From AOL | Drive Less, Live Longer

Let’s face it: Most motorists just drive too fast. Too many people are in too big a hurry to get where they’re going. Safety experts and law enforcement agencies are constantly admonishing the lead-footed to “Just Slow Down!” And to underscore that point, a recent study by a Canadian research team has determined that driving decreases life expectancy.

According to the study, every hour you spend behind the wheel in North America leads to a 20-minute loss of life expectancy due to the risks of a fatal car crash. Further, the study concluded that by slowing down just two miles per hour, the average driver would increase their life expectancy by three hours per year.

“When drivers speed to get to their destination faster, they actually lose more time because the savings from faster travel are offset by the increased prospect of a crash,” says Dr. Donald Redelmeier, the lead investigator in the study. Redelmeier is a professor of medicine at the University of Toronto and a staff physician at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Canada’s largest trauma center.

“The study suggests that small changes can have large consequences…and would translate to approximately 3 million fewer property-damage crashes, one million fewer injurious crashes, and 9,000 fewer fatalities each year in the United States,” says Redelmeier, who believes that if North American drivers would slow down by two miles per hour, it could reduce crash-related property damage by about $10 million each day.

Keeping with the old truism that most crashes occur within 25 miles of your home, Redelmeier warns that the chances of being in a fatal car crash are just as high when you’re running errands around town as they are if you’re on a long trip, out on the freeway. “Even a short trip can put you into contact with 100 other drivers, some of whom may be speeding, some of whom may have poor driving skills, and any one of those could ruin your life, forever,” he says.

One sad statistic is that for every person who is killed in a car crash in North America, there are another 50 individuals who suffer crash-related injuries, with 20 of those injuries being permanently disabling, says Reidemeier.

The study was based on a combination of computerized traffic modeling, national statistics covering driving on public roadways, and the laws of physics. The computer models calculated results taking into account average distances and time drivers in the United States spend traveling daily, the number of annual crashes categorized as fatal, injuries and property damage, and the expected time losses due to accidents.

The study was supported by the Canada Research Chair in Medical Decision Sciences, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the National Institutes of Health Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium, and the Patient Safety Service of Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre.

“What inspired this study was what I saw at the hospital. I am always amazed that so many of my patients in the trauma center were injured in crashes that were caused by excessive speed,” says Redelmeier. “And I’m not talking about egregious speeding, like the psycho who is driving 150 miles an hour. I’m just talking about the drivers who are maybe a little over-confident, and are maybe driving a few miles an hour faster than they should be.

“And if you’re someone who frequently drives 80 miles an hour, slowing down to 65 or 70 would result in an even more significant increase in your life expectancy.

Leonard Evans, author of “Traffic Safety,” a popular textbook on the subject, says the results of Redelmeier’s study “are very much in accord” with his own findings. “Speed is the most important factor in traffic safety,” he stresses.

Evans, a retired General Motors research scientist, cites the “three simple laws,” as he calls them, that he spelled out in his book:

“Number one, the faster you drive, the more likely you are to crash,” says Evans. “Number two, the faster you were going, the more likely you are to be injured. And number three, if you’re injured, the faster you were traveling, the more likely you are to be killed.

Redelmeier also stresses that his findings bolster the argument for increasing government efforts to reduce speeding, including photo radar, traffic calming programs, and crackdowns on street racing. “Such programs can have huge gains even if partially effective and imperfectly run,” says Redelmeier.

Evans agrees that such government programs and practices need to be implemented and enforced. “There is a great deal of evidence that if you drive just two percent faster, your risk of being killed increases by 10 percent,” he says.

Redelmeier and Evans both believe that the government isn’t nearly pro-active enough in implementing such programs. “The United States lags way behind other countries in terms of programs like red light cameras and photo radar,” says Redelmeier. “The efforts to curb speeding are much more advanced in many other countries.”

Full | Drive Less, Live Longer

by Andre Blackman

It is fairly understood that staying active goes a long way in reducing obesity and related diseases (diabetes, hypertension, high cholesterol, etc.) as well as the emotional benefits of staying physically fit. As much as public health studies have shown the impact of simple movement, such as walking, to greatly improve health – sometimes there are other barriers to getting this done than just “get up and move”. The environment in which people live is constantly linked to important statistics such as life expectancy

Earlier this month, I was fortunate to have the opportunity to discuss health journalism and the impact of new media on the field. While getting insight and thoughts from a great group of health/medical bloggers, a story came up that highlighted the difference a group of people can make in their community. An inspirational story that once again shows the need for individual and group effectiveness in changing public health landscapes.

Three years ago, a group of moms who decided to begin walking in their community, were met with several barriers to a safe and enjoyable atmosphere. This included aggressive pets and physically unsafe walking conditions. This is not uncommon in areas that are close to or inside of cities. An individual might have just given up and decided not to walk in that area – but the collective thoughts of these determined mothers gave way to action.

