Advocacy & Safety - Making the Link from Transportation to Physical Activity and Obesity

http://www.rwjf.org/files/research/20091112alractivetransportationfinal.pdf

During the past four decades, the obesity rate for children ages 6 to 11 has more than quadrupled (from 4.2% to 17%), and it has more than tripled for adolescents ages 12 to 19 (from 4.6% to 17.6%).1, 2 Regular physical activity can reduce the risk for obesity and help people lead longer, healthier lives. Yet studies show that less than half of U.S. children and adolescents meet the recommended guidelines of at least 60 minutes of daily moderateto- vigorous physical activity.3–5 The same studies indicate that less than 10 percent of adults in the U.S. get the recommended 30 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per day.6–8

Walking and bicycling for daily transportation are important sources of physical activity, but they have declined dramatically over the past few decades. Between 1977 and 1995,a the number of all walking trips decreased by 32 percent, and there was a similar decrease in trips made by adults walking to work.9 Adults walk for only 21.2 percent of trips that are one mile or less, and children walk for only 35.9 percent of trips to school that distance.10 Reversing the decline in rates of walking and biking for transportation, especially for short trips, presents a major opportunity for improving health among children, adolescents and adults.

Transportation investments can either support or impede walking and bicycling in neighborhoods and near schools, depending on how they are implemented. Evidence is accumulating about how infrastructure improvements, programs that aim to manage neighborhood road traffic, and efforts to make streets and sidewalks safer for active travel influence travel patterns among both children and adults. This research brief presents an overview of findings demonstrating the potential impact of infrastructure investments and other transportation programs on walking and bicycling for transportation, and on related health outcomes. It focuses on public transit, greenways and trails, school-related infrastructure and programs, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and efforts to manage car traffic.

Key Research Results

* People who used public transportation (i.e. subways, commuter rails, light rails, buses, trolleys, etc.) for any reason were less likely to be sedentary or obese than adults who did not use public transportation.11–13 Nationwide, 29 percent of those who use transit were physically active for 30 minutes or more each day, solely by walking to and from public transit stops.14 Similarly, transit users took 30 percent more steps per day and spent 8.3 more minutes walking per day than did people who relied on cars.15 Conversely, reliance on the automobile for travel was associated with higher obesity rates at both the county16 and individual level.17–20

* With few exceptions,21 proximity to public transit stops was linked to higher transit use and higher levels of physical activity among adults.22–26 A study conducted in Salt Lake City, Utah, found that 18.8 percent more residents used the rail system after a new rail stop opened in their area.27

* The physical activity associated with transit use saves money. According to one study of obesityrelated medical costs, the extra walking related to transit use was estimated at a lifetime savings of $5,500 per person in 2007 dollars.28 When accounting for decreases in quality of life, such as disabilities related to obesity, the estimated savings were even higher.29,30

* Most studies of children and adolescents indicate that walking or bicycling to school is related to higher overall physical activity.32 However, the percentage of school-age children nationwide who commute to school by walking or bicycling decreased by 68 percent from 1969 to 2001.33, 34

* Parents’ perceptions of the transportation route between home and school were among the key factors determining whether children walk or bike to school.35, 36 Perceived safety from traffic and crime have been associated with higher rates of children walking and bicycling to school.37, 38 A survey in Melbourne, Australia, found that children ages 5 to 6 and ages 10 to 12 whose parents believed they had to cross several roads to get to play areas were between 40 percent and 60 percent less likely than other children to walk or bicycle to school or parks at least three times per week.39

* Promotional and educational programs helped increase rates of biking and walking to school.40–42 Parental safety concerns about traffic tend to be a common obstacle to biking and walking to school,43–45 but addressing safety behaviors and concerns through educational programs appears to be a promising strategy. For example, US Walk to School programs have been associated with higher walking rates.46 Additionally, the WalkSafe program, an educational injury-prevention program in Miami-Dade County, Fla., has led to children who are more likely to engage in safe pedestrian behaviors (e.g., stopping and looking when crossing the street) or avoid unsafe behaviors (e.g., mid-street crossing and darting out) than were those who did not participate, a change which was sustained over time.47

