Designing for choices & opportunity, not user groups
Last night’s Discussion on Complete Streets got me once again thinking about language. As is custom amongst wonky types of any field, using industry terms is an easy crutch. Regarding transportation, we will then hear about the needs of pedestrians, cyclists, transit users, and motorists as if they are a completely different species. The result is they are treated as such in the design of our public spaces, and in many cases an absurd & distorted version of social Darwinism assumed.
Problem is, when we are talking about a more inclusive & complete system, we aren’t talking about users defined by a single mode of transportation. Ideally, we are talking about designing a system that increases choices and opportunity for everyone.
As community advocates, we are citizens who simply want our values reflected in the infrastructure outside our front door. We are people, who depending on the task at hand, want safe and comfortable choices and opportunities in how we move around our community.
#Completestreets isn’t about designing for different user groups, it’s about designing for choices that we all can use to connect.
— MyWHaT/G. Howe (@glhjr) November 14, 2012
I walk. I bike. I take transit. I drive. On some trips, I do all four. Design for it.
Reminder: Before commenting, please read the comments policy. If you feel you need to rant against the world while raising enumerable tangential issues to personally attack individuals or organizations, consider creating your own blog and tracking back to MyWHaT. If it is of value, you will attract readers. Or, send me a message with all the rants you wish; I’m a connoisseur of ranting. Otherwise, please contribute to a healthy, friendly discussion in the comments section below.