The Gross Report

Walkabout

2009-06-25T09:00:00.002-05:00

I went for a walk last night. Normally, that wouldn't merit a post. Plenty of people go for plenty of walks in plenty of cities every day. Why is my experience any different? I suppose it isn't. It is, however, a great opportunity to remind ourselves (1) why walkability matters, and (2) what elements of urban planning and policy can encourage it.

Why does walkability matter?

* Walkability matters because we see things in greater detail when we walk. When we drive past a house, or a park, or a factory, we things in fast motion. Our eyes pick up the big details: dominant color, dominant shape, and so on. But we miss little details. When we walk, we see that the bricks have different shapes. We see that sidewalks are worn to different degrees. We see not just that there is trash in some corner, but that the trash consist of takeout containers from this-or-that restaurant, along with empty bottles of liquor. These artifacts tell us stories about the people with whom we share these spaces. These spaces are no longer simple entertaining backgrounds from behind a window. They are spaces lived in by fellow humans (and animals, too!). Walkability matters because we only slow down to appreciate little details--like the 6 kinds of peace signs in front of one of my favorite houses on Nicollet island--when we are free to stop and look.

* Walkability matters because fresh air matters. Rolling down the window in a moving car is not the same thing as breathing in air at ground level. When you breathe air at walking speed, it doesn't rush past you. You smell everything. Fresh paint, burning rubbers, blooming flowers, river pollution. Wonderful and terrible smells. These are real smells of real things; we would not notice them if we did not walk around and breathe in the air. Too much air conditioning and indoor life stultifies in the long run.

* Walkability matters because we encountering people matters. Most Americans these days seem to live in suburbs. They encounter one another in well-defined social settings--restaurants, churches, workplaces, parks. But they miss encountering the vast majority of people who share their space in the interstices between these well-established gathering places. I walk across the Stone Arch bridge almost every day. I see all kinds of fellow Minneapolitans: kids, teenagers, couples, retirees, families, pets. Not to mention the wide variety of ethnicities we have in the Twin Cities: Liberians, Hmong, central Americans of every type, and (of course) one or two Scandinavians. Walkability matters because without it we would only spend time with our self-selected social circle. We need walkability because it exposes us to all of our fellow residents.

What elements of urban planning and policy can encourage walkability?

* Zoning: We need aggressive zoning policies that encourage (1) small-format ground-floor retail, (2) medium-density housing adjacent to, and above, said retail, and (3) parking policies favorable to multi-modal transit and rapid turnover of parking spots. Small-format ground-floor retail is great because it encourages a multiplicity of uses. Many small shops are better for the economy in the long run than one large shop, because economic diversity breeds long-term stability. Ground-floor retail is essential because people walk--and drive--past at eye level. They need to be able to see, and interact with, the ground-level retail space itself. Medium density housing is necessary in commercial districts because you need a critical mass of people to support dense retail environments and mass transit. Parking policies that encourage rapid turnover of parking spaces are important because a commercial area thrives when customers arrive and depart steadily.

* Pocket parks, benches, and the like: Sidewalks--and streets--are safer when there are more eyes-on-the-street. To encourage people to spend time outside, we need lots of pocket parks. We also need (gasp!) benches. I know it's scary to think that a person might want to sit outdoors, but it is indeed possible. More benches = more people outside = safer streets.

Urban Funnybone

2009-06-07T11:08:00.008-05:00

(I'm trying to get back in the habit of writing this blog--more on that to come).

As I'm sure everyone in the urban blogosphere already knows, there were two really hilarious--and insightful--"tourist" videos for Cleveland published on youtube recently. If for some reason you missed them, you can see them both at the following links:

* Video #1
* Video #2

The first video is a little less snarky and a lot more funny. The second one is also hilarious, but its humor is more mean-spirited. The videos generated quite a bit of discussion. Much of the feedback on the subject has focused on (1) whether its a fair depiction of the city, (2) whether the humor is in good/poor taste, and (3) what can Cleveland do to remedy its problems. I think other commenters have addressed these concerns thoroughly, so I'll keep my remarks limited to an analysis of the humor itself. In particular, I'm interested in examining the assumptions of race and poverty that underlie many of the jokes. Consider the following punchlines:

Video 1: A shot of a downtown Cleveland bus stop, where a few dozen people wait for buses. Voiceover: "Watch the poor people all wait for buses."