* Efforts promoted by programs such as Safe Routes to School, including building sidewalks, crosswalks and traffic-control devices around schools, have been linked to both increases in the percentage of students who walked to school48–52 and reductions in the percentage of students being driven to school.53 Up to 39 percent of the land in large U.S. urban areas is within one-half mile of a public school, so physical improvements in neighborhoods surrounding schools provide safer walking environments not just to students, but also to residents in the surrounding neighborhoods.54

* More and better-quality sidewalks are associated with adults having both higher rates of walking and of meeting physical activity recommendations,56–61 and with a lower likelihood of being overweight.62–64 Similarly, the presence of bicycle lanes and paths is positively related to cycling,65 and to more adults meeting physical activity recommendations.66–70 Cities that invest in bicycle facilities exhibit higher levels of bicycle commuting.71

* A survey of more than 11,500 participants in 11 countries found that residents of neighborhoods with sidewalks on most streets were 47 percent more likely to get moderate-to-vigorous physical activity at least five days per week for at least 30 minutes each day than were residents of neighborhoods with sidewalks on few or no streets.72 A review of 16 studies found that people who reported having access to sidewalks were 20 percent more likely to be physically active than those reporting no access to sidewalks.73

* One study of cities across the country estimated that, for every 1 percent increase in the length of on-street bicycle lanes, there was a 0.31 percent increase in bicycle commuters.74 Studies conducted in Minneapolis, Minn., and Portland, Ore., showed that bicyclists were willing to go farther than they would normally in order to use safe bicycle infrastructure.75–77

* Two studies found that facilities for bicycle parking, personal showering and locker storage at destinations were a promising strategy for promoting cycling and walking.78, 79 The monetary value of the benefits of having destinations with facilities to support walkers and bicyclists was calculated at between $0.96 and $1.92 per bicycle trip.b

* Building multi-use trails can lead to short- and long-term increases in walking and cycling, especially on urban-area trails and trails that connect population centers with desirable destinations, such as downtowns.81–83 Furthermore, trails have been shown to be particularly beneficial in promoting physical activity among women and people in lower-income areas.84

* With few exceptions,85 living near trails or having trails in one’s neighborhood has been associated with people being 50 percent more likely to meet physical activity guidelines86, 87 and 73 percent to 80 percent more likely to bicycle.88 In a nationally representative study, individuals who reported using trails at least once per week were twice as likely to meet physical activity recommendations as were those who reported using trails rarely or never.89 In a sample of pre-adolescent girls, proximity to trails was related to 4.8 percent more physical activity and a 1.4 percent lower body mass index.90

* The financial gain of the health benefits related to trail use outweighed the cost of building and operating the trails.91, 92 For example, in Lincoln, Neb., every $1 invested in trails was estimated to save $2.94 in direct medical costs from a societal perspective.93

* Fast and heavy traffic is commonly cited by youth and adults as a barrier to walking and cycling.94–98 Infrastructure changes that decrease vehicle speeds, increase the attention of drivers and enhance pedestrian safety are known as traffic-calming devices. Devices such as speed bumps and visibility aids can improve pedestrian and bicyclist safety. Other devices, including reductions in the number or width of car lanes, sidewalk extensions into traffic lanes at street crossings, and space for cars to park along the roadway, can help pedestrians but may be detrimental for bicyclists.

* Several recent reviews have examined how traffic-calming influences the risk of crashes involving pedestrians, and that of automobile crashes resulting in injuries. One found that traffic-calming substantially reduced the risk of crashes involving pedestrians,99 while another did not detect reductions in crashes involving pedestrians after such changes.100 The second of these reviews, along with a third one, suggested that traffic-calming efforts resulted in 11 percent to 15 percent lower rates of automobile crashes with injuries.101, 102 Traffic calming on residential streets may have a greater effect than doing so on main streets.103

* With few exceptions,104 high levels of vehicular traffic have been associated with lower rates of physical activity in nearby areas.105, 106 Accordingly, some of the benefits of traffic calming included increased walking and cycling, and enhanced opportunities for outdoor play among children and adolescents.107–111 In one study, the number of observed pedestrians increased after the introduction of neighborhood traffic calming, and 20 percent of respondents reported they walked more in the area as a result of the calming effort.112

Conclusion

* A substantial body of research shows that certain aspects of the transportation infrastructure—public transit, greenways and trails, sidewalks and safe street crossings near schools, bicycle paths, traffic–calming devices, and sidewalks that connect schools and homes to destinations—are associated with more walking and bicycling, greater physical activity and lower obesity rates.

