exhaust is another.[2] But recently, another aspect of
our transportation system has appeared in scientific and medical
literature: serious pollution from rubber tire fragments (tire
dust) released by tire wear.
When a rubber tire, bearing the weight of a vehicle, rolls across
an asphalt or cement surface, tiny fragments of rubber break off
from the tire and become airborne. In the 1970s and early 1980s,
scientists working for the rubber tire industry and for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency concluded that these tire
fragments were too large to enter the human lung and so presented
no threat to human health.
However, new research published this year by allergy specialists
has reached a different conclusion: these new studies show that
about 60% of tire fragments (tire dust) are so small that they
can enter the deep portions of the human lung where the latex
rubber in the tire dust may cause allergic reactions ranging in
severity from rhinitis (runny nose), conjunctivitis (tearful
eyes), to hives (urticaria), bronchial asthma, and occasionally
even a life-threatening condition called anaphylactic shock.[3]
Asthma, and asthma deaths, have increased dramatically during the
past 20 years, especially among children, and specialists have
been searching in vain for causes. (See REHW #374.) [...]
The human nose and throat filter out airborne particles larger
than 10 micrometers in diameter, but about 60% of tire dust is
smaller than 10 micrometers in diameter and can thus enter the
lungs where it can cause allergic reactions in some people.
In 1974, tire industry scientists estimated that 600,000 metric
tonnes (1.3 billion pounds) of tire dust were released by tire
wear in the U.S., or about 6.5 pounds (3 kilograms) of dust
released from each tire each year. In 1995, there were an
estimated 280 million tires in use in the U.S.;[5] if each tire
releases 6.5 pounds of dust per year, tire dust released in 1995
would total 1.8 billion pounds. A billion is a thousand million.
In Los Angeles alone, at least 5 tons (10,000 pounds) of tire
dust are released into the air each day.
Radial tires create a finer, more respirable dust than do bias
ply-constructed tires, and the percentage of tires that are
radial grew from 2% in 1970 to 95% in 1990, so tire dust released
in the 1990s probably enters the lungs more readily than tire
dust did in previous decades. Conceivably, this might explain
part of the recent increases in asthma in the U.S.
In 1994, careful measurement of air near roadways with moderate
traffic revealed the presence of 3800 to 6900 individual tire
fragments in each cubic meter of air, more than 58.5% of them in
the fully-respirable size range. [...]
In the case of rubber tires, the problem is more complex than
mere latex allergy, although this may well turn out to be a
serious public health problem by itself. The high dollar cost of
truck freight, private automobile commuting, and maintenance of
our highway infrastructure must be counted as major sacrifices to
our rubber-tired transportation system. Furthermore, fine
particle air pollution now kills an estimated 60,000 Americans in
cities each year.[7] And global warming is a serious threat to
many nations from many viewpoints. (See REHW #429, #430.)
However, from the viewpoint of our most important national
treasure --our self-governing democracy --the systematic sabotage
of the nation's electric/rail mass transit systems by automobile
corporations points up a most serious problem: the ability of
"private" corporations to effect sweeping changes in our public
life and culture, without public accountability or even debate.
If we ever hope to achieve a sustainable environment, and
re-establish a fair economy and a working democracy, this is a
key problem we will have to acknowledge and address.
[1] Marty Jezer, THE DARK AGES; LIFE IN THE UNITED STATES,
1945-1960 (Boston: South End Press, 1982), pgs. 138-146.
[2] See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, HEALTH ASSESSMENT
DOCUMENT FOR DIESEL EMISSIONS [External Review Draft; 2 volumes:
EPA/600/8-90/057Ba and EPA/600/8-90/057Bb] (Research Triangle,
N.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, December, 1994). And
see REHW #120.
[3] P. Brock Williams and others, "Latex allergen in respirable
particulate air pollution," JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL
IMMUNOLOGY Vol. 95, No. 1, Part 1 (January 1995), pgs. 88-96. And
see: M. Michael Glovsky and others, "Can Latex Allergy be
Triggered by Air Pollution?" Abstract presented at Experimental
Biology '95 in Atlanta, Georgia during April, 1995. Dr.
Glovsky's address: Asthma Center, Huntington Memorial Hospital,
Pasadena, CA 91105. Phone: (818) 397-3383; fax: (818) 795-0982.
Glovsky's work is discussed briefly in J. Raloff, "Latex
allergies from right out of thin air?" SCIENCE NEWS Vol. 147, No.
16 (April 22, 1995), pg. 244. See also: L.M. Hildemann and
others, "Chemical Composition of Emissions from Urban Sources of
Fine Organic Aerosol," ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY Vol.
25, No. 4 (1991), pgs. 744-759.
[4] Doris Jaeger and others, "Latex-Specific proteins causing
immediate-type cutaneous, nasal, bronchial, and systemic
reactions," JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY Vol. 88,
No. 3 (March 1992), pgs. 759-768. And: Gordon L. Sussman and
Donald H. Beezhold, "Allergy to Latex Rubber," ANNALS OF INTERNAL
MEDICINE Vol. 122, No. 1 (January 1, 1995), pgs. 43-46. And:
Denise-Anne Moneret-Vautrin and others, "Prospective study of
risk factors in natural rubber latex hypersensitivity," JOURNAL
OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY Vol. 82, No. 5 (November
1993), pgs. 668-677.
[5] Tire use in 1995 is a projection based on trends from
1970-1990 shown in: Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of
Commerce, STATISTICAL ABSTRACT OF THE UNITED STATES 1990
(Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1990), Table
1027; and Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Statistical Abstract of the United States 1992 (Washington, DC:
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1992), Table 1000.