Video 1: A shot of a guy talking on a pay phone downtown. Voiceover: "Who the fuck still uses a pay phone?"

Video 1: A shot of a downtown sidewalk. A normal-looking guy walks past a drifter-looking guy; the drifter pivots around to follow the normal-looking person, implying that panhandling (or mugging?) is a frame away. Voiceover: "Cleveland leads the nation in drifters."

There are a few common themes to the jokes listed above. Certainly, they're all pretty funny. But they also reflect some serious, depressing elements of life in a depressed city.

Theme #1: Poor people are disproportionately black. Take a closer look at the videos. You'll notice that black people are significantly over-represented in the jokes that poke fun of poor folk. While there are certainly prosperous middle-class black suburbs in Cleveland, there's also a lot of poverty among inner-city black Clevelanders. This is clearly reflected in the videos. Maybe it's a funny punchline, but it's sad too.

Theme #2: Poverty is visible in downtown. Remember, most middle-class Clevelanders do not live in Cleveland. They live in the inner, and now outer, ring suburbs. Their main point of contact with the city itself is downtown, where there are still around 150,000 jobs. While there is plenty of visible poverty in areas outside of downtown, the videos focus on downtown. The depictions of human poverty are very much focused on that portion of the city. Who the fuck still uses a pay phone? Poor people, that's who. At least, that's the implicit point-of-view that makes that line a joke. I'll leave it to you to decide if it's funny.

Theme #3: Poverty implies violence and crime. The Cleveland-leads-the-nation-in-drifters bit shows a drifter trailing after an ordinary resident. The implied message: watch out for those crazy, impoverished drifter folk. They're waiting for any opportunity to mug you. (For more amusement on those lines, go read the lyrics from 'Class' from the Chicago soundtrack).

With all that said, I'm not writing about these particular videos because I dislike them. Quite the contrary: I think they're hilarious. I've watched them many times, and they consistently get a laugh out of me. I lived in Cleveland for long enough to appreciate the dark humor in those videos. But it's worth examining the underlying assumptions and experiences that make those elements of city life into viable jokes. Race and poverty are strong undercurrents in Cleveland's affairs; indeed, in the affairs of many American cities, not just the Rust Belt. The Cleveland tourism videos are a telling example of these unresolved, ongoing issues.

The Land of Milk and Honey

2008-03-17T07:00:00.001-05:00

(Sorry for the downtime; midterms caught up with me! Without further ado...)

Well, I just spent a week in California. And let me first say that this is one impressive state! Of course, my reaction to California is largely conditioned by having spent a few months in the Minnesota winter. After single-digit weather, a full week of sun and 65 degrees was exceedingly pleasant.

But enough of this--let's get to the urban planning angle!

I've certainly heard about San Francisco's hills, but it was really amazing to see them for myself. The city fully occupies a peninsula with extremely steep hills. And when I say "fully occupies" I mean it--pretty much every available square foot on this space is used for streets and buildings. I have never before seen houses stacked so precipitously close to each other, up and down unbelievably steep hills.

It's very interesting to compare San Francisco to another hilly city: Pittsburgh. The curious difference between the two is that Pittsburgh is slightly less fully developed. Certainly, there are tens of thousands of Pittsburgh houses clinging to the sides of hills, ready to fall over at any moment. But nevertheless there are still trees and foliage. San Francisco, on the other hand, is almost completely built out (with the exception of dedicated parkland). Why this difference?

Of course, I would have to actually research this a bit to answer. My first guess is: weather. Pittsburgh has moderately heavy winters, which makes travel up and down hills fairly difficult. Northern California, on the other hand, doesn't really freeze over or get snow. I imagine the consequence of this is that it's easier to build there.

Ok, enough for now. More to come.

Urban sprawl

2008-03-10T07:00:00.001-05:00

I ran across this excellent photo essay of the far western suburbs of the Twin Cities. It's a very instructive picture of what urban (well, rural) sprawl looks like. Notice the large lots, in particular!

Lifestyle centers

2008-03-07T08:00:00.001-05:00

I would like to follow up a bit on my last post. Lifestyle centers are haunting my brain these days. It's worth talking a bit more about them and trying to understand their appeal.

