Burden leads a workshophelping a hospital in Calgary design its pedestrian space. Photo: Dan
Burden.
Last week Streetsblog spoke to walkability expert Dan Burden about
how new design guidelines for urban streets can replace the suburban,
car-oriented standards that have become the norm throughout America
(read the interview here).
Burden has been advocating for walkable neighborhoods for more than
30 years, including 16 as the bike and pedestrian director for
Florida's Department of Transportation. He's traveled to over 2,700
communities across the United States and Canada to help them figure out
how to build safer, more sustainable transportation systems. So while we
had him on the phone, we wanted to pick his brain a little more.
In the second part of our interview, we discussed why
transportation reformers shouldn't recoil from public process, as long
as that process is well-designed. Burden has faced more than his share
of what he calls "the screaming meanies" over the years, and here he
talks about some of his experience building a base of support for
livable streets that can withstand the inevitable opposition.
Noah Kazis: A lot of your work focuses less on
generating the content of planning, but on getting people to
collaborate. What is the role of public process in designing walkable
communities?
Dan Burden: In about 1978, after I’d been out
trying to promote bicycling, I realized that there is a huge pressure
just to keep doing the same thing that others did. When we got to a
public meeting, we couldn’t get enough people to show up. I realized
that everything that we want to do to change America had to revolve
around good quality public process. The product, the technical side of
things we did, was the easy side; it was the public process side that’s
the real tough ingredient.
So I went back to school, got my masters in interpersonal
communications to learn how to work with the public, to talk through
issues and take ownership of the change, whether the change was to build
a park or design streets for walking. It’s a fairly radical departure
from before, when we let the professionals do all the work for us. It’s
really a matter of reinventing public process, using techniques that we
refer to as informed consent.
You get people to create the plan themselves -- as citizens, as
advocates, as stakeholders of a community -- and then they’ll come to
the public meeting when the screaming meanies show up, which they will.
Now the planning staff and the elected leaders have somebody to support
them.
NK: So what about those issues where it seems like
the public is opposed to a livable streets reform? In New York, one
example might be parking, where across the city you get these vocal
calls for more and cheaper parking.
DB: I think the process really has to include
taking a good solid technical look at things, how things actually work. I
was just in Vernon, British Columbia and they want to rebuild their
city center. The business community wanted more on-street parking in
front of their buildings and they wanted more off-street parking. They
had these ugly parking lots spread throughout the entire downtown like a
grey cancer. It was really affecting whether people would want to live
downtown or walk downtown. We could do traffic calming by putting in
more back-in angle parking on the street, and then removing more and
more off-street parking, but we had to work our way through it by
completely getting across that we were listening.
But then we got to transportation demand management: the idea that
over time we shouldn’t just look at building more parking to have more
people come downtown to shop, but at eliminating the parking over time.
We’re only able to do that, of course, if we get more people to walk,
more people to bike, more people downtown, more transit service. The
businesses got that. It’s really better to develop a master plan and do
the things that make this a cooperative, collaborative process where
everybody is going to change their practices and behaviors. Because
everyone agreed that the new city center should be very different than
the old city center, where we were all car dependent and speeds were
high.
NK: As someone who’s been in government and
outside of government, what are the ways that ordinary citizens can best
influence policymaking?
DB: I think the average citizen should just study
Obama himself. Becoming an advocate for change in a person’s own
neighborhood is the right place to begin. As you learn how to work with
people, how to really listen and understand what people need in the
neighborhood and then start building some of these things, that’s really
the right place to begin. Anyone who thinks that they can skip over
that and just jump into a higher level is just missing the whole point,
that all great leaders are coming out of the neighborhoods.
One of the people whom I most admire, Congressman Earl Blumenauer,
was sensitive enough that after getting his Harvard law degree, he got
into the legislature in his own state around Portland and worked through
a number of local issues, really got into the legislation. He held a
county elected position, a city elected position, was the public works
director. He really got that anyone who wanted to become an elected
leader had to first become a community advocate. And that’s truly part
of the greatness of Portland, that the advocacy got built so well. Over
time their annual meetings grew so large, that they had to take over
entire high schools in order to handle all the workshops that took
place.
NK: I know you've worked across the country, but
do you have any New York-specific experience you’d like to share with
our readers?
Burden helped ensure that the HudsonRiver Greenway's path by the new Goldman Sachs headquarters worked for
cyclists and the firm's employees. Image: Business
Insider.
DB: In Manhattan, I worked
with the new Goldman Sachs world headquarters, where a bike trail runs
right across their backyard. We had some fairly complex things that had
to be negotiated with that. For example, being Goldman Sachs, you really
had to pay attention to security. And so the trail had to take on a
certain number of twists. Also there’s going to be something like 60,000
pedestrians going in and out of the building daily, so we had to focus
on how the bicycle trail would interact with several significant
crossing points with pedestrians. We put the onus on the bicyclist to
watch out for the pedestrians and designed the trail so it will be very
easy for the bicycles to clearly see the pedestrians and pause
momentarily to let a cluster of pedestrians get across the street.
I did not get to participate in the recirculation of the Broadway
area, but I’ve been watching it. It was just amazing. I got to work
directly with Sam Schwartz, who was sharing with me that the early work
that was done for Earth Day -- it’s got to be 40 years ago now, when he
was deputy commissioner -- was only laying the groundwork for what was
eventually worked out on Broadway.
NK: Do you have any wish list for what would be
next in New York?
DB: The big wish would be that we continue to take
out lanes as appropriate. I also wish that we would get rid of some of
the one-way systems that have moved traffic very well, but make the
traffic horrendous. I am hopeful that some day we’ll eliminate 90
percent of the one-way streets. They create too much speed.
So, yeah, I’m very hopeful. I do a lot of work on Long Island, and I
know that parts of the boroughs are representative of the attempts made
over the years to speed up cars. But I think we’re going to see over
time that the lanes become so precious and the parking so rare that
people are going to turn more and more towards walking and cycling and
transit throughout the entire city.
