People-oriented
approach
to
a walkable and bikeable Jakarta
Arlene Nathania Chrissila ; The writer is an architect,
urban planner and researcher. She is pursuing a PhD at HafenCity Universität
(HCU) in Hamburg, Germany
|
JAKARTA
POST, 30 Agustus 2014
Fighting against Jakarta’s traffic during peak hours burns us
out, and burns our money — for nothing. At some point, driving a car starts
to be a symbol of immobility rather than mobility.
There have been different approaches introduced to deal with
Jakarta’s widespread urban congestion, namely the Transjakarta busway, mass
rapid transit (MRT) and monorail systems, electronic road pricing (ERP),
free-of-charge double-decker public buses, the elimination of fuel subsidies
or the increase of commercial parking rates. And, most recently, there has
been the highly debated plan to build six inner-city toll roads to
mathematically lower Jakarta’s road density.
Jakarta always comes up with typical engineering approaches that
fall short of their vision when implemented collectively in the city’s urban
context.
Most of the approaches are foreign-based best practice, but
still seem to fragmentarily follow an old-fashioned auto-oriented paradigm,
which aggravates our existing urban structures because they prioritize
concrete-based infrastructure.
Jakarta is estimated to lose US$3 billion per year due to
traffic congestion, which is closely related to the rapid growth in private
vehicle ownership of 9-11 percent per year, while the existing public
transportation systems and road facilities fail to function in accommodating
citizens’ mobility (Rukmana, 2014).
According to Rukmana, traffic congestion in Jakarta is worsening
in the aftermath of an induced demand phenomenon.
Neither newly built roads nor widening existing roads will offer
a viable solution to traffic congestion in the long term.
In cities, traffic infrastructure is still predominantly
designed and financed to support auto-oriented systems (Sarmiento and Priego, 2014). By building more roads, auto-oriented
cities always sprawl and are dispersed, unequivocally impelling inhabitants
to depend on private vehicles as the only commuting option. Cars and
motorbikes have become a common standard of comfort for all social classes,
despite the many hours of traffic jams.
Applying legal-economic instruments to cope with congested
commercial zones, such as a three-in-one vehicle restriction or the ERP
scheme, will not be fully effective due to the lack of a reliable public
transport system and car-pool facilities.
This approach tends to shift traffic flow to the fringes of
restricted zones, thus creating more traffic bottlenecks and gridlock in the
city as a whole during peak hours. How to define the restricted areas is also
questionable, since most congested commercial zones in Jakarta are greatly
decentralized.
Solving traffic congestion does not merely require mathematical
tactics to create a higher ratio of required road space compared to the
city’s physical area, or to temporarily restrict motor-vehicle flows in
particular zones. Urban traffic is a set of interlaced networks, a delicate
integrated system in which millions of vehicles of different types, all
necessitating certain social behavior, drive together and possess equal
levels of priority.
A car is an efficient piece of urban transportation only if it
exists within the context of a transit-oriented neighborhood that is
supported by MRT systems and active transit options such as walking and
cycling (Sarmiento and Priego, 2014). Technologies like MRT or bus rapid
transit (BRT) will be unattractive to Jakartans without adequate pedestrian
and cycling infrastructure to and from stations.
Therefore, we should start thinking in an integrated way about
moving people rather than moving cars, thus creating a people-oriented city
instead of an auto-oriented city (Sarmiento
and Roe, 2014).
There are several underestimated but crucial planning principles
in a people-oriented traffic approach that should be taken into account when
we are trying to unlock traffic congestion puzzles.
First, untangle all road junctions. Gridlock is a situation
where we experience zero frequency of vehicles passing through a particular
point on a road.
If one or more junction gets stuck during peak hours, the whole
traffic system within a city will be paralyzed soon afterwards in a chain
reaction. Adding more roads or toll roads will simply create more bottlenecks
at exits and entry points.
Thus, we must develop a traffic intersection model that
untangles the traffic knots throughout the city. Under a non-spatial
intervention, we could restructure the traffic flow system to reduce
crossing-conflict points. At minimum intervention level, there is the
yellow-box junction model, where queuing vehicles may not enter the marked area
unless the exit from each junction is clear.
At a more sophisticated level is the protected-intersection
model that seeks to retrofit an intersection with design elements that create
a safe, clear experience for all people using the road (Falbo, 2014).
According to Falbo, this people-oriented traffic model
delicately defines the positioning of crossings and conflict points between
all kinds of transportation modes with clear movement-control signals as well
as providing refuge islands as protected spaces for pedestrians and cyclists.
Second, we must develop active transportation systems and
minimize travel interruptions. There are too many mixed-up activities and
crisscrossing events, both formal and informal, that clog up our roads.
In addition to the omnipresent illegal roadside traders, illegal
parallel parking activities and incidental taxi or bus pick-ups, all land and
building premises along the roadway create their own entries, exits and
parallel parking spaces adjacent to the public road.
Given the plan to have a transit-oriented development concept in
the future, if every road has the same motor-vehicle accessibility with no
walking or cycling infrastructure, then no one would walk or cycle to reach
any public transit stations (Sarmiento and
Roe, 2014).
There should be a hierarchy of traffic accessibility that is
sensitive to urban land-use patterns, existing built environments and urban
activity needs.
There would be specific dedicated zones for cars and motorbikes.
But where short-distance travel trips were most frequent, accessibility for
pedestrians and cyclists would be prioritized, while roadways must be
designed to make driving uncomfortable.
A spatial approach is badly needed to design convenient
pedestrian zones and plazas, protected sidewalks and bike lanes,
accessibility for people with disabilities or parents with strollers,
bike-sharing facilities, as well as more green and blue infrastructure that
motivates and facilitates people to walk instead of driving.
The idea of people-oriented planning is to remodel a useful road
traffic control system that transforms Jakartans into a more active commuting
population. The key to success is another level of integrated approach
between spatial, legal, economic and cutting-edge traffic-monitoring
technology instruments to ensure compliance with the expected behavior.
A people-oriented approach would contribute social and
environmental improvements to Jakarta’s traffic culture that would be passed
on to the next generations. Walking and cycling would benefit the city and
its people, relieve traffic congestion, reduce air pollution, improve traffic
safety, increase physical activity and create a more environmentally friendly
city (Sarmiento and Roe, 2014).
Perhaps today the idea seems naïve, but I assume that the city
government would actually be capable of addressing traffic irregularities, as
I believe Jakartans would embrace the culture in their own city, not only
elsewhere when they are abroad. ●
|
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar