Community Transportation

Part of the Climate Steps Social/Community Pages

In many regions around the world, everyone is expected to own their mode of transportation: we’re all supposed to own cars, motorcycles, or bicycles. But some neighbors share. If your neighborhood has fewer cars because you’re sharing vehicles, or if you’re riding a bicycle or a public transit bus or train, your local emissions could be lower. 

Citizens want more places to ride bikes

Your municipality can also keep local emissions lower by making some streets car-free. A number of cities tried this at the onset of the COVID pandemic, and although in some cases, those streets reverted to regular vehicular use when restrictions were dropped, some cities decided they liked the change and kept those streets car-free (Bloomberg.com). Examples include Milan, Bogotá, New York City, San Francisco, Stockholm, Paris, and Quito.​

Photo by Nubia Navarro via Pexels.com

In Barcelona, a few kids riding their bikes to school turned into a weekly Friday event called “bicibús,” or “bike bus,” involving hundreds of children and adults riding bicycles and roller skates down a main road with a front and rear police escort. Barcelonians who want more environmentally friendly travel options would like to see the bicibús transition into bike lanes at the very least.

They’d probably love to have something like Bogotá’s Ciclovía program, with its 120 kilometers of roadway that are closed to cars from 7 am to 2 pm every Sunday and holiday. Like the bicibús, the Ciclovía started with a few people and grew to something much bigger, which now includes a bike school for children and adults who want to learn how to ride. By making it easy to find a place to ride bicycles and making sure everyone who wants to learn is able to, the city has made it more likely that residents will choose to ride bikes rather than drive cars more often, and that results in lower emissions city-wide.

Design cities for less driving

We can also limit transportation-related emissions by designing our neighborhoods so that both our need to travel as well as the paved surfaces necessary for vehicular travel are limited. For example, the paved surfaces necessary for vehicular travel prevent rainwater from being absorbed, leading to flooding from huge storms, which are likely to become more prevalent  as a result of global warming (National Climate Assessment, U.S. Global Change Research Program). And pavement itself passively emits greenhouse gasses (GhG) constantly (National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S.). 

If most of what we need is near us, we don’t have to spend time and money to go somewhere else (not to mention the extra money, traffic, energy, and emissions associated with the constant upkeep on heavily used roadways, and we may be able to get where we need to go on foot, via bicycle (or skateboard, or via mini-motorized machines), avoiding the large amounts of asphalt and its emissions as well as the emissions from gas-powered vehicles. For those of us who live in cities (more on rural areas next), it’s inspiring to learn that many urban areas are investigating the idea of the 5-, 10-, or 15-minute neighborhood, where everything we need is designed to be within reach without a car. Examples include Barrios Vitales (datapartnership.org) in Bogota, Portland’s Complete Neighborhoods (portlandonline.com), 20-minute Neighbourhoods (planmelbourne.vic.gov.au) in Melbourne, and Paris’ 15-Minute City (politico.com). The Congress for New Urbanism (CNU) explains:

“When an urban area achieves the 15-minute city goal by organic evolution or legal inducement, several positive implications follow:

• • It is socioeconomically equitable—those without a car could easily access all their needs….
  • The need for transportation is minimized—and therefore the reduction in fuel mitigates global warming.
  • Human-powered transportation [like walking or riding bicycles], which improves health and well-being, is promoted. The benefits are greater than one compact neighborhood alone could provide.
  • The convenient location of services, accessible by multiple modes, saves time and improves quality of life.”

CNU categorizes various areas reachable by walking or biking within increasing lengths of time as “sheds,” and describes how cities could be designed to meet varying levels of need at increasing distances:

• The 5-minute walk shed, a quarter-mile from center to edge, indicat[es] the individual neighborhood. Each quarter-mile shed must have ordinary daily needs, a range of housing types, and a center (generally a public square or main street with minimal mixed use). Small businesses, at least, are located in the neighborhood. The population may be provisionally calculated at 2,600.
• A 15-minute walk shed, three-quarters of a mile from center to edge, is the maximum distance that most people are going to walk. Within this shed should be located a full mix of uses, including a grocery store, pharmacy, general merchandise, and public schools. Larger parks that serve multiple neighborhoods will be found here, in addition to larger employers—but not necessarily the region’s biggest. The 15-minute walk shed provides access to regional transit [like buses or trains]—at least one station. This shed is similar in size to a 5-minute bicycle shed, and the bicycle can be used to transport purchased goods. The shed provides for weekly and daily needs. The population is approximately 23,000.
• The 15-minute bicycle shed would give access to major cultural, medical, and higher education facilities. Regional parks and major employers can be found here. Access to intercity transit may be available. This shed provides access to special needs. The total extent of the 15-minute city is therefore defined by the three-mile radius of the 15-minute bike ride. The population may be calculated at 350,000.1