* Beyond improving local travel options, transportation infrastructure investments that support physical activity can result in increased recreational opportunities, improvements to individuals’ health and decreased health care costs.

* In combination with infrastructure investments, programs that raise awareness and complement pedestrian and bicycle facilities are promising options for supporting physical activity. Specifically, Safe Routes to School programs and the management of traffic in local neighborhoods and around schools have been shown to affect physical activity among children, adolescents and adults.

* Fast vehicle traffic is a significant barrier and danger to bicyclists and pedestrians. Measures to slow down traffic and to help pedestrians negotiate busy streets can be effective in increasing physical activity and improving safety.

* Addressing the decades–long decline in walking and bicycling for transportation requires changing the physical characteristics of our communities. Federal, state and local policies and funding that support the type of infrastructure investments and programs identified in this brief can help slow and perhaps even reverse this decline.

Yawn...

-Kurt

Wasn't long enough... Ha ha

If you have a point to make then make it. If you have 127 points to make, write a book.

If you have a point to make then make it. If you have 127 points to make, write a book.

Look out, Forester.

-Kurt

Thanks for the link, Barry. It's always good to see constructive material here.

(http://www.bikeforums.net/member.php?40306-cudak888)

It was a good article for those who have sufficient IQ points and attention spans to to follow it. Thanks for posting it! :)

In a nutshell: When people adopt walking, cycling, or even public transit as their main transportation mode, their health improves and obesity declines. The article also discusses city planning changes that can encourage more people to get out of their cars and us more "active transportation."

Of course there isn't much hope of this being adopted since those who call themselves "bike advocates" are too lazy to even read the article! :(

(It's probably easier to read the article in the HTML that includes the formatting and illustrations.)

http://www.rwjf.org/files/research/20091112alractivetransportationfinal.pdf

Cool story, bro.

After just walking 2 miles on an icy sidewalk that was actually only partially cleared (while 3 feet away was a perfectly snow-free 4-lane street...) it's not too difficult to understand that there's a link between obesity and transportation infrastructure.

For the entire trip I kept kicking myself for not having done the trip by bike. I guess most would-be pedestrians would be kicking themselves thinking, "I should have taken the Hummer..."

Great article. I'm a big believer in incorporating exercise into everyday real life, vs. thinking of it as something one has to do at a gym.

When I went to school in the 1950s and 1960s, the vast majority of kids got to school under their own power. There were very few who could be considered obese.

Watching the big, fat slob across the street drive his humongous pickup truck 100 yards to check the mail makes me want to vomit.

Watching the big, fat slob across the street drive his humongous pickup truck 100 yards to check the mail makes me want to vomit.
Do you really watch such an activity across the street, or are you just repeating what you read somewhere? If true, I suggest you stop watching.

One issue not addressed in the article is zoning -- the notion that different land uses should always be segregated has in many places destroyed the natural development of urban landscapes. Mixed-use buildings, with residential space above commercial, retail, or other business use, was traditional in cities that developed before modern zoning, but was largely outlawed in many jurisdictions by zoning idealists that saw all work as dirty, and sought, with the best of intentions, to make sure everyone lived in a neighborhood free from unsightly productivity.

What this really produced was vast swaths of people storage that was largely vacant during daytime, and large concentrations of commercial uses that were largely vacant at night, with full streets, utilities, and infrastructure for both. More expensive, and worse for people's health.

* Fast vehicle traffic is a significant barrier and danger to bicyclists and pedestrians. Measures to slow down traffic and to help pedestrians negotiate busy streets can be effective in increasing physical activity and improving safety.


This could be the easiest way to increase pedestrian and bicycle use in my city but it will never happen in my lifetime. Most car and truck traffic travel above the posted speed limit by 10 to 15 kilometers per hour and in some cases 20 to 30 over. The traffic enforcement is almost nonexistent and our spineless, narrow-minded policy makers buckle under public pressure to increase speed limits, not decrease. Speeding is a reoccurring factor in pedestrian and cyclist injuries. Thank you for the article but it makes me sad knowing how much better our lives could be with just a few simple changes.