[6] Richard Lipkin, "No-itch latex," SCIENCE NEWS Vol. 147, No.
16 (April 22, 1995), pg. 254.
[7] C. Arden Pope III and others, "Particulate Air Pollution as a
Predictor of Mortality in a Prospective Study of U.S. Adults,"
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Vol.
151, No. 3 (March 1995), pgs. 669-674. See also REHW #373.
(Rachel's Environment and Health Weekly, Environmental Research
Foundation, P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403, 410-263-8944;
erf@rachel.clark.net)
V. OTTAWA IN 2020: A CAR-FREE DAY IN THE LIFE OF A SINGLE
MOTHER OF TWO (Billy, age 7 and Neta, age 3)
This car-free fantasy is the product of a visioning workshop led
by David Engwicht while he was in Ottawa in April 1994 and was
published in Ottawa-Carleton's Ideas Catalogue.
Dear diary:
7:00 a.m. I'm so tired. I feel so alone and exhausted,
even after a full night's sleep. The divorce has taken so much
out of me. Oh joy! Billy and little Neta jumped into bed with me
-- giggling and happy. To see their bright eyed, smiling faces
makes everything worthwhile.
8:00 a.m. Up and dressed. Ted came by with our milk and
bread delivery -- and -- he winked at me! All our boycotting,
and campaigning at the local supermarket paid off -- with
dividends!
8:30 a.m. Billy off to school. The walking bus is such a
convenience and comfort. I know Billy will get safely to school.
Mind you, crossing Bank Street isn't what it used to be! There
ain't too many cars there -- but you have to watch out for those
bikes.
10:00 a.m. Walked up to the Multi Centre with Neta in her
stroller. We saw Billy in the playground as we went in. After
Neta's check-up and shots at the health centre we went next door
to the Parent and Child drop-in. Neta had lots of fun playing
with all the toys. As we left we saw Billy in the playground
again for his Phys. Ed. He was so excited to see us. It's so
wonderful to have all the school, daycare health and other
community uses all in the same location.
11:45 a.m. We walked up the street to the "Brown Bag Cafe"
and sat outside watching the people go by. Everyone was out and
enjoying the sun. Mrs. Carruthers looked wild in her latest neon
outfit. She looked like a mother duck as her brood of children
-- all 5 -- walked in single file. Then Roger walked by and told
me the book I ordered is in. To my embarassment Neta suddenly
said, Mummy, isn't Roger SO cute"! I'm sure my face was very red!
12:45 p.m. I dropped Neta off at afternoon daycare. Billy
was out again playing soccer on lunch recess. I went home to
finish my report. I think I'm bonded with my PC. I know it's
just a tool -- but I feel so comfortable with it I find myself
talking to it. Anyway, the report is finished and I sent it over
Cyberspace to my boss's PC. It's good to think this project is
nearly over.
2:45 p.m. I HAVE A DATE! Roger (cute Roger!) called and
asked me to a movie! Now there is something I haven't done in a
while. I made a quick call to the "Granny Net". Mrs. Blair is
coming over at 7:00 p.m. What would I do without my Granny help?
All the ladies have so much enthusiasm and charge so reasonably.
It's pretty handy for Mrs. Blair as she lives just a couple of
flats up.
4:30 p.m. I picked up Neta and Billy. The playground was
full of children playing ball. Billy wanted to stay, but I think
we needed a walk. Billy asked if he can join the Community
Service Children's Group -- but I think he is still too young. I
think it's great he is interested already in serving his
community. Mr. Chari from the Seniors Volunteer Group was
having a great time watching the kids at play. He seems to come
many afternoons and it's great to know there is an adult present
for the children who want to stay and play after school.
5:30 p.m. The river was so calm. Summer is in the air. A
few boaters were out. Across the river a policeman on horseback
strolled along. We had a great picnic supper. I love eating out
-- it keeps the kitchen so clean. We were not alone on the river
bank. The grass was littered with people eating or feeding the
ducks. Billy asked if I came here when I was a child. I used to
feed the ducks, but no picnics, I said. The traffic on either
side of the river was so heavy, the air stank and the noise was
deafening. Billy did not even know what rush hour traffic was!
I said even buses smelt bad back then, before the new fuels.
7:00 p.m. Tubby time. Our Granny for the evening arrived.
8:30 p.m. Roger and I saw a great movie at St. Laurent. It
was pretty quiet there! We took a bus which was an unusual bus
-- it had a Reggae band on. After the movie, we went for a
stroll in the Market and had coffee at the street caf. We
walked home. The streets were FULL of people. Walked down the
middle of Bank Street. Artists were displaying their art,
musicians were everywhere and the sidewalks were covered in
cafes.
11:00 p.m. Home. What a great day! I can't believe I felt
so tired and alone this morning! I met so many super people
today and had such fun.
VI. AUTO-DEPENDENCE: A DRIVING FORCE FOR GENDER INEQUALITY
While a "woman's place" is no longer restricted to the home,
the transportation system does little to help women get anywhere
else they may want to go.
Out of the Kitchen, Into the Car
To many people, including most feminists, travel and
transportation may not seem to present any gender-based problems.
Cars, trains and buses offer the same destinations to men and
women. If the system breaks down, everyone suffers. And if
there are any social inequities, they are geographically based,
so that poorer neighbourhoods bear the brunt of bad service and
heavy traffic.
