Comments on: Child Miles Traveled http://www.howwedrive.com/2009/07/06/child-miles-traveled/ Just another WordPress weblog Wed, 23 May 2012 00:24:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Ed Hillsman http://www.howwedrive.com/2009/07/06/child-miles-traveled/#comment-8075 Ed Hillsman Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:09:37 +0000 http://www.howwedrive.com/?p=1016#comment-8075 Actually, local governments have more influence on family travel than we realize, through infrastructure. When I was a child, I had a large area within which I could walk and bike safely to friends' homes, school, the recreation center, the library, a movie theater, and shops. A child in post-1970 suburbia has to go a lot farther to get to anything useful, and may have to be driven because subdivisions feed onto busy arterials that are not safe for children to bike on. If you build small parks with baseball or soccer fields, scattered throughout a community, and if you form leagues based on geography (neighborhoods, school attendance areas), then a child could walk/bike to the "home field", for an average of half of the games in which s/he participated. "Away" games would require transportation by driving (or bus). If instead you build large multi-field/multi-sport recreation complexes out on the edge of town (because that's where large parcels of inexpensive land are), then virtually all children have to be driven to virtually all league games. Even if you have neighborhood playing fields, if you don't form leagues based on geography, you get a lot of driving. Given the number of foreclosed and abandoned houses, I wonder whether it might make sense to look for playing-field-sized clusters of abandoned houses in suburbia, buy them, tear them down, and redevelop the land as small neighborhood recreation parks within subdivisions. Yes, including space for the visiting team's parents to park their cars. But I'm sure the rest of the neighborhood would object to the prospective traffic. Ed Hillsman USF, Tampa, FL Actually, local governments have more influence on family travel than we realize, through infrastructure. When I was a child, I had a large area within which I could walk and bike safely to friends’ homes, school, the recreation center, the library, a movie theater, and shops. A child in post-1970 suburbia has to go a lot farther to get to anything useful, and may have to be driven because subdivisions feed onto busy arterials that are not safe for children to bike on.

If you build small parks with baseball or soccer fields, scattered throughout a community, and if you form leagues based on geography (neighborhoods, school attendance areas), then a child could walk/bike to the “home field”, for an average of half of the games in which s/he participated. “Away” games would require transportation by driving (or bus). If instead you build large multi-field/multi-sport recreation complexes out on the edge of town (because that’s where large parcels of inexpensive land are), then virtually all children have to be driven to virtually all league games. Even if you have neighborhood playing fields, if you don’t form leagues based on geography, you get a lot of driving.

Given the number of foreclosed and abandoned houses, I wonder whether it might make sense to look for playing-field-sized clusters of abandoned houses in suburbia, buy them, tear them down, and redevelop the land as small neighborhood recreation parks within subdivisions. Yes, including space for the visiting team’s parents to park their cars. But I’m sure the rest of the neighborhood would object to the prospective traffic.

Ed Hillsman
USF, Tampa, FL

]]> By: Jan-Albert de Leur http://www.howwedrive.com/2009/07/06/child-miles-traveled/#comment-8066 Jan-Albert de Leur Tue, 07 Jul 2009 08:33:17 +0000 http://www.howwedrive.com/?p=1016#comment-8066 Me and al lot of my collegues (transport specialists) still tend to overvalue the traffic flows in rush ours and connecting this to commuting between home and work locations. Research has shown that in the Netherlands this type of traffic is only around 12,5% of total traffic and this rate is declining. Most motives for travelling are connected with family (home-school, family visits etc.) and recreation. I think we mostly ignore this phenomenon, because the government doesn't have much influence on the choices made by induviduals in their family circle. We have a fair deal of influence on the standard commuting relations. When I look at my own situation, it is also true that for most of these trips the car is the only realistic mode of transport. traveling by public transport with my family is expensive and time comsuming, the bike is only attractive up to 7 or 8 kilometer range. Also most of these trips are made in evening hours and weekends, when congestion is not that heavy (yet) and public transport supply at these times is at a minimum. Jan-Albert de Leur traffic specialist - Heerhugowaard, the Netherlands Me and al lot of my collegues (transport specialists) still tend to overvalue the traffic flows in rush ours and connecting this to commuting between home and work locations. Research has shown that in the Netherlands this type of traffic is only around 12,5% of total traffic and this rate is declining. Most motives for travelling are connected with family (home-school, family visits etc.) and recreation. I think we mostly ignore this phenomenon, because the government doesn’t have much influence on the choices made by induviduals in their family circle. We have a fair deal of influence on the standard commuting relations.
When I look at my own situation, it is also true that for most of these trips the car is the only realistic mode of transport. traveling by public transport with my family is expensive and time comsuming, the bike is only attractive up to 7 or 8 kilometer range. Also most of these trips are made in evening hours and weekends, when congestion is not that heavy (yet) and public transport supply at these times is at a minimum.

Jan-Albert de Leur
traffic specialist - Heerhugowaard, the Netherlands

]]>