One issue not addressed in the article is zoning --

Yes, this urban planning mentality has been a major contributor to our over-reliance on the automobile. This is belatedly changing in my city now, with the small pockets of infill development taking on a more mixed use character, but the damage has already been done to immense tracts of suburbia.

Yes, this urban planning mentality has been a major contributor to our over-reliance on the automobile. This is belatedly changing in my city now, with the small pockets of infill development taking on a more mixed use character, but the damage has already been done to immense tracts of suburbia.I live in a suburb with a walkability rating of 5 (out of 100). There is no commerce within a mile of my house and only a handful within 5 miles. We have miles of excellent bike paths in our neighborhood that connect to ... nothing.

Yeah, it could have been planned a little better. All this in a neighborhood that didn't exist 10 years ago.

* Fast vehicle traffic is a significant barrier and danger to bicyclists and pedestrians. Measures to slow down traffic and to help pedestrians negotiate busy streets can be effective in increasing physical activity and improving safety.


This could be the easiest way to increase pedestrian and bicycle use in my city but it will never happen in my lifetime. Most car and truck traffic travel above the posted speed limit by 10 to 15 kilometers per hour and in some cases 20 to 30 over. The traffic enforcement is almost nonexistent and our spineless, narrow-minded policy makers buckle under public pressure to increase speed limits, not decrease. Speeding is a reoccurring factor in pedestrian and cyclist injuries. Thank you for the article but it makes me sad knowing how much better our lives could be with just a few simple changes.

It really is a simple matter of getting the right info circulating in government. Here is another factoid I recently ran across: Auto accidents cost each American more than $1,000 a year, 2-1/2 times the cost of the traffic jams that frustrate the nation's drivers, according to a report issued Wednesday. (http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/05/news/economy/AAA_study/)

Great article. I'm a big believer in incorporating exercise into everyday real life, vs. thinking of it as something one has to do at a gym.

This is why I commute.

On a totally different tangent, though... Both of my sons are relatively sedentary, and both are skinny as rails.

Great article. I'm a big believer in incorporating exercise into everyday real life, vs. thinking of it as something one has to do at a gym.

When I went to school in the 1950s and 1960s, the vast majority of kids got to school under their own power. There were very few who could be considered obese.

Watching the big, fat slob across the street drive his humongous pickup truck 100 yards to check the mail makes me want to vomit.

When I went to school in the 60's and 70's most everybody got there on their own power and there were few obese kids as well.

When I raised my kids in the 80's and 90's things changed. Everybody was worried about "dangers" (child abduction, traffic, etc.) so all the kids had to be driven everywhere. (I thought everybody was wrong about this)

The fear people had from unlikely dangers has now resulted in a bigger danger (poor health)

If the article is correct, where did all those fat people on the bus come from?

If the article is correct, where did all those fat people on the bus come from?

... 29 percent of those who use transit were physically active for 30 minutes or more each day, solely by walking to and from public transit stops.
...

They are the 71% who don't get 30 minutes or more.

I live in a suburb with a walkability rating of 5 (out of 100). There is no commerce within a mile of my house and only a handful within 5 miles. We have miles of excellent bike paths in our neighborhood that connect to ... nothing.

Yeah, it could have been planned a little better. All this in a neighborhood that didn't exist 10 years ago.

Walkability was a major factor when my wife and I were looking for a new home several years ago. We ended up in a small town that was laid out for passenger rail a hundred years ago. Cars may have changed the world a lot since then, but the basic plat map hasn't changed. Yes, we have a 4-bedroom 2-story on a quarter acre, but we're also within walking distance of groceries, coffee, ice cream, city hall, several parks, and the elementary school. (Not to mention having a bike trail next door.)

While that was lucky for us, it's also a warning: it will be hard to re-develop current people-storage neighborhoods to be more pedestrian friendly, don't be surprised if the basic layout doesn't change in 100 years.

Going forward, in my opinion, all new housing developments should have at least one neighborhood-commercial zoned intersection within half a mile of every house. Maybe not full groceries, but when you run out of milk or eggs, it should be reasonable to walk to the store and back.

Walkability was a major factor when my wife and I were looking for a new home several years ago. We ended up in a small town that was laid out for passenger rail a hundred years ago. Cars may have changed the world a lot since then, but the basic plat map hasn't changed. Yes, we have a 4-bedroom 2-story on a quarter acre, but we're also within walking distance of groceries, coffee, ice cream, city hall, several parks, and the elementary school. (Not to mention having a bike trail next door.)