Through unified efforts to bring other community members, police, parks & recreation officials and other urban planning entities into their frustration (and more importantly solutions) – the Greenfield Walking Group were catalysts to change in their environment. This course of action has led to “walkability” improvement measures in other communities.

From the article:

In Stiern Park, the broken lights have been replaced, graffiti and dogs removed. Police surveillance and maintenance efforts have increased. And now the members of the walking group have learned the numbers to call and people to talk to if further problems arise.

To me, this story of change makes it even clearer that in order for positive public health changes to happen in communities, there needs to be a sense of urgency and benefit instilled in the minds of the people.

Local. Impact.

Why do you prefer to shop and eat at certain places more than others?  Why do people in one neighborhood seem to all know each other while people in another neighborhood keep to themselves?  Why will you walk down main street, but drive from one end of the strip mall to the other to frequent different stores?   The design of place plays a major factor.  It affects your experience, your behavior, the value of the place, and of course the environment.

Below is a comparison of two retail centers designed very differently.  Both retail centers are located near each other in Atlantic Beach, Florida and contain popular locally owned and national neighborhood retail shops and restaurants.  The first example, the Atlantic Beach Town Center, has a pedestrian friendly design that encourages people to walk to and within the retail center, a fundamental element of sustainable design.  The second retail center is designed solely for customers to arrive by automobile, a common design flaw of unsustainable developments.

Atlantic Beach Town Center Design Elements:

• Buildings are setback from the street only enough to allow one row of parking, landscaping and the sidewalk.
• The landscaping and parallel parking along the street provide a buffer between the pedestrian and cars driving down the street, allowing the pedestrian to feel more comfortable walking down the sidewalk.
• The parking, landscaping, sidewalk, building pattern is mirrored on the opposite side of the street, framing the street.
• The buildings are to scale and in character with the surrounding neighborhood.
• The sidewalks are wide and made of dedication bricks.
• The angled parking in front of the retailers along the street is teaser parking, provided to allow for quick automobile stops (good for retailers).
• Parking is limited, encouraging bike and pedestrian traffic.
• Most parking is provided in surface lots located behind the buildings or buffered by landscaping.

Atlantic Beach Strip Mall Design Elements:

• The building is setback from the street to allow four rows of parking.
• Two sidewalks are necessary, one next to the street and one next to the building.
• The sidewalks are not connected, and therefore a pedestrian walking along the street has to cross through the parking lot to visit a business.
• Parking is plentiful, encouraging driving and creating unnecessary impervious surfaces and thus excess stormwater runoff.
• A minimal amount of landscaping is provided within the parking lot for aesthetic purposes, providing minimal shade for the cars and no benefits for the pedestrian.

Are there any other design differences you can find between the developments?  Look for future postings of “The Design of Place” with comparison pictures for different types of developments.

From The Salt Lake Tribune | Are Banks a Roadblock to Walkable Development?

Salt Lake City’s new-urbanism epiphany — fervently backed by Mayor Ralph Becker and the City Council — appears to be catching static from an unlikely source.

Transit-oriented development isn’t stymied by outdated zoning, unwilling developers or a lack of space. It turns out, banks, wedded to old-fashioned lending standards that stress parking, may pose the biggest blockade by denying financing.

The reason: Lenders operate from a tried-and-true principle that maintains more parking means less risk and a higher return on their investment. But ditching cars is the whole point of urban developers looking to create 24-hour live, work and play environments that hug light-rail hubs.

Take the capital’s gateway district, which soon could be further revived by a North Temple TRAX train, a new viaduct and millions in streetscape upgrades. City leaders envision a walkable, vibrant mix of housing, retail, restaurants and offices that one day will bridge the FrontRunner hub and a new North Temple transit station along downtown’s western rim.

But commercial investors, including one with a $100 million blueprint, complain banks cannot grasp the concept and instead slam their doors.

“It’s an interesting dilemma,” says Council Chairman Carlton Christensen. “In Portland [Ore.] they admitted it and said it took a number of years. For the first few projects, lenders had to have their hands held. The educational part is critical. We can help facilitate that.”

To be sure, commercial loans in general are incredibly difficult to secure as the Great Recession drags on. But more and more mixed-use builders cannot get banks to finance their projects without a guaranteed number of parking stalls, Redevelopment Agency Executive Director D.J. Baxter recently told the council.

As he unveiled the conundrum, developers Jeff Woodbury with Woodbury Corp., Russ Callister with Mecham Investments, and Tom Guinney with Gastronomy nodded in the background. The builders later said a recent tour of Portland, set up by the city, convinced them that a largely car-less combo of live-work-and-recreate projects could thrive.

But banks, which often sell the loans after a few years, need to ensure whatever is financed is acceptable to the long-term credit market. That way, they don’t end up with foreclosures they must unload.

“We’re not going to make a loan without getting comfortable with the parking element and the parking strategy,” explains Michael Morris, executive vice president of real estate for Zions Bank.

Other factors besides parking ratios also play a role, he says, including the overall economy and the mix of equity and debt.

Construction lenders could be “flexible” and approve transit-oriented projects, Morris says, so long as long-term lenders are content. But he predicts parking at housing units, regardless of location, likely will remain a premium.

“I don’t know if public transportation or fuel efficiency or the green movement is going to change that in the near term,” Morris adds, before pausing. “As a corporation, we’re open-minded and will participate in the dialogue. And we’ll do what makes sense.”

Former Salt Lake City Planning Director Stephen Goldsmith says parking was a frequent fight while shepherding the “progressive planning” for Artspace under then-Mayor Rocky Anderson. Unfortunately, he argues, the outdated thinking remains.

“The lack of alignment that exists in the banking community and the city offices to accomplish community goals,” Goldsmith says, “is quite astounding.”

Still, the perception problem may not rest solely with the banks, says Councilman Luke Garrott, a Chicago native and transit advocate.

“It’s with the perception of potential tenants and buyers,” Garrott says. “We still want it both ways in Salt Lake. We’re still a car culture.”

Andrew Adamson, a Barnes Bank manager in Salt Lake City, agrees.

“Utah hasn’t graduated yet to that phase of what the city wants to do,” he says, adding that large regional banks get more restrictive after getting burned. “Mixed-use stuff has an element of risk. If there’s not a market for that product, maybe they’re saying, ‘We won’t do a loan for that.’ ”

Bruce Bingham, whose Hamilton Partners is about to complete the new 222 S. Main office tower, sees it differently. He deliberately scaled back parking — the skyscraper offers two slots per 1,000 feet of rental space — because of the proximity to light rail.

“So far, it’s proven out that the TRAX stop is going to compensate for a lack of excess parking,” he says. “The same conditions would exist for any transit-oriented development near a TRAX stop.”

Bingham also disputes the notion that all downtown development must include surface lots or parking garages. Nearly 5,000 parking spaces, he points out, sit within a block and a half of 300 South and State Street.

“The myth that there is a lack of parking in Salt Lake is just that: a myth.”

Perhaps the only market force fueling transit-oriented projects is the high price of adding parking.

Right now, The Gateway mall still wrestles with the balance. If the city successfully raises the $71 million for a new North Temple viaduct, the base of the bridge will wipe out 200 Gateway parking stalls that mall owners may want back.

“Will we have to build them a parking garage?” an incredulous Garrott asked the RDA staff.

The Gateway is not yet sure it needs the spaces to support its long-term growth, Baxter notes, although some city leaders fear it will insist.

But, like the lenders who got new-urbanist religion in Portland, Christensen and Co. predict a similar conversion could happen here.

Full | Are banks a roadblock to walkable development?

Photo credit: NASA, Johnson Space Center

by Liz Neves

In the big city, on any given day, anything seems possible. Millions of thinkers, dreamers, and doers exchange ideas, creative sparks, and currency. There are plenty of reasons to be a city dweller – more jobs, much inspiration, more opportunities to help people who need it. But there’s one big drawback to city dwelling, especially New York City dwelling: dismally poor air quality.

Some might argue we just can’t help it. In a city of millions where almost all of our goods are trucked in and 12,000 tons of residential trash is trucked out every day, how could we fight the beast of diesel exhaust? When coal-burning power plants in the MidWest are emitting mercury and other harmful pollutants that drift our way with the air currents, what are we supposed to do to stop that?

The health implications of poor air quality from diesel exhaust and coal burning are numerous. Increased asthma rates, increased rates of cancer, even endocrine disruption and reproductive disorders result from the multitude of particulates we inhale.

But there are measures we can take, as a community, as individuals to improve our outdoor air quality (stay tuned for ways to improve indoor air quality in a future post). Here are a few:

Plant and care for trees

Trees are amazing filters of air pollution. They take in carbon dioxide and absorb harmful particulates through their leaves. Certain cultivars are particularly good at filtering air pollution and tolerating the harsh environment of the city, including the London Plane, Silver Leaf Linden, and Gingko Biloba. Through the Bloomberg administration’s PlaNYC there is an effort to plant 1 million trees citywide, concentrating on neighborhoods who need it most, such as those with high asthma rates and few standing trees.

Unfortunately, young street trees have a high mortality rate; half of them don’t make it within the first couple of years. But there are groups whose sole purpose is to care for street trees, including Trees NY and the New York Restoration Project. The Brooklyn Botanic Garden’s GreenBridge Program provides free courses on tree care as well.