In fact, the U.S. transportation system consistently fails to
serve the needs of women, particularly women who enter the
workforce while still retaining their traditional domestic
duties. As a group, women's travel patterns are different from
men's. Women tend to work closer to home, yet their commuting
times are often longer because they do not travel in a direct
line between work and home. Trips to school, the daycare centre,
the grocery store and a host of other domestic chore trips divert
women from the standard home-work-home commuting pattern enjoyed
by men. Increasingly, the automobile is viewed as the tool that
allows women to fulfill their many obligations. Rather than the
great liberator, however, the automobile is an accomplice of a
system which burdens women with more responsibilities than men.
The Negligence of Transportation Planning
A transportation system should move people and goods from one
place to another in the most efficient, convenient, and
environmentally benign way as possible. Unfortunately, women's
needs in the transportation planning process are usually
overlooked by male transportation bureaucracies, and a mindset
that does not recognize transportation as a social issue.
Much of transportation planning is based on assumptions that do
not reflect the reality of many households and their true travel
behaviour. Generally, it is assumed that (a) the head of the
household is male, (b) his travel behaviour is representative of
the whole family, and (c) the home to work trip is most
important. These assumptions consequently place a much higher
value on men's travel and translate into action which supports
the commute from home to work. This is done at the expense of
women, children and the elderly whose needs are secondary and/or
neglected.
Transportation bureaucracies assume that the transportation
network is meant to promote economic development and, therefore,
that allocating public monies for the traditionally male labor
force is socially appropriate. [...]
The Safety Factor
Crime, or the fear of crime, are cited by many women as reasons
to drive, which explains the shift among women from public
transportation to driving automobiles. Ironically, it is far
safer to use transit than travel by automobile. Indeed, desolate
parking garages are more dangerous than the more well traveled
transit stops.
Public transportation is unquestionably safer when one
considers the deaths and injuries caused by automobile mishaps
(over 40,000 auto-related deaths yearly [in the U.S.]).
Interestingly, traffic safety data reveals that it is
overwhelmingly men who are out of control while driving. In NYC,
of the 15,609 pedestrians injured and the 282 pedestrians killed
by drivers in 1982, 83% and 85% respectively were the victims of
male drivers. The national organization, MADD (Mothers Against
Drunk Drivers) offers an example of women organizing around the
safety issue. While their work is not based on a gender
analysis, it does effectively question the rights of those who
are primarily male to pose a menace to society. Possibly, the
safety agenda could be a rallying point to energize women to more
general transportation issues.
A Woman's Agenda for Transportation
The transportation system must be changed to meet the needs of
women. Unfortunately, there is no clear feminist transportation
agenda. [...] Advocacy organizations and transportation planners
must be pushed and prodded into integrating women's
transportation concerns into their efforts. But most of all,
women themselves must realize that the car is not the answer to
their transportation problems. (Auto-Free Press, March/April
1994)
VII. WOMEN IN CITIES - Renata Brillinger
Urban planning, architecture and the discourse on city life
have been dominated by men and masculine ideas and attitudes. If
urban centres are to become livable places for all citizens,
clearly this tradition needs to be challenged and feminist
perspectives must be offered and heard.
Part of my impetus for this column came from a book written by
Elizabeth Wilson called The Sphinx in the City: Urban Life, The
Control of Disorder, and Women (University of California Press,
Berkeley, 1992). It is clear that female contributions to the
subject of urban planning are sparse, and Wilson notes that the
most related feminist writings have either been anti-urban or
restricted to issues of safety, welfare, and protection. In her
book, she pushes past these precedents to describe the
relationships of city development to socio-economic factors,
focusing on the impact of these relationships on women. [...]
For women, cities have always been places of relative freedom
from domestic and rural isolation. However, they have also
become places of fear, danger, and exploitation. Women must deal
with the dichotomy of being at once anonymous and on public
display. As Wilson points out, "there is no identity without
visibility," and women and minorities (e.g. gays, lesbians,
African-Americans, jews, etc.) must constantly balance the safety
of being part of a tangible urban community with the dangers of
being visible targets for oppression and surveillance.
Much of the book is devoted to describing the evolution and
history of various world cities, their influences on women, and
vice versa. Wilson describes modern cities as places where "the
direst misery has become another spectacle," where "sensation is
valued more highly than sense," and where "we have the worst of
all worlds: danger without pleasure, safety without stimulation,
consumerism without choice, monumentality without diversity."
She argues that it is primarily big business and multinational
corporations that have ghettoized and gutted neighbourhoods in
their pursuit of profit, and which are responsible for current
urban crises. Women, ethnic communities, and the working class
have been most affected by these, as well as by the attempts of
urban planners to control chaos and crime using zoning (e.g.
segregating different land uses and communities from one
another). Low-income housing for example has often been built
without input from potential inhabitants, in areas that make
access to city resources difficult, and development of such
housing projects has often been motivated by the goal of
isolating threatening groups of people. [...]
Wilson maintains that in order to solve urban problems, we
must appreciate and respect the disorder, variety and richness
inherent in cities. The dark side of the city must not prevent
us from seeing its virtues, and certainly must not convince us to
limit or eliminate diversity, interaction, and choice. She
argues that we must make the freedom and autonomy of cities
available to all classes and groups, and that there must be
democratically controlled spaces that are not commodified. And
of course, women must take an active role in the creative,
radical envisioning of cities that must happen. (Urban
Ecologist, Fall 1992)
VIII. CARS ATTACKED AS ROOT OF MOST EVIL
The car is at the heart of many of society's worst problems,
its devastation reaching far beyond environmental degradation to
marital strain, economic chaos and the collapse of social
networks, a U.S. writer on urban issues says.