While that was lucky for us, it's also a warning: it will be hard to re-develop current people-storage neighborhoods to be more pedestrian friendly, don't be surprised if the basic layout doesn't change in 100 years.

Going forward, in my opinion, all new housing developments should have at least one neighborhood-commercial zoned intersection within half a mile of every house. Maybe not full groceries, but when you run out of milk or eggs, it should be reasonable to walk to the store and back.

The interesting thing about your comment is the 100 year comment... regarding "people storage" neighborhoods; neighborhoods have obviously changed in some places in the past 100 years... as just about the entire country has changed from being that very style of neighborhood you sought to neighborhoods that now embrace the automobile... which has only been around for about "100 years."

Most of the lifestyle change in the US, that focuses on the automobile as a key element in transportation and housing and of course zoning, has taken place since the end of WW2. We actually can make changes "fairly quickly."

Great article. I'm a big believer in incorporating exercise into everyday real life, vs. thinking of it as something one has to do at a gym.

When I went to school in the 1950s and 1960s, the vast majority of kids got to school under their own power. There were very few who could be considered obese.

Watching the big, fat slob across the street drive his humongous pickup truck 100 yards to check the mail makes me want to vomit.

Plus we had recces where kids actually went outside got some fresh air and oh no ran around and played. I don't know how true it is, but I've heard that some schools have cut back on recces as well as gym classes. In some respects we need to go back to those "good old days of yore." Where kids walked, road bikes to school, had recces and gym class and got exercise.

One issue not addressed in the article is zoning -- the notion that different land uses should always be segregated has in many places destroyed the natural development of urban landscapes. Mixed-use buildings, with residential space above commercial, retail, or other business use, was traditional in cities that developed before modern zoning, but was largely outlawed in many jurisdictions by zoning idealists that saw all work as dirty, and sought, with the best of intentions, to make sure everyone lived in a neighborhood free from unsightly productivity.

What this really produced was vast swaths of people storage that was largely vacant during daytime, and large concentrations of commercial uses that were largely vacant at night, with full streets, utilities, and infrastructure for both. More expensive, and worse for people's health.

Yep, there isn't anything "wrong" with having a couple of apartments over the corner deli, or grocery store.

If one looks at most high rise buildings it wouldn't be that difficult to divide it into two or even three "levels." The ground floor/first level has some sort of retail stores, the second level has some sort of fitness center, and finally the third level has apartments or condos. Giving the people who live in the apartments/condos first crack at the jobs in the first two levels.

* Fast vehicle traffic is a significant barrier and danger to bicyclists and pedestrians. Measures to slow down traffic and to help pedestrians negotiate busy streets can be effective in increasing physical activity and improving safety.


This could be the easiest way to increase pedestrian and bicycle use in my city but it will never happen in my lifetime. Most car and truck traffic travel above the posted speed limit by 10 to 15 kilometers per hour and in some cases 20 to 30 over. The traffic enforcement is almost nonexistent and our spineless, narrow-minded policy makers buckle under public pressure to increase speed limits, not decrease. Speeding is a reoccurring factor in pedestrian and cyclist injuries. Thank you for the article but it makes me sad knowing how much better our lives could be with just a few simple changes.

There is one big negative to a lot of the various traffic calming devices that people don't consider when discussing them. The impact that they'll have on first responders. I was talking with one the other day and he was telling me how they do not like them because they have to slow down as well. Otherwise they risk damaging their vehicles and/or equipment.

So for those communities contemplating installing traffic calming devices think about the unintended effect that it'll have on first responders. If right now from the time that the call is made they can make the trip to your door in say 10 minutes. When the traffic calming device(s) are installed that travel time can go up to 15 or more minutes. And as I am sure we all know those extra minutes can be the difference between life and death.

Yep, there isn't anything "wrong" with having a couple of apartments over the corner deli, or grocery store.

If one looks at most high rise buildings it wouldn't be that difficult to divide it into two or even three "levels." The ground floor/first level has some sort of retail stores, the second level has some sort of fitness center, and finally the third level has apartments or condos. Giving the people who live in the apartments/condos first crack at the jobs in the first two levels.

