Thinking Through Disaster HR321 Anneka Olson and Katie Reed

NOLA Advocacy Proposal

Thinking Through Disaster HR321Anneka Olson and Katie Reed

Urban Greenways in New Orleans, Post-Katrina


Advocacy ProposalProject Goal:

To implement a city-recognized

governance structure that works to

improve biking infrastructure in the City of New Orleans.

The governance structure must also be representational of the city’s biking

interests in the form of membership of

various stakeholders groups.


Why Biking?

•Increasing bike infrastructure, along with bicycle safety and education, means that people will bike more

•Making biking a more feasible form of transportation means that people will drive less, thereby mitigating carbon emissions and effects caused by carbon emissions (ie. Urban heat island)

•Biking has public health and community benefits—it integrates exercise into lifestyles, increases neighborhood interactions, and is much cheaper than owning a car


What this might look like:

A committee within the Department of Public

Works that is comprised of a variety of bike

interest stakeholders. The commission would work

collectively to make suggestions to the city

about where bike infrastructure

improvements are needed, and would

provide a democratic means for community input in infrastructure

decisions.


Things that the commission would work on improving:

•Bike lanes

•Bike paths

•Biking safety

•Transportation connectivity that integrates bikes

•Increasing practicality of biking as a means of transportation, particularly through education

•Changing the image of the city to be more bike friendly and safe

•More effectively matching the surplus of donated bikes with appropriate recipients


Members who would comprise this commission:•Community members

•Bike co-ops

•Bike repair shops

•Urban planners focused on bike/pedestrian issues

•City and Regional planners working on bike/pedestrian infrastructure

•Students and Faculty from local universities

•Community Development Corporations


Background to the Project:

Original Project Goal: to connect the various stakeholders, from the micro to the macro level, to engage in a dialogue and collectively use their knowledge and resources to improve biking in New Orleans and advocate for follow-through with funding earmarked for bicycle infrastructure improvements.ex. Charrette through Tulane University

Research: We went to New Orleans over spring break to better understand the current state of biking, to meet with a variety of groups who are working on biking issues, and to find out what the city’s long term goal was for alternative transportation. We felt that a trip to New Orleans would be the best way also to discover what would be best for the city in terms of biking, prepared to completely revise our project.


Stage One: UNOP Plan Biking Research

Under the Regional Planning

Commission we combed through all

13 of the city’s planning districts

to determine what their intended goals were for

biking improvements.


•We found that there was a large diversity between the different districts proposal biking plans. Often times if there was a plan proposed it followed along with the Regional Planning Commissions 2004 Citywide Biking Master Plan, but some were very theoretical, and made few concrete proposals.•We also found a great emphasis on bike paths as part of the goal for all of the city’s residents to be no further then ¼ mile from a green space or bike path.•However, it remains unclear to what extent the UNOP plans will be implemented—so it is important to ensure that other means for community planning exist peripherally

Outcome of Research


Stage Two: Research of Biking Infrastructure and Advocacy in Successful Bike Friendly

CitiesAs part of establishing this commission the second stage of our project is to research other cities that have an recognized bike supportive and friendly environment. We will be researching the components of their success, looking specifically at:

•What government advisory boards do they have in place?

•Who serves on these boards?

•How do they represent the voices and interests of many different facets of the community?


Case Study: Portland, OR


Case Study: Seattle, WA


Case Study: Sydney, AUS


Case Study: Davis, CA


Case Study: Copenhagen


How does this proposal pertain to “Thinking Through Disaster?”

•Importance of community involvement in planning

•Community dialogue and discussion

•The special role of outsiders, and the way that we engage with community organizations already doing the work

-Jennifer Ruly, Department of Public Works

•Information sharing


Got Questions?

Documents

Thinking Through Disaster HR321 Anneka Olson and Katie Reed