Okay, so I haven't been (yet). But if you're an urbanist in search of a new city to check out, consider Pontevedra in northwestern Spain. Pontevedra is famous for its car-free city center. Starting in 1999, then-mayor Miguel Anxo Fernández Lores began making some radical changes to prioritize pedestrians and turnaround a city in decline. They'd still be considered radical today, so I can only imagine what they felt like back in the 90s.
The historic center of the city, which covers an area of about 300,000 m2 (or about 74 acres), was fully pedestrianized. The area surrounding it was also converted to a low-traffic zone, bringing the total size of the pedestrian-oriented area to more than 1.3 million m2 (or about 321 acres). To put this into perspective, High Park in Toronto is just under 400 acres.
The result is that vehicular traffic dropped by ~92% in the historic center and ~53% in the city as a whole. Today, walking accounts for over 65% of all trips and the average resident walks about 5 km per day (roughly equivalent to 6,000 to 7,500 steps). On top of this, over two-thirds of children now walk to school. And the city hasn't reported a single pedestrian death from cars in over a decade!
Okay, so I haven't been (yet). But if you're an urbanist in search of a new city to check out, consider Pontevedra in northwestern Spain. Pontevedra is famous for its car-free city center. Starting in 1999, then-mayor Miguel Anxo Fernández Lores began making some radical changes to prioritize pedestrians and turnaround a city in decline. They'd still be considered radical today, so I can only imagine what they felt like back in the 90s.
The historic center of the city, which covers an area of about 300,000 m2 (or about 74 acres), was fully pedestrianized. The area surrounding it was also converted to a low-traffic zone, bringing the total size of the pedestrian-oriented area to more than 1.3 million m2 (or about 321 acres). To put this into perspective, High Park in Toronto is just under 400 acres.
The result is that vehicular traffic dropped by ~92% in the historic center and ~53% in the city as a whole. Today, walking accounts for over 65% of all trips and the average resident walks about 5 km per day (roughly equivalent to 6,000 to 7,500 steps). On top of this, over two-thirds of children now walk to school. And the city hasn't reported a single pedestrian death from cars in over a decade!
But how has the city performed economically since the change? Some 15,000 people have moved to the city since it became car-free and the total inventory of shops and restaurants has increased. It has also been reported that foot traffic went up (possibly by as much as 30%) and that retail vacancies dropped significantly. This is supported by research showing that well-designed pedestrianized areas do often drive higher retail sales.
Toronto never adopted a shared e-scooter program. And as far as I know, e-scooters in general are technically illegal to use on our public roads, though this illegality seems to be minimally enforced. But today, more cities around the world seem to be following suit.
But I continue to think that this is a shame. I first tried a shared e-scooter in Lisbon in 2019. And at the time, I wrote "I now know what all the fuss is about!" It was a lot of fun. I used it to ride out to the Museum of Art, Architecture, and Technology. I also said that they would be arriving in Toronto imminently. Nope.
The main concerns seem to be around urban clutter and riders using them irresponsibly. But I think you could say the exact same thing about cars, and we're not going to ban those anytime soon.
So I agree with what Karen Vancluysen says in this recent CityLab interview: Keep e-scooters on the menu and give people as many transportation alternatives as possible. They're not going to work for everyone, but that's okay. They're one option in a broader mobility network.
But how has the city performed economically since the change? Some 15,000 people have moved to the city since it became car-free and the total inventory of shops and restaurants has increased. It has also been reported that foot traffic went up (possibly by as much as 30%) and that retail vacancies dropped significantly. This is supported by research showing that well-designed pedestrianized areas do often drive higher retail sales.
Toronto never adopted a shared e-scooter program. And as far as I know, e-scooters in general are technically illegal to use on our public roads, though this illegality seems to be minimally enforced. But today, more cities around the world seem to be following suit.
But I continue to think that this is a shame. I first tried a shared e-scooter in Lisbon in 2019. And at the time, I wrote "I now know what all the fuss is about!" It was a lot of fun. I used it to ride out to the Museum of Art, Architecture, and Technology. I also said that they would be arriving in Toronto imminently. Nope.
The main concerns seem to be around urban clutter and riders using them irresponsibly. But I think you could say the exact same thing about cars, and we're not going to ban those anytime soon.
So I agree with what Karen Vancluysen says in this recent CityLab interview: Keep e-scooters on the menu and give people as many transportation alternatives as possible. They're not going to work for everyone, but that's okay. They're one option in a broader mobility network.
Nationwide across the US, transit ridership is only at about 70% of where it was in 2019 before the pandemic. But this is not the case in all cities around the world. According to this recent Bloomberg article, Madrid, Hong Kong, and Paris are all above their 2019 ridership levels. Seoul and Shanghai are also close at just over 90%, and London is at 85%.
So this problem of fewer people riding transit seems to be a North and South American phenomenon. Rio de Janeiro is at 73%, Mexico City is at 70%, and San Francisco is somewhere near or at the bottom at 44%. The obvious explanations for this are that Europe and Asia are generally denser and less car-oriented, their return-to-office patterns have been much stronger (less WFH), and their governments probably care more about transit (and spend more money on it).
Broadly speaking, I think this is all true, but I'd love to know more precisely what's driving these differences. Because it's not exactly obvious. Consider, for example, Paris and London. Paris is at 103% of its 2019 levels, whereas London is only at 85%. Why is that? Both cities share a lot of similarities. They have a river that weaves through the middle, they're dense, they have lots of trains, and both are alpha global cities.
So why the delta? What exactly is Paris doing that is encouraging more transit usage?
Nationwide across the US, transit ridership is only at about 70% of where it was in 2019 before the pandemic. But this is not the case in all cities around the world. According to this recent Bloomberg article, Madrid, Hong Kong, and Paris are all above their 2019 ridership levels. Seoul and Shanghai are also close at just over 90%, and London is at 85%.
So this problem of fewer people riding transit seems to be a North and South American phenomenon. Rio de Janeiro is at 73%, Mexico City is at 70%, and San Francisco is somewhere near or at the bottom at 44%. The obvious explanations for this are that Europe and Asia are generally denser and less car-oriented, their return-to-office patterns have been much stronger (less WFH), and their governments probably care more about transit (and spend more money on it).
Broadly speaking, I think this is all true, but I'd love to know more precisely what's driving these differences. Because it's not exactly obvious. Consider, for example, Paris and London. Paris is at 103% of its 2019 levels, whereas London is only at 85%. Why is that? Both cities share a lot of similarities. They have a river that weaves through the middle, they're dense, they have lots of trains, and both are alpha global cities.
So why the delta? What exactly is Paris doing that is encouraging more transit usage?