Improve the efficiency of your home or office

Consuming less energy means fewer resources will be burned, fewer pollutants will be released. Considering about 50% of this country’s energy comes from coal, it could make a big impact if we all changed a few of our home practices.

Simply installing and using a programmable thermostat can save money and energy use. Setting the thermostat to around 68 degrees F in winter (78 degrees F in summer) when you’re home and awake and lowering it (in winter) when your not home or asleep can help you save significantly on your home energy bill.

Sealing drafty windows and doors with inexpensive and simple devices like caulking and door draft guards can make a big difference. Black & Decker recently launched some new devices for home use, like the auto-off energy switch and thermal heat sensor to help you determine where you could use some extra insulation.

Setting your hot water heater to a lower setting can help you save, too. According to the US Department of Energy, “for each 10ºF reduction in water temperature, you can save between 3%–5% in energy costs.” Simply using cold water for laundry, washing your hands, and doing dishes can also help save some energy (and money).

You might be rewarded for your efforts to make your home run more efficiently. Check to see if you’re eligible for Federal Tax Credits through Energy Star.

Get more tips on improving your home’s efficiency from ReCharge America.

Support alternative sources of energy

New York City residents have the option to switch to alternative sources of energy, such as wind power, through Con Ed Solutions. To find out if you have a choice of energy source in your part of the country, check out Community Energy.

Walk, ride your bike, take mass transit

Who needs a gym? Walking and bicycling are both great ways to get where you’re going while burning calories, not air-polluting fuel. Find out how walkable your city is with Walk Score.

Utilizing mass transit, like trains or buses, reduces emissions, saves wear and tear on your car (if you’ve got one), and decreases fuel consumption.

Reduce overall consumption

If you haven’t yet seen the Story of Stuff, it’s an eye-opening short film detailing the history of our consumer culture. It’s sure to get you thinking about how much you buy and whether those purchases are really necessary.

It’s easy to buy less when you know a few basic skills like sewing on buttons or repairing broken appliances instead of tossing out the old and buy new. Groups like Brooklyn Skillshare are ensuring that communities maintain skills like bicycle repair, sewing, and food preparation so that we can be a bit more self-sufficient and reduce consumption of new things by utilizing the resources we have handy.

By reducing overall purchase of new products, we can dramatically reduce the amount of fuel (and other non-renewable resources) burned as well as cutting back on the trash we produce. And having less clutter can actually help you breathe a little easier as well.

Buy local

When goods don’t have far to travel, generally less fuel is spent in the process of getting them to your household. By supporting local businesses who make goods locally, you’ll not only reduce the burning of fuel, you’ll be boosting the local economy. Organizations like Buy in Brooklyn encourage community members to support their local business owners. Local Harvest will help you find what’s fresh and in season in your area.

Compost

Half of all the household trash created in NYC is compostable. That would mean instead of 600 tractor trailers hauling out our trash daily, there would potentially be 300, reducing the amount of diesel fuel burned by half. Composting also keeps food waste out of landfills where they would release methane gas, a greenhouse gas that’s 25 times more potent than carbon. Not to mention that food waste can be turned into a fruitful commodity, a valuable medium for growing nutritious food.

Get involved

It’s encouraging to see how many health and sustainability groups have formed or have been strengthened in recent years. Here are just a few organizations you can support or join who have air quality or related initiatives:

• Livable Streets Initiative
• Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
• Sierra Club Safeguarding Communities Initiative
• Environment America
• American Lung Association Clean Air Initiative

These are just a few ways we can improve the air we breathe. Do you know someone (organization, community group, individual) who is taking steps to improve air quality? How are you helping to improve air quality where you live?

Many of us are familiar with the great feature of Google Maps – we use it to get to Point to Point B – usually printed out before we drive some place. Last year I was pretty pleased to find out that Google Maps implemented walking directions into their maps functions. There are a few reasons why I was happy that this came about:

1. Public health and the reduction of obesity
2. Walking is good for your health
3. Environmental health – reduce needless auto emissions
4. Gas prices aren’t always where you want them to be

If you think about it, wouldn’t you rather figure out that you could get to your destination at the same time (maybe leave a bit earlier) and not have to pay a cent in fuel? Now I can understand not wanting to lug armloads of groceries down the street – that’s cool and makes sense. But what about going to the movies? Just leave a bit earlier and take a nice walk, especially since Fall is just about here. Think about making it a family event with the kids.

I popped in random addresses in the Triangle area (that were reasonably close by) on Google Maps and saw this:

You see the WALKING option plainly offered right? Another great thing will need to be paid attention to as communities center around healthier, alternate methods of transportation – it’s easy to find.

Something important I thought about was that this shows another way in which we make technology work for us – for our own benefit. Now it’s just up to us to actually use it.

So next time you aren’t in a rush to get to your destination, check to see if you can get there by using some free transportation: your own two feet.