But the curse of flexibility is that it gets used. It sounds like a truism, but bear with me. I believe the theme applies rather broadly, but I want to talk about the curse of transit flexibility.

The other day I was at the University of Waterloo after 7 pm and had to unexpectedly make it to downtown Kitchener. The 8 bus could get me there, but it was running at a 30 minute frequency. By that hour the 7 was running at a 30 minute frequency, on just one of its routings. The iXpress had the furthest stop and at that hour was also at a 30 minute frequency. I had the luxury of a choice between three different buses with separate schedules and bus stops — and infrequent service. Had the iXpress been running at a 10 minute frequency, I would’ve gone to that stop and not have wasted my time and energy trying to plan such a simple trip.

In contrast, transit infrastructure like light rail forces a choice of a corridor — and that’s where the service is concentrated, without being diffused among many routes.

Buses can detour. For some time this week road construction closed the north UW campus entrance, and separate construction closed the east side of Ring Road. That meant hell for transit users, who first had the realization that their bus wasn’t where they expect it, then had to figure out where it actually was, and of course the schedules were screwed up anyway. The iXpress did a detour of over 3 km between the UW stop and the R&T Park stop, taking a long time and getting stuck in the construction-related traffic along the way. Getting out and walking that same distance would have been faster.

Light rail can’t detour, so it forces construction to be done quickly, with minimal impact — and at night whenever possible.

Buses can have their routes moved in accordance with change in transportation demand, and the flip side is the absence of commitment that transit along a corridor will be provided in the years to come. So the location of transit routes cannot be used to directly inform decisions about where to live, or where to build. If you build fixed transit infrastructure (e.g. light rail), however, it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. There is a tangible commitment to providing transit along that corridor, which is used to determine where to live and where to build, thereby itself shaping the transportation demand.

Precisely due to their flexibility, buses can do little to shape or direct urban form and land use. So they have no choice but to react. They can demand little of any forces that hinder their operations. And a bus system’s flexibility in providing service from any point to any other point makes it difficult to consolidate service into select, high quality routes that are easy to understand and use.

For a city to be open to pedestrians, there need to be paths between useful destinations, the paths need to be maintained, and pedestrians need to feel safe. Before you can run, you have to walk, and before you can walk, you need a place to do it. In Kitchener-Waterloo there are numerous roads that are missing sidewalks, often on both sides of the street. Sometimes the sidewalks are sporadic: they appear and disappear on a stretch of road. Occasionally one-sided sidewalks even switch sides at intersections. Suburban subdivisions are haphazard, sometimes having full sidewalk coverage, but just as often leaving them out. And sidewalks in industrial areas are simple: there just aren’t any.

I set out to document the state of missing sidewalks in Kitchener and Waterloo. Using Google Maps, I drew red lines for roads missing sidewalks on both sides and blue lines for those missing a sidewalk on just one. I tried to cover everything that is not a suburban subdivision, and I did Eastbridge as an example of a suburban area. There are undoubtedly missing sidewalks that I did not document, and probably some tiny sidewalks that I mistook for curbs. Click on the below map image to see it on Google Maps in more detail. [Update: This is based on 2006 satellite imagery, and a few sidewalks have been put in since then.]

The list of important roads with serious sidewalk absences reads like a who’s who of roads in the region: Fischer-Hallman Rd, Fairway Rd, University Ave, Westmount Rd, Seagram Dr, Victoria St, Homer Watson Blvd, Bleams Rd, Manitou Dr, Lackner Blvd, Bridge St, Northfield Dr, and even King St and Weber St by the St. Jacobs Market. The suburbs are missing many useful sidewalks. And the north Waterloo and south Kitchener industrial parks — while currently devoid of sidewalks — would be quite reasonable places for them, as both are within walking and biking distance of residential areas and transit hubs.

Of course, it isn’t enough for sidewalks to exist. The sidewalks need to be maintained, cleared of snow in the winter, free of standing water, and so on. There need to be walkway connections. There need to be places to walk to. However, sidewalks are a significant step, as they invite people to consider their use and have symbolic value as a commitment by the municipality to its pedestrians.

By the Region of Waterloo’s own estimates, it would cost less than $20 million to add in all the missing sidewalks on regional roads. I would guess it would cost less than $100 million to construct every single missing sidewalk in Kitchener-Waterloo. Considering the region and the two cities can afford to spend around $100 million a year on roads, we can afford this.

What would be the outcome if we added in all the sidewalks? First of all, the people who already walk in these places would now be able to do so safely. Other people will consider walking when they otherwise wouldn’t have risked the side of the road. Many probably aren’t currently willing to walk because there literally is no space for it, or because they are afraid that poor weather would make their journey back unpleasant. Perhaps most intriguingly, there are many missing sidewalks along fast-moving roads to destinations that may be far for walking, but just right for cycling. I think a secondary outcome would be that many will consider cycling on low-population sidewalks as an alternative way to get to their workplace from their suburban homes — both of which may now be solely accessible by car. I know that legally bicycles are supposed to be on the roads, but as a practical matter, many roads — especially in suburban areas — tend to be scary for prospective cyclists, and consequently a very strong deterrent if they are missing sidewalks.

I don’t think sidewalks are always necessary on both sides of the street, particularly if one side does not have any connections. However, calculations about where sidewalks may or may not be needed must be viewed with suspicion, as they appear to me to be prescriptive rather than descriptive. The purpose of sidewalks and walkways should not be just to provide a choice for people, but also to accommodate the choices that will be made and already are being made by pedestrians. People in industrial areas do walk, as do people in the suburbs, whether or not planners think it reasonable. If you look carefully at the satellite imagery in the above map, you will find many places with footpaths in lieu of missing sidewalks.

There is a possibility that if you build a sidewalk, it will not have a use. For 60 years we have been erring on the side of building fewer sidewalks than necessary. It’s about time we started building at least as many sidewalks as we need, and perhaps a few more. Widen (and create) sidewalks, not roads!

It is irrelevant how far people should want to walk to get to transit. The reality is that they are not willing to walk far, though the more complete reality is that they are willing to walk further to get to a train than to a bus.

It is irrelevant that people could plan around infrequent service. Very few are willing to do so.

It is irrelevant that people should take the bus to get to where they need to go. Either they will or they won’t, and empirical evidence all over the world says that they will do everything in their power to avoid buses.

This is why I have been talking about perception and simplicity. Because at the core of a transit system are people who have to navigate it using their faculties of perception and memory (and more), and who also do not derive equal pain or pleasure from the various modes of transportation. Paternalistic transit planning based on what people should do is self-defeating.