I've seen new developments that do this. But they include an island of parking around the thing, so it's complete trash. The other fix to zoning would be the removal of minimum parking requirements, as well as adding parking back to the street. This should encourage developers to skimp on the parking (they'll still build some, and they probably should if the city isn't going to erect garages).

New Urbanists are always talking about ground floor businesses with second, third, and fourth story living. Unfortunately they're not talking revolutionary enough. Instead of making developments they should be vying to make changes to city codes that would render the car useless. If you don't render the car useless it'll ruin everything you do. It simply takes more space than you can provide.

Note: By useless I mean *very inconvenient*. Think of a car in Manhattan.


Now, that's what has to happen for walking to work. Biking, on the other hand, just takes more time in a car world and is more dangerous. It's perfectly reasonable to ride 10 miles to work (presuming those roads are maintained). It takes longer, yes, but it's not so bad that you can't do it.

There is one big negative to a lot of the various traffic calming devices that people don't consider when discussing them. The impact that they'll have on first responders. I was talking with one the other day and he was telling me how they do not like them because they have to slow down as well. Otherwise they risk damaging their vehicles and/or equipment.

So for those communities contemplating installing traffic calming devices think about the unintended effect that it'll have on first responders. If right now from the time that the call is made they can make the trip to your door in say 10 minutes. When the traffic calming device(s) are installed that travel time can go up to 15 or more minutes. And as I am sure we all know those extra minutes can be the difference between life and death.

One option that's rarely given serious consideration is plain old traffic enforcement. My town has a reputation as a speed trap because we actually enforce our residential 25mph speed limit in residential areas, the 20mph zone at our school, the 35mph arterial limits. We're a small town, out of town drivers may not know any better, but people who drive here regularly know that our speed limit signs mean what they say.

But, when it's an emergency, the 25mph residential street in front of my house has the sight lines and lane width for a fire truck to drive 50+ mph.

Plus we had recces where kids actually went outside got some fresh air and oh no ran around and played. I don't know how true it is, but I've heard that some schools have cut back on recces as well as gym classes. In some respects we need to go back to those "good old days of yore." Where kids walked, road bikes to school, had recces and gym class and got exercise.

. One in five children will be obese by 2010. Children should be active at least one hour each day; only one-third of high-school students currently meet this goal. Schools can help meet this physical activity goal, through physical education programs, active recess, after-school and other recreational activities. Education funding should be linked to all children achieving at least half of their daily recommended physical activity at school, and over time should be linked to reductions in childhood obesity rates.
http://www.commissiononhealth.org/PDF/779d4330-8328-4a21-b7a3-deb751dafaab/Beyond%20Health%20Care%20-%20New%20Directions%20to%20a%20Healthier%20America.pdf

The interesting thing about your comment is the 100 year comment... regarding "people storage" neighborhoods; neighborhoods have obviously changed in some places in the past 100 years... as just about the entire country has changed from being that very style of neighborhood you sought to neighborhoods that now embrace the automobile... which has only been around for about "100 years."

Most of the lifestyle change in the US, that focuses on the automobile as a key element in transportation and housing and of course zoning, has taken place since the end of WW2. We actually can make changes "fairly quickly."

We can change the development of new neighborhoods fairly quickly, but how many old, pre-car neighborhoods have been redeveloped into car-centered neighborhoods?

When you have existing homes, existing streets, existing infrastructure, all under dispersed ownership, it's a lot harder to re-subdivide a neighborhood, re-design the streets, re-zone to allow appropriate neighborhood commercial uses, etc. That's one reason car-centered culture fled to the suburbs -- the cities were already built, it was easier to build new in the countryside than to rebuild the city to a new model.

If the car-centered model becomes truly cost-prohibitive, the value of car-dependent real estate could fall far enough that developers can reasonably buy up significant tracts of homes and redevelop the neighborhoods. Otherwise, change will have to come incrementally, e.g. zoning changes to allow infill development, followed by individual homeowners or builders deciding to take advantage of the changes one property at a time. (In other words, the suburbs will become the slums that then get gentrified, just like the old pedestrian-oriented urban neighborhoods have done.)

I've seen new developments that do this. But they include an island of parking around the thing, so it's complete trash. The other fix to zoning would be the removal of minimum parking requirements, as well as adding parking back to the street. This should encourage developers to skimp on the parking (they'll still build some, and they probably should if the city isn't going to erect garages).
Here, here!