A lifestyle center attempts to recreate the historical urban configuration, albeit in an arguably sterilized way. In pre-car, pre-train civilization, the movement of people and goods was extremely expensive and energy intensive. Consequently, humans tended to cluster together social and economic functions as much as was feasible. Cities evolved as densely concentrated regions of commerce and socialization. City culture evolved, with its attendant diversity (not to mention problems of public health and property crime).

So how does a lifestyle center recreate this world? It lays out retail space in a dense fashion, and encourages the public visibility of those storefronts. It places housing adjacent to retail space, or immediately above it. In rare cases, it incorporates non-retail economic uses, including office, industrial (gasp!), public sector, and education.

The central question, it seems to me, is this: Does the artificial creation of the traditional urban configuration miss the point? Is the organic evolution of traditional urban centers somehow more authentic than its suburban counterpart? Can true diversity of uses (and users) arise from a centrally-planned development?

Suburban wastelands?

2008-03-05T08:00:00.001-05:00

A recent article from the Brookings Institution got me thinking about the long-term future of suburbs. Like many reports from said institution, the author posited that because (1) energy costs are rising, (2) the foreclosure crisis is bringing traditionally urban crime problems to the 'burbs, and (3) demographic shifts are bringing more yuppies and empty-nest baby boomers back to city centers, it is likely that (4) cities will once again surge in economic and social importance.

Well, it's a nice thought anyway. Let's unpack this logic.

Energy costs are rising: True. Oil is more expensive, and likely to remain so. Large suburban homes are, consequently, more expensive to heat and cool. It is also more expensive to travel over long commutes to and from those suburbs. Will this lead to more people living in cities? Maybe. I see a lot of press about alternate energy sources which might make it cheaper to heat/cool suburban homes. I also see a lot of press about cars that get better mileage. If these two trends make real progress, it may indeed offset the increases in traditional energy costs, thereby preserving the suburban lifestyle.

The foreclosure crisis is definitely hitting suburbs, some worse than others. It is also hitting cities (see my earlier posts on Cleveland, for instance). A few things to keep in mind, however: 1) The crisis is the of an over-hyped housing market and an over-extended credit market, both of which are likely to correct in the long run; 2) The suburbs that are hardest hit are also the most speculative, in which construction boomed very recently.

Demographic shifts are definitely increasing interest in cities. Keep in mind, however, that there has been a MAJOR condo bust across the country in the past two years. MAJOR. Developers vastly overestimated people's interest in city living. Also, remember that New Urbanist developments are growing, and will take attention away from traditional city centers. If you doubt me, go visit Crocker Park in Westlake, OH. Why move to a city center with all its attendant problems (you know the list!) when you can buy a condo next to an outdoor lifestyle center?

OK, I don't mean to be too cynical. I just think it's too easy to cherry-pick a few economic and social trends and conclude that Americans are giving up on suburban living. Americans have demonstrated their clear devotion to large-lot, large-house, high-energy-consumption suburban lifestyle. It will take more than a few lifestyle centers to convince me otherwise.

Entertainment Districts

2008-03-03T08:00:00.000-05:00

Entertainment districts are curious beasts. Cities that don't have them, want them. Cities that do have them often struggle to contain their side effects. Cities with too few of them look for ways to build them up. Cities with too many of them start playing favorites with police presence, infrastructure funding, zoning variances and liquor licenses.

As far as I can tell, Minneapolis has two major such districts. Hennepin Ave & 1st Ave, both of which stretch sort-of north south along the city's downtown, as well as Uptown (a neighborhood a bit south of the city center). Both of these districts are fairly lively, and attract a good-sized crowd at night.

What are the long-term prospects for our entertainment / nightlife districts in the city? St. Anthony Main is an interesting proposition. It offers stunning views of the city, and in good weather is unbelivably well-attended. In the cold weather months, it pretty much shuts down. Why do some districts continue to thrive in winter, whereas a place like St Anthony Main goes into hibernation?

Also: how many consumer dollars are really available for discretionary spending in the metro area? Will New Urbanist outposts in suburbia eventually drain those dollars from the city core?

The Castle

2008-02-29T08:00:00.001-05:00

This is another great city shot I ran across in my wanderings of the urban web. Industrial zones make a powerful impact on the psyche. If you doubt me, go visit Cleveland at night and check out ISG's tower of flame. It spits out easily 10 feet of flame at the top of a smokestack all night long. That thing is captivating, I tell you.