According to Roberta Brandes Gratz, "The car is the culprit.
So much of what is wrong in North America...is wrong because we
have done everything we could to make the automobile central to
everyone's lifestyle."
The impact of cars has never been fully understood, said Ms.
Gratz, a former journalist who lectures and writes on urban
affairs. Ms. Gratz has travelled throughout the world studying
community-based solutions to urban problems, which she discussed
in her 1989 book The Living City.
Even now, she said in an interview, concern with cars is
focused on their environmental effects. But for decades, she
said, cities have been devastated by expressways that cut people
off from other parts of town while making possible the
development of suburban malls that have killed local shopping
areas and the jobs they provided.
When companies move to the suburbs, they often have problems
building their work force, she said, because suburban communities
are too homogeneous to provide the range of workers companies
need. [...]
Ms. Gratz blames government policies in the years after WW II
for the development of a car-oriented lifestyle. It was done, she
said, in the belief that the auto industry was the only possible
cornerstone of the U.S. and Canadian economies. "Nobody opted to
be stranded and totally dependent on cars, but that is the way we
have made ourselves in most cities, unless you live in the heart
of downtown. We have to give people the option of leaving their
cars at home. A lot of people use them all the time because they
have no choice."
She believes cities should focus on increasing density in
downtown areas, building on the vacant land she calls "vestiges
of past mistakes". [...]
Many U.S. cities deliberately dismantled their transit systems
and are faced with rebuilding them almost from scratch, just to
get back to what they once were.
Creating, or returning to, a good public transit system is the
essential ingredient in solving social problems, she said. "Until
we reorient ourselves to public transit, we just can't talk about
health care, or day care, or employment opportunities; we can't
talk about any social-welfare issues until we talk about
transportation, because access-physical, social and economic-is
key to improving cities.
"The good things that are happening are happening despite the
local political leadership," she said. "No government ever
stopped an inappropriate expressway because they got smart - only
because they were engaged in battle by vigorous local
opposition."
The way to build good cities, she said, is to move away from
theories and designs imposed by planners to solutions that
respond to what people need. [...] (Jane Coutts, Globe and Mail,
15 July 1992)
IX. STEPS TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY
GETTING PHYSICAL WITH CITY PROMOTES WILD PLANNING - Wayne Roberts
The new crop of municipal politicians have to get physical, say
two urbanism experts who've helped give Toronto its world
reputation among planners as "the city that works".
A city's greatness, health and dynamism come from getting the
humdrum details of sewage, street lengths and derelict lots
right, not from grandiose, world-class schemes, says Michael
Hough and Ed Fowler, York University professors with growing
international reputations as city eco-visionaries.
Both are at the cutting edge of the movement to ground urban
infrastructure in ecological design, planning as if nature and
community mattered.
REVOLUTIONIZE CITIES
Hough, a landscape architect, is the author of City Form and
Natural Process and Out Of Place. Political scientist Fowler
wrote Building Cities that Work.
Together, their above- and below-ground policies would
revolutionize the shape, feel and financing of cities.
"Appreciation of the sheer physical - that's how we connect,"
says Fowler, who believes public squares, community gardens and
short streets with high densities and mixed uses serve and
protect against crime better than police. [...]
A belief in the wide promise of naturalized design has landed
both Hough and Fowler in a scholarly microclimate of hot water.
Fowler set out in the 1970s to provide rigorous academic proof
for Jane Jacobs' then-revolutionary view that short streets where
homes and workplaces mixed in haphazard density (what supporters
of the 1960s fad of urban renewal called "urban blight") provided
the best guarantee of social vitality, street-smart businesses
and crime control. [...]
NEW BREED
Hough broke from the standards of landscape architecture that
celebrated grand parks as recreation-centred retreated sealed off
from the squalor and crowding of the grubby city.
A new breed of parks could handle water more healthily for
humans, providing nesting grounds for wildlife and improve
environmental literacy "by making visible the processes that
sustain life," says Hough. [...]
Hough's books denounce the tradition of "pedigree architecture",
which he says is dedicated to power and authority and leads to
edifice complexes that overcome natural arterials and limits with
technology and energy. [...]
If followed, their advice might solve many of the problems
politicians are responding to with tried and untrue notions from
the past. (NOW, 17 Dec 94)
FREE PARKING BRINGS COSTLY SPRAWL
University of California at Berkeley Professor Robert Cervero
told an audience of transportation planners at a Manhattan forum
recently that little can be accomplished to promote public
transit in the region's suburbs unless officials and developers
limit abundant free parking. Motoring convenience is also
reinforced by zoning codes that separate complementary land uses,
such as commercial and residential development, and thereby
promote sprawl and car-dependence. Cervero said that census data
shows that the proportion of suburban New York/New Jersey
residents using transit dropped from 24% in 1980 to 10% in 1990,
mainly because jobs spread out across the suburbs during the
eighties. Globally, no metropolitan area has achieved a
substantial travel shift to transit without limiting free
parking. Cervero cited a Seattle example in which one large
employer that offered free parking (with parking capacity in
excess of the total work force) found that 85% of its employees
drove alone to work, while another employer offered limited
parking for a fee, with the result that 37% of its workers used
car and van pools and 12% rode transit. Cervero is regarded as
the country's leading expert on suburban transit issues.
(Mobilizing The Region (tstc@igc.org), 19, 2 Feb 95 via Auto-Free
Press, May/June 1995)
PARKING AT TORONTO BOARD OF EDUCATION NO LONGER FREE!
There used to be 6,000 free parking spaces at the TBE and at
local schools. Now drivers have to pay $20 a month to use them,
thanks to the efforts of former Toronto Board Trustee Joan Doiron
who lobbied for consistency between the Board's green
transportation policies (walking, cycling, transit), and
practices (66% of staff used private cars). For information:
Environmentalists Plan Toronto 416-397-3073.
BABY, YOU CAN SHARE MY CAR
Engineers at Dynamic Transport Management of Melbourne, Australia
have developed a car pool system that matches people not only by
destination, but also according to age, sex and interests. The
computer system called Easy Share tries to pick the perfect
travelling companion.
The greatest demand is expected to be from women between the ages
of 18 and 35 in clerical and professional jobs, who prefer to
know something about who they are sharing a car with before they
start their journey.
DTM is about to begin its first scheme in an unnamed city with a
financial partner from Southeast Asia. (New Scientist, 7 Jan 95)
CALGARY CUTS ROADS, BOOSTS TRANSIT
In February, the City of Calgary unveiled a radical long-term
plan to boost transit and reduce the levels of car usage. The
plan includes fuel taxes, parking restrictions, better transit
and cancellation of some new freeways.
City council's 30-year target is for the public transit share of
downtown commuting to rise from 39% to 50% as the population
rises by about 500,000. (Transport Action, 95/1)
RAILROADS FIND NEW WAYS TO MOVE TRUCKS
MONTREAL~A small Quebec company may be the first off the mark
with an efficient way for trains to carry truck trailers over
medium distances.
The patented Ecorail, a mini train conceived by a former truck
driver, has just completed five months of commercial test for CN
Rail. In February it will begin a new test moving truck trailers
between Drummondville, Quebec and Toronto.
Trucks back their trailers on to a bogie, or set of four rail
wheels. The trailer's rubber tires dangle just above the track.
The typical convoy consists of 10 trailers, pulled by a special
locomotive that rolls at up to 113 kph. (Ottawa Citizen, 18 Oct
94)
X. AUTO-FREE OTTAWA NEWS
AUTO-FREE BY WARD MARKET - Carolyn Luce
What would it be like if the By Ward Market were auto-free?
There would be more room to shop, stroll and relax as people
wouldn't be crowded onto the narrow sidewalks. The air would
smell cleaner. Fresh produce wouldn't be contaminated with
emissions from automobiles. It would be safer for children and
adults alike without the hazardous start-and-stop auto traffic.
Open-air patios could spill out onto William Street where patrons
could enjoy a drink or a meal in a pleasant, unpolluted
environment. Trees and flowers might live longer due to the
cleaner air.
For three years, members of Auto-Free Ottawa have had
precisely this vision and have sketched out a four-stage proposal
for removing cars from the By Ward Market. The Market is the
easiest place to start the move to a car-free city, because it
has the most congestion. This apparent contradiction is
explained by the fact that much of the time, the market is so
congested with cars searching out parking spots that pedestrians
are essentially in charge. Pedestrians cannot only cross the
street at almost any time, but often walk along the street to
overcome the crowded sidewalks.
Over the last three summers, members of Auto-Free Ottawa have
collected about 1,000 signatures on a petition to City Hall
asking that By Ward and William streets be closed off to cars on
weekends during the summer on a trial basis. The response from
shoppers has been overwhelmingly supportive. Many of them wonder
why this wasn't done long ago.
Business people in the area have been less enthusiastic. They
equate car traffic with business. Proving to them that a car-free
Market will be economically viable and will enhance and not
hamper business in the area will be a big challenge. We have
realized that in order to achieve our aim of a Market with, at
the minimum, some form of traffic-calming, we will have to work
with the merchants to develop a plan, and not appear to be a
group of outsiders who want to impose their own vision on the
Market.
In order to present a less radical image, it was decided to
form a coalition of community groups to continue the process. So
far CFSC and OttaWalk, as well as Auto-Free Ottawa have endorsed
the coalition, named Friends of the Market. Local City
Councillor Stphane-mard Chabot has expressed interest in our
cause, and has agreed to assist us in working with the merchants.
We have the support of several prominent local architects and
have been speaking to activists in other cities who have created
pedestrianized areas in their own communities.
Our next step is to hold a Public Forum on traffic in the
Market which we have tentatively scheduled for Saturday, June 17.
The idea of the forum is to promote open discussion on
alternatives for the Market and not to impose one view, although
the Auto-Free Ottawa proposal will likely be presented. We
want to invite the public, as well as all stakeholders to
participate in the discussion. We plan to follow the forum with
a dinner and a street dance on William Street as a celebration of
life in the Market.
To alleviate people's concerns about transporting purchases
(e.g. flats of flowers or bags of fruit) to their parked cars or
to their homes, we are also trying to get a bicycle-delivery
project off the ground to demonstrate that there are workable
alternative solutions if one uses a bit of creativity. The plan
is to have several pedal-powered vehicles in operation during
summer weekends. This service would most likely be free for the
first few weeks until the idea catches on. We have approached
TEAP for assistance in sponsoring this project.
For both the bike-delivery project and for the Public Forum
there is still much work to be done, and any help would be
appreciated. If you like the idea of an Auto-Free Market and
would like to get involved, please contact either Carolyn Luce at
241-8176 or Jane Stratton Zimmer at 723-2325. We would be happy
to hear from you.
AUTO-FREE OTTAWA AT WORK - Lucy Segatti
Last summer, several Auto-Free Ottawa volunteers came out to
the By Ward Market to collect signatures on our petition. In 3
or 4 pairs - one person to carry a sign ("Aren't you just
fuming?", "Footloose and carefree", "Market or Park-it") and one
person holding the petition - we stood at strategic locations in
the Market area, smiling at passersby.
