UCL to UCLA: public transport

Following on from a post I wrote earlier this term, I have done a little more reading into how transport methods affect our knowledge of cities. In an article written for Access Magazine Mondschein et al. (2013) distinguish two general modes of travel. These are cognitively active, which includes walking or driving, and cognitively passive whereby someone is a passenger of a car or public transit.

They argue that cognitively active travellers are far more capable of generating mental maps of Los Angeles. This because the are constantly exercising their cognitive mapping abilities as they navigate through the city. This contrasts with cognitively passive travellers who do not engage as much with their routes or surroundings. This was demonstrated by cognitively active travellers being more able to estimate the distance between themselves and nearby locales. They were also more capable at describe the locations of their homes and workplaces using street names and intersections as opposed to local landmarks.

Cognitively passive travellers who focus on other things, such as texting or browsing the internet, create incomplete mental maps. They may therefore lose out on opportunities that ‘unknown’ parts of the city may offer. These include jobs, services or certain forms of recreation.

In line with my earlier post, Mondschein et al. (2013) argue that an active engagement with transport leads to a greater knowledge of cities. However we do not agree on everything. Namely while I believe that public transit facilitates the creation of better ‘mental maps’ of the city, they argue that such modes of transport are inhibitive of cognitive mapping. They instead argue that driving cars is more effective.

I can appreciate the reason for this argument. They suggest that while on a bus or tram, commuters pay no attention to what is around them. Inversely, they suggest that drivers are actively route planning and therefore more engaged with their surroundings.

However I believe that Mondschein et al. (2013) have ignored a key aspect of both modes of transport: the level of interaction with maps. As I previously argued, GPS systems used in cars limit a driver’s exposure of a city to their nearby surroundings. This prevents a more holistic, long-term understanding of the city. Users of public transport, on the other hand, are frequently exposed to maps of the whole city which I suggest is more conducive to effective mental mapping.

A map of Los Angeles' bus and rail systems

I would therefore be interested to conduct a slight variation on this research, focussing instead on how people's use of GPS affects their ability to cognitively map a city.

References

Mondschein, A., E. Blumenberg and B.D. Taylor (2013) ‘Going Mental: Everyday Travel and the Cognitive Map’, Access, 43: 2-7.

With time off school last week I was able to take a trip to New York. On my first night I walked from my apartment in Greenwich Village to the infamous Times Square. While others had warned me that I would hate this landmark for its crowds, commercialisation and tackiness, I found myself loving every bit of it. The reason was immediately clear: after two months living in the ‘archetypal automobile city’, it was a relief once again being able to get around by foot or public transport and to be sharing the streets with other pedestrians (Bottles 1992).

Looking at a comparison of the proportion of travel methods in Los Angeles, New York and my hometown London, it is immediately evident that the latter two are far more similar. Clearly I felt at home in a city that offered far greater transport autonomy to non-drivers than my temporary home on the West Coast.

% Method of Transport to Work in Los Angeles, New York and London

Los Angeles, a vastly spread out city with notoriously dire public transport, can only be experienced through the car. With plans needing to be made well in advance in order to find a car and to avoid traffic, the scope for spontaneity is severely reduced. Thus without being able to quickly and cheaply travel to places and events taking place across the city, I do not feel as well integrated into Los Angeles as I did in London and even New York. The introduction of transport and ridesharing companies such as Uber and Lyft have to an extent improved this. However these services, costing an average of $15 per ride, do not compare with the extensive New York Subway or London Underground which cost $2.75 and £2.30-4.70 respectively (UberPeople 2014).

The rest of my trip in New York was brilliant. In just a few days I was able to see a huge amount of the city with highlights including the Museum of Modern Art and the Guggenheim, a stroll through Central Park and the Upper West Side, a walk through the Meatpacking District along the recently redeveloped High Line, and coffees and dinners at numerous cafes and restaurants across the city. Thanks to marvellous transport links and close proximities this was all done at relative ease and little expense with each day planned at very short notice.

In addition to making it easy to see the city, New York’s transport and layout also forces people onto the streets. With Times Square epitomising this, everywhere is packed full with pedestrians which I loved. Indeed, the urban theorist and activist Jane Jacobs (1961: 107) states that while ‘streets in cities serve many purposes besides carrying vehicles’, so too do sidewalks ‘serve many purposes besides carrying pedestrians’. While she goes on to discuss the implications of busy or empty streets in creating a safe or unsafe environment for pedestrians, I believe walking through the bustling New York also allows you to feel a part of the city as you unconsciously interact with everyone around you. This experience contrasts heavily with Los Angeles where wide empty sidewalks and crossings make travel by foot an isolating experience.

Times Square buzzing with late night pedestrian visitors

A typically enormous yet empty pedestrian crossing in Century City, Los Angeles

A year abroad is a fantastic opportunity to experience new places and to learn how you react to them, either positively or negatively. There are many things I love about Los Angeles, as well as many I did not like about New York. However this trip to has highlighted to me that any city I settle in must have an accessible and extensive public transport network, as well as a layout that encourages people to walk around the city. I believe these two features, certainly present in London and New York, make it far easier to become part of the local milieu of the city around you.

References

Bottles, S.L. (1992) Los Angeles and the Automobile, Berkeley: University of California.

Jacobs, J. (1961) The Death and Life of Great American Cities, New York: Random House.

Office for National Statistics (2013) ‘Method of Travel to Work in England and Wales Report’ (WWW), Newport: Office for National Statistics (http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census-analysis/method-of-travel-to-work-in-england-and-wales/art-method-of-travel-to-work.html#tab-Commuting-by-public-transport; 18 November 2015).

UberPeople (2014) ‘What's your average fare?’ (WWW), UberPeople (http://uberpeople.net/threads/whats-your-average-fare.1174/; 18 November 2015).

U.S. Census Bureau (2012) ‘2008-2012 American Community Survey’ (WWW), Suitland, U.S. Census Bureau (http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk; 18 November 2015).

U.S. Census Bureau (2013) ‘Commuting/Place of Work/Travel Time’ (WWW), Suitland, U.S. Census Bureau (http://www.census.gov/hhes/commuting/data/commuting.html; 18 November 2015).

Here are a few pictures of the many sights I got to see in only a few days in New York: