city planning, transportation, and health

I enjoyed Montgomery’s excerpt which discussed city planning, transportation, and health. It was relevant to the various lifestyles and transportation methods provided in NYC.

I especially enjoyed the first half of the excerpt which was just a psa for pro cycling. Montgomery mentioned that cycling provides more freedom and happiness than driving and public transit despite the increased physical effort of cycling. The story of Judge, the super-hooah eskimo cyclist, worked well to reveal that obscure transportation methods may have unique perks. I also took it as the message- ultimately, you choose whatever transportation method you like most, even if it isn’t the most effective one.

Speaking personally, I prefer taking public transport going into the city over driving. The reason for this, which Montgomery doesn’t talk about, is that parking in the city absolutely sucks. I remember times in freshman year when I was running late and decided to take the faster method of driving, but ended up spending literally one hour looking for parking around City College. However, in general, I think driving’s the best. You don’t ever have to be hot or cold, or stand while holding a heavy backpack. The best feeling is driving past someone walking through a thunderstorm with a broken dollar store umbrella and realizing you’re comfortable in your car. And in many situations, like Montgomery mentions, driving is simply really fun. Even after doing it so many times, ripping through the freeway, especially after being stuck in traffic, is exhilarating.

The latter half of Montgomery’s excerpt was about how city designs force certain transportation methods on commuters, which may lead to certain health trends. His observation was that spread out and homogenous systems promoted driving while cluttered and integrated systems promoted walking, and that this exercise difference contributed to health. This kind of made sense, but also seems oversimplified. I think that the small variation in walking doesn’t really matter. The person’s availability to affordable, healthy food seems more important. After all, an active person who enjoys exercise will do so no matter if the nearest stores are within walking distance or not. Nonetheless, his points were things I never thought about. They really highlighted the vast effects city planning can have on residents’ behaviors.

______________________________________________________________________________

Greenwald’s article was a nice short-and-informative read. It’s something that I realized on only some instances when going home after staying at my friend’s house in Brooklyn- the commute is really tiring and inefficient. I really wished there were more direct routes from Brooklyn to the Flushing area.

The most interesting part of the article was Greenwald’s statement that a lot of people only use the bus to get themselves to the train station. This ties in with Montgomery’s excerpt. I agree with Montgomery that buses are the most frustrating way to travel. They’re much slower and less reliable than subways. Nonetheless, buses serve a purpose in more suburban areas. Buses are basically the only transportation source for students and poor families, who don’t have access to cars, to get around within Queens.  They’re cheap and fast enough to beat walking and cycling.