As usual, public reaction was generally favourable. Some
people who signed our petition told us about precedents like the
Faneuil Market in Boston and pedestrianized areas in German and
Dutch cities.
Some people had already heard about our campaign and were
eager to sign our petition. One young man from Sandy Hill
approached us asking if this was the petition to "pedestrianize
the Market", which he enthusiastically signed.
Despite the encouragement we were receiving from the public,
some local merchants were less pleased to see us on "their" turf.
Their comments included (in order of frequency): "Don't you
[women] have anything better to do?" (maybe like go shopping?);
"The Market can't survive without cars" (even though a recent
survey showed that at least 50% of Market shoppers arrive without
a car); "If you don't like cars, go shop somewhere else"; "Do you
live here?" (how many of the Market merchants live in the
Market?).
The territorial and misogynist tone of some of the comments was
reinforced on two weekends when the composition of our group was
2 men and 6 women. Both times the men had to leave early. And
both times, the woman volunteer who took over their corner was
verbally abused by one of the nearby shopkeepers who obviously
didn't care to speak to the men.
In another incident, when another woman and I were standing
beside a flower stall with our sign and petition, we were asked
to go "solicit" elsewhere. When I tried to explain that European
studies have shown that pedestrianization is good for business,
the flower vendor replied that she had work to do and no time for
our nonsense.
The controversy that the concept of an auto-free By Ward
Market engenders seems to appeal to the media. With very little
effort to get media coverage, the petition drive was reported in
the Ottawa Citizen, Ottawa Xpress, and Le Droit, and led to radio
interviews with CKCU, CHEZ.
Despite some negative reaction, which is merely evidence of
a deep-rooted irrational dependency on cars, most volunteers came
away empowered and buoyed by the words of encouragement and
appreciation most people had for our efforts.
AUTO-FREE OTTAWA RENEWS ITSELF - Cathy Woodgold
Now that Lucy Segatti has resigned as editor and coordinator,
several people have jumped in to take up the reins.
Beginning next issue, Dennis Whitfield will be our new newsletter
editor, with assistance from Cathy Woodgold (helping with
content), Russell McCormon and Richard Briggs (both helping with
computerization). Contributions of articles, letters to the
editor, etc. from other members are also encouraged.
Richard is also membership secretary, treasurer and phone
contact.
Caroline Vanneste is the events coordinator. She will delegate
the coordination of special events to a project coordinator. The
work of staffing literature tables at various events will be
shared among many: the more the merrier!
We still need a secretary, coordinators for individual projects,
people to phone others to announce meetings, and people to put
out posters and pamphlets.
Auto-Free Ottawa is now having meetings every month, with every
second one being a potluck dinner. Come out and get involved!
To find out about the next meeting, call one of the following
people:
Richard Briggs: 237-1549
Cathy Woodgold: 231-4311 an588@freenet.carleton.ca
Editor: Dennis Whitfield 745-7627
Events Coordinator:
Caroline Vanneste 236-9370
Internet: Russell McOrmond http://www.flora.ottawa.on.ca
XI. CYCLING CHALLENGE '95 - Mike Buckthought
"We've got to pause and ask ourselves: how much clean air do we
need?" - Lee Iacocca on Detroit's resistance to tougher auto
emission standards
Everyone knows that cars are bad for the environment. This
spring, you can do something about it - try cycling instead. On
May 18 (rain date May 19), you can join cyclists in Ottawa,
London and other cities in Cycling Challenge '95, an
environment-friendly competition to see who can reduce air
pollution the most by cycling to work or school.
Total reductions in pollution will be estimated from
distance travelled, resulting in an informal environmental impact
assessment for everyone who has participated. In 1993, the year
of the last Challenge, 500 cyclists reduced emissions of carbon
dioxide, nitrous oxides and other pollutants by an estimated 2.4
tonnes.
For this year's Challenge, cyclists in London, Ontario will
be challenging cyclists in our region to see which city is the
most environmentally friendly. It is hoped that city councils in
both cities will also take part, and perhaps the losing city will
fly the flag of the winner. As in previous years, there will also
be challenges between different schools and workplaces.
Individuals can make a difference, especially now. We can't
rely on governments and industries to solve the problems of
global warming and air pollution, for they have clearly failed to
live up to their promises - promises to stabilize greenhouse gas
emissions at 1990 levels, for example. According to a report from
Environment Canada, emissions could rise by 11% from 1990 levels
by the year 2000.
Meanwhile, the effects of climate change continue to become
increasingly obvious. Strange things are happening: glaciers
slowly recede, and this year, the Netherlands was deluged by
floods. There may or may not be a connection between these events
and global warming. We could wait until all the scientific
evidence becomes available. We could even wait until vulnerable
areas like PEI and Bangladesh are submerged as the polar ice caps
melt and sea levels rise, but by then, it would be too late to do
anything - we must take action now. Reducing our reliance on cars
must play a part of this action.
For more information about Cycling Challenge '95, contact Mike
Buckthought at 567-7244 or ag270@freenet.carleton.ca
STRATEGY TO COMBAT TRANSPORTATION CO2 EMISSIONS
The Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy is
attempting to formulate a transportation planning process that
will minimize the emission intensiveness of the transportation
sector and ensure the maximum the use of existing transportation
resources. Views and references from readers of the Auto Free
Zone would be welcome. Our proposed scheme (outlined below) is
partly based on an energy conservation process that has been
successfully employed in the utility sector called Integrated
Resources Planning.