The city of Englewood, CO recently redeveloped an old mall into a mixed-use, transit oriented development. The only transit oriented thing is on the west side of it is a light rail station with busses connecting there. Apart from the block over with condos/retail stores, the rest is one huge giant parking lot with a Wal-Mart interspersed.

Its uglier than it was before IMO.

One option that's rarely given serious consideration is plain old traffic enforcement. My town has a reputation as a speed trap because we actually enforce our residential 25mph speed limit in residential areas, the 20mph zone at our school, the 35mph arterial limits. We're a small town, out of town drivers may not know any better, but people who drive here regularly know that our speed limit signs mean what they say.

But, when it's an emergency, the 25mph residential street in front of my house has the sight lines and lane width for a fire truck to drive 50+ mph.

Logically one would think that that would be the first thing to try, but sadly as we all know these days logic has very little to do with anything that gets done. I am glad to hear that your town is doing what it can to control the speed of it's drivers without resorting to the so called traffic calming devices.

. One in five children will be obese by 2010. Children should be active at least one hour each day; only one-third of high-school students currently meet this goal. Schools can help meet this physical activity goal, through physical education programs, active recess, after-school and other recreational activities. Education funding should be linked to all children achieving at least half of their daily recommended physical activity at school, and over time should be linked to reductions in childhood obesity rates.
http://www.commissiononhealth.org/PDF/779d4330-8328-4a21-b7a3-deb751dafaab/Beyond%20Health%20Care%20-%20New%20Directions%20to%20a%20Healthier%20America.pdf

And unfortunately I am sure that there is an equal rise in children developing Type II Diabetes. People seem to forget how important daily exercise is to our total well being.

Hmm. My 7 year old has recess twice a day at school. Recess is cheap. PE on the other hand, they can only afford 2 days a week.

Logically one would think that that would be the first thing to try, but sadly as we all know these days logic has very little to do with anything that gets done. I am glad to hear that your town is doing what it can to control the speed of it's drivers without resorting to the so called traffic calming devices.

Many people have an almost religious hatred of traffic enforcement. Motorists are so accustomed to driving over the limit that actually ticketing ordinary speeding seems like a threat to the American way of life.

yet one of the most effective ways to reduce death is reduce the speed at which drivers drive...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2458/3818227162_7c9d3be9b7_o.gif

However, death from MV collisions make up only a small portion of deaths each year. Regular cycling prevents, reduces, or delays most of what causes us to die.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1375/655932140_f672bca6fc_o.jpg

Many people have an almost religious hatred of traffic enforcement. Motorists are so accustomed to driving over the limit that actually ticketing ordinary speeding seems like a threat to the American way of life.

Watching how people drive when or after it's been raining I have no problems whatsoever in believing that. That and they get as if not more impatient with those drivers who are actually driving the speed limit as most of them seem to get with us.

Hmm. My 7 year old has recess twice a day at school. Recess is cheap. PE on the other hand, they can only afford 2 days a week.

PE should be as important as any other class during the day. Especially given the health benefits that it has.

Yep, there isn't anything "wrong" with having a couple of apartments over the corner deli, or grocery store.

If one looks at most high rise buildings it wouldn't be that difficult to divide it into two or even three "levels." The ground floor/first level has some sort of retail stores, the second level has some sort of fitness center, and finally the third level has apartments or condos. Giving the people who live in the apartments/condos first crack at the jobs in the first two levels.

In the multi-story ones similar to that, that they are building in this area, the people working in the stores will not make half of what it costs to live in the apartments above.

And unfortunately I am sure that there is an equal rise in children developing Type II Diabetes. People seem to forget how important daily exercise is to our total well being.

“For example, we now see young adults who suffer from heart disease risk factors and other conditions such as type 2 diabetes that were unheard of in the past.’’
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/07/09/americans_fatter_than_ever_cdc_says/

Hmm. My 7 year old has recess twice a day at school. Recess is cheap. PE on the other hand, they can only afford 2 days a week.

Around here most kids only get 1 day a week of PE and that is only 20 minutes worth a bit shy of the 30 minutes a day recommended.

However, death from MV collisions make up only a small portion of deaths each year. Regular cycling prevents, reduces, or delays most of what causes us to die.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1375/655932140_f672bca6fc_o.jpg

Wait did you read the description of the 44,747 figure? Or are you referring to death while riding caused by a MV?

Wait did you read the description of the 44,747 figure? Or are you referring to death while riding caused by a MV?

By far, the largest proportion of deaths come from diseases, many of which could be reduced, delayed or outright prevented by cycling regularly. For all those deaths motorists suffer, it's a drop in the bucket to how many die from heart disease.

If we want to reduce premature deaths, the public has to start moving, just the way cyclists do. Cyclists do live longer because of this movement, yet many people do not cycle because they are afraid of being killed while riding. Ironic.

Interesting way of looking at but if you break it down by age a different picture emerges:
http://www.baltimorespokes.org/article.php?story=2009123022402748

Interesting way of looking at but if you break it down by age a different picture emerges:
http://www.baltimorespokes.org/article.php?story=2009123022402748

And yet, studies of overall life expectancy show a dramatic net benefit for cycling.

More interesting to me, theDanish study (http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/160/11/1621) showing that,


Results A total of 2881 women and 5668 men died. Compared with the sedentary, age- and sex-adjusted mortality rates in leisure time physical activity groups 2 to 4 were 0.68 (95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.71), 0.61 (95% confidence interval, 0.57-0.66), and 0.53 (95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.68), respectively, with no difference between sexes and age groups. Within the moderately and highly active persons, sports participants experienced only half the mortality of nonparticipants. Bicycling to work decreased risk of mortality in approximately 40% after multivariate adjustment, including leisure time physical activity.

Read that again: even after adjusting for leisure time physical activity, bicycle commuting reduced mortality rates 40%. To my mind, that most likely points to the benefits of truly regular physical exercise -- bicycle commuters generally have that activity twice a day five or more days a week. It's hard to incorporate more regular exercise into an average lifestyle than that.

The way I look at the chart I referenced, is up to the age of 44 motor vehicles are the leading cause of death and over the age of 44 inactivate related diseases are the leading cause of death. So directly and indirectly the automobile is the leading cause of death.

There are concrete, compelling indications of positive social returns from investment in 'active' mobility infrastructure. the stat from Lincoln Nebraska is a zinger!

"For example, in Lincoln, Neb., every $1 invested in trails was estimated to save $2.94 in direct medical costs from a societal perspective.93
"

. . . .So for those communities contemplating installing traffic calming devices think about the unintended effect that it'll have on first responders. If right now from the time that the call is made they can make the trip to your door in say 10 minutes. When the traffic calming device(s) are installed that travel time can go up to 15 or more minutes. And as I am sure we all know those extra minutes can be the difference between life and death.

That five-minute difference would be a rare and extreme situation in that emergency routing first uses higher-speed arteries and major feeders, dipping onto local streets only when necessary at the end of a run. That said, there are some devices worse than others. Speed bumps seem to me way overused.

I really believe it's the diet which is creating most of the obesity. We eat more salt and sugar than any other nation and 30 minutes a day of exercise or walking will not stop you from gaining weight.

In the multi-story ones similar to that, that they are building in this area, the people working in the stores will not make half of what it costs to live in the apartments above.

The solution is relatively simple, give those people who live and work in the building a discount on their rent or mortgage payment. Much like I am sure that the supper or manager of an apartment complex. As I am sure that their apartment is "given" to 'em as part of their employment perks, or they're given a break on their rent because they also work for the complex.

That five-minute difference would be a rare and extreme situation in that emergency routing first uses higher-speed arteries and major feeders, dipping onto local streets only when necessary at the end of a run. That said, there are some devices worse than others. Speed bumps seem to me way overused.

If it was you or a member of your family do you really want first responders to be looking for a route that will take them to their destination that doesn't have traffic calming devices or do you want them to be able to make as straight a line as possible to your house or where you've crashed your car?

I agree that speed bumps are probably more then a tad overused. Not too long ago I attended my neighborhood association meeting. Two of the items on the agenda were connecting the sidewalks in the area so that were continuous instead of running for a block or two then "disappearing" or ending for another block or two. As well as the instillation of speed bumps on some of the streets that are having problems with chronic speeders. The irony of the situation is, is that the speed bumps were if I'm not mistaken were "cheaper" to install then the sidewalks.