Need for New Process
It is evident to anyone who knows transportation systems that to
achieve a sizeable reduction in emissions from the transportation
sector, a shift to less emission intensive travel modes is
required. There are a number of adequate (some might even say
superior) modes available for the movement of people which are
less emission intensive than travel by personal vehicle: walking,
bicycling and transit (both road and rail) can adequately
displace automobile kilometres driven. For the movement of
freight, rail is, on almost every basis, less energy and emission
intensive then shipping by truck. It is also evident that
current transportation planning processes at the municipal and
provincial level are not likely to achieve any of the above
stated objectives.
Primary Goal Key to New Process
To achieve the objectives of reduced emission intensity and
maximum use of existing resources, a dramatic shift in the
allocation and manifestation of transportation resources will be
required. Such a shift could be achieved if transportation
planning was subject to a process such as the following:
1) Set primary goal: meet transportation demand but minimize
societal costs. This goal would ensure that transportation
planning captures all of the costs and impacts which are
currently not assessed or are underestimated : land use;
emissions of all types; health and ecosystem impacts; accidents
and fatalities; noise, congestion and so on.
2) Develop transportation demand forecasts.
This part of the process is not apt to change significantly from
conventional demand forecasting. Demand for mobility is bound to
continue to increase. However, it is the means by which the
demand is satisfied that will change.
3) Assess costs and remaining lifespans of existing
infrastructure; identify need for additional infrastructure.
There will over time be the need for infrastructure to replace
that which has expired, however, what will be at issue is whether
that which has expired should be replaced with the same
infrastructure (particularly in the case of more impact intensive
modes).
4) Assess a broad range of alternatives to meet the
transportation task.
This is the creative part - at least as compared to conventional
transportation planning. One, or more of a broad range of options
could be deployed to satisfy new demand provided the undertaking
satisfied the goal of the system. Options could include:
providing safe amenable conditions for cycling and walking; using
existing rail lines instead of highways; increased
operation/frequency of transit; improved signalling, priority
and throughways for transit; staggered hours; telecommuting; use
of subway/transit systems during off-hours to deliver light
freight; coordinating surplus municipal and provincial vehicles
into a transit brokerage; incentives to expand movement of goods
by bicycle; enhancements to car-pooling networks; better
cycling infrastructure; changes to municipal by-laws; and the
organization of our habitations that bring people closer to the
objects of their travel (i.e. work, goods, services). And I am
sure this list is not definitive. The key is to meet
transportation demand but minimize societal cost.
Some of the physical, material and modal effects of adopting this
system should be:
* Cities which are more vibrant, multi-modal and accommodating
for people.
* Increased resources for, and competitiveness of transit
systems.
* Decreased resources for new highway infrastructure.
* A shift to rail from road for passenger and freight movement as
much as possible.
* Smaller scales of urban development with a much greater mix of
functions and services than is currently occurring in most
locales.
If readers know of similar transportation planning processes that
have been successfully applied in other jurisdictions, I would
like to hear of them. Please contact: Greg Jenish, CIELAP, 517
College Street, Suite 400, Toronto, Ontario M6G 4A2. E-mail:
CIELAP@Web.apc.org.
Greg Jenish is a Research Associate with the Canadian Institute
for Environmental Law and Policy.
XII. THE PEN IS MIGHTIER THAN THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE
Auto-Free Ottawa responds to draft report by the City of Ottawa's
Task Force on the Atmosphere.
May 12, 1995
Carolyn Cahill, Environmental Management Branch
Department of Engineering and Works
City of Ottawa
Dear Ms. Cahill:
On behalf of Auto-Free Ottawa, I am submitting comments on
the Task Force on the Atmosphere's Action Plan. Since our group
promotes sustainable alternatives to our current car-dominated
land-use and transportation policies, I will focus on
transportation and the action plans relating to it.
1) ACTION PLAN NOT ENOUGH
While the 11-step action plan developed by the Task Force is
commendable and necessary, it will not achieve the City of
Ottawa's 20%-reduction goal unless accompanied by changes to the
City of Ottawa's current land-use and parking policies.
To achieve the 20%-reduction goal the City of Ottawa would
have to change the current trend of favouring free or cheap
parking, and allowing land zoned residential or greenspace to be
converted into parking space or commercial sites including
parking. Implementing the Task Force's action plans alone,
without changes in long-term policies on land-use and parking, is
like trying to fill a bathtub without first putting in the plug.
While energy-conservation technologies and alternative
renewable fuels must be supported, they will not provide
effective tools for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. A common
attitude towards fluorescent bulbs, for instance, is that since
they use so little energy, they can be left on all the time.
Energy-efficient technologies are only effective if used with
long-term conservation in mind, not simply so that a certain
activity can be prolonged or increased.
2) THE NEED TO ACT NOW
The Task Force report also appears to have ignored the new
information from the Berlin conference on climate change which
clearly confirmed that climate change, as a result of global
warming, is already under way (i.e. melting polar ice caps), and
not merely a future problem as implied on page 5 of the Task
Force report (''will increasingly interfere'' and ''will cause
significant alterations'').
Precisely because long-term policy changes can be the most
difficult to implement, work in this area must begin as soon as
possible and be carried out parallel to the short- and medium-
term action plans being implemented. Otherwise, any gains
achieved by the action plans will be wiped out by continued car-
centred development and sprawl.
Naysayers like to argue that there is no hard data that the
global climate change is happening or that it will have a
detrimental effect on Canada. Do these same people refuse to buy
house or car insurance because they do not know for certain that
they will be involved in a traffic accident or the victims of
theft? Any long-term measures adopted should be viewed as erring
on the side of caution, or taking out insurance to protect the
City of Ottawa against the impacts of global climate change,
increased health costs due to the effects of air pollution, and
to plan for the post-petroleum era 20 to 30 years from now.
3) DISCREPANCIES IN REPORT
Ironically, even though the report states that
''transportation is the largest single source of CO2 in Canada''
(page 7) and ''reducing transportation fuel use'' (page 19) is
recognized as a priority for meeting the 20% target, only 3 of
the 11 action plan elements deal with transportation.
While the
important role played by land use is recognized on page 7 (''The
amount of air pollutant emissions created by a community is
greatly influenced by how land is used.''), and again on page 26
under ''Reduce demand for person-kilometres'', the 11-point plan
does not even mention a review of land-use and parking policies.
Land use or zoning is again given as an example of one of
the most effective overall emission reduction measures on page
19. Long-term policies to promote residential density increases
are identified as critical to achieving CO2 reductions.
According to David Engwicht (author of Reclaiming Our Cities
and Towns: Better Living With Less Traffic), the best way to
give people the option to leave their cars at home is to increase
access to goods, services and social interactions within
neighbourhoods. This would require the long-term redesign of
Ottawa neighbourhoods, which the City of Ottawa should undertake
now.
Recent studies in the United States have shown that
increased parking fees are very effective in boosting public
transit use (Auto-Free Press, May/June 1995). Moreover, a recent
issue of the APA Journal included an article on parking ceilings
in the United States. By not keeping up-to-date with trends in
the United States and other Canadian cities, the City of Ottawa
has already started to lose its reputation as a model city (see
John Sewell's article in the Ottawa Citizen, 6 Mar 95).
While parking and land-use policies may appear to be
difficult issues to address, on the other hand, they are both
under municipal jurisdiction. Therefore, it is the
responsiblity of the City of Ottawa to take action in these
areas. Furthermore, such land use policies would be in
compliance with the new Ontario land-use reform guidelines, as
well as in the City's own revised official plan.
4) MONITORING AND FOLLOW-UP
As the action plans are implemented and monitored, there
should be a time-limit for voluntary transportation demand
management measures to produce significant results, after which
measures such as increased parking fees and financial incentives
for preserving and increasing residential development downtown
should also be put into place.
On behalf of Auto-Free Ottawa, I thank you for the
opportunity to submit these comments, and look forward to being
kept informed on the results achieved by the action plans.
Carlessly,
Lucy Segatti
c.c. Louise Comeau, Sierra Club, George Rejhon, Chair,
Environmental Advisory Committee
Dear Auto-Free Ottawa,
I was so "amused" to see the latest commercials put out by
Health Canada regarding the harmful effects of cigarette smoke on
children.
What about the harmful effects of car exhaust on our children?
Every time we start up our cars, it's like lighting up a
cigarette. There are just as many harmful chemicals, probably
even worse, that we are all breathing in every day.
Anyway, I wrote to that joke of an Environment Minister Sheila
Copps with a copy to Diane Marleau telling them my feelings on
this matter and interestingly enough haven't heard a word from
either of them. Guess the car companies win again. They have
them - the politicians, that is - right where they want them.
Yours truly,
An anonymous AFO member
If anyone else wants to follow this example, our MPs can all be
reached by writing postage free to: House of Commons, Ottawa,
K1A 0A6.
AUTO-FREE ZONE is published quarterly by Auto-Free Ottawa, Box
57006, 797 Somerset St. W., Ottawa-Rideau Bioregion, ON K1R 1A1,
Canada, and is mailed to subscribers or members of Auto-Free
Ottawa (see form inside last page).
Auto-Free Ottawa is a grassroots group, whose mandate is to draw
public attention to the full costs of our car-dominated trans-
portation system, and to point out ecologically sustainable and
socially beneficial alternatives.
Opinions expressed in AFZ do not necessarily reflect those of
Auto-Free Ottawa members. Readers are encouraged to submit
articles, announcements, and graphics. Articles should be sub-
mitted on diskette (WP 5.1) and limited to 1,000 words. Letters
to AFZ must be marked "For publication" (include address and
phone number which will not be published), and are subject to
selection and editing.
Articles reprinted from other publications are abridged to save
space.
Reproduction of editorial content is welcome provided that credit
is given to the author and issue of publication. Please send a
copy of reprinted articles to Auto-Free Ottawa for our files.
Editor: Lucy Segatti
Thanks to the following for contributing articles: John Barton,
Seajay Briana Crosson, Tom De Marco, Joan Doiron, Marti Mussell,
Caroline Vanneste, Hamish Wilson, Andrew Van Iterson
AFZ logo: Cathy Woodgold
Other original graphics: Cathy Woodgold, Nancy Shaver
Advertising: For information on advertising rates, please con-
tact Auto-Free Ottawa at the address above.
AFZ is printed on unbleached, 100% post-consumer recycled paper.
Deadline for next issue: July 20, 1995
ISSN 1195-1958
CARS ARE RUINING MY LIFE AND OUR BIOSPHERE!
Sign me up, and .......................................................................................send a complimentary copy to:
___ $20.00 individual or family ___ $10.00 unwaged
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
Name Name
___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
Address Address
Tel: (h)____________________(w)________________________ (e-mail) _______________________
AUTO-FREE OTTAWA
Box 57006, 797 Somerset St. W., Ottawa River Bioregion, Ontario K1R 1A1
(613) 237-1549
Last Modified: June 20, 1995
by Russell McOrmond (rmcormon@flora.ottawa.on.ca)