Anyway, I'm always struck when I encounter images of huge factory complexes in action. Perhaps it's just that I'm too accustomed to living in a service-sector America. Once upon a time, this country was covered in such districts. It was perfectly ordinary to see smokestacks, flickering lights and fires at night, and listen to the abrasive clanging of industrial equipment. I grew up in suburban America, and now live in a city not particularly dominated by heavy industry.

Will service-sector America ever become once again manufacturing-sector America? It's doubtful. The only major external force that would drive manufacturing back within our borders is a rising cost of transportation. Certainly, fuel costs are way up in the past ten years, but as far as I can tell that just means we'll import from Mexico instead of China.

Signs of Growth

2008-02-27T08:00:00.000-05:00

I ran across this image while perusing for urban enthusiast sites. It does a great job at showing both the beauty and ugliness of the industrial landscape.

I named this entry "Signs of Growth" because it helps us see the evolution of economic indicators of wealth. In the foreground is a young tree (leafless, unfortunately). This is the symbol of growth and wealth in pre-modern civilization. Wealth came from the earth; trees supply the raw material for shelter. Plants supply the raw material for food.

In the background, we see a host of container-moving cranes at a port. Cranes are the sign of economic progress. They signal the exchange of goods, the creation and exchange of wealth.

It's also striking that both trees and cranes bear a certain visual similarity, at least in this photo. They are both skeletal structures that reach out and away.

Rail Transit

2008-02-26T10:45:00.001-05:00

A commenter on MinnPost wrot e recently about the practical problems that rail transit from Minneapolis to Chicago presents. He specifically lays out a convincing argument for why air travel to Chicago is more effeicient than rail travel. I thought it would be handy to review the numbers a bit and consider what level of performance (both in price, and speed) passenger rail needs to compete effectively with air transit.

Let's start by reviewing the numbers for weekend air travel between Minneapolis and Chicago.

Price: Tickets are as cheap as about $100 round-trip these days. Then you might have to park your car at MSP during your trip ($14/day * 2 days = $28). Then you have to take the train from O'Hare or Midway to the city ($2). That leaves us with a total cost of between $102 and $130.

Time: A flight to Chicago is about an hour. You'll need to get to the airport about 45 minutes in advance. Also, you'll need to get to the airport somehow (let's say maybe 15 minutes if you live in the Metro area). Lastly, you'll need to get from O'Hare or Midway to the city (maybe 20 more minutes). That leaves us with a total of 2 hours 20 minutes.

So, that means that passenger rail to Chicago has to compete with a roughly $116 round trip price and a 140 minute travel time (across 408 miles). To match the travel time, the train will have to travel at least 177 mph. Now that is indeed a fast train. Bullet trains in Japan can perform this well. Most of the estimates I've seen for bullet trains in the US peg the reasonable train speed more around 150 mph. The would give us a travel time of 2 hours 42 minutes (22 more minutes than air travel).

I guess the question, then, is this: Can a 150 mph bullet train exist at at or below that $116 round-trip price point? I don't know. It would take a heck of a subsidy to make that happen. It will take clearly billions of public investment to lay the rail lines themselves. How do you feel about a 1-cent sales tax increase for the next 20 years to cover it?

High Speed Rail transit to Chicago

2008-02-25T08:00:00.001-05:00

A commenter on MinnPost <a href="http://www.minnpost.com/steveberg/2008/02/06/800/bells_transit_plan_is_superb_except_somebody_forgot_to_include_money#comment_960">wrot
recently</a> about the practical problems that rail transit from Minneapolis to Chicago presents. He specifically lays out a convincing argument for why air travel to Chicago is more effeicient than rail travel. I thought it would be handy to review the numbers a bit and consider what level of performance (both in price, and speed) passenger rail needs to compete effectively with air transit.

Let's start by reviewing the numbers for weekend air travel between Minneapolis and Chicago.

Price: Tickets are as cheap as about $100 round-trip these days. Then you might have to park your car at MSP during your trip ($14/day * 2 days = $28). Then you have to take the train from O'Hare or Midway to the city ($2). That leaves us with a total cost of between $102 and $130.

Time: A flight to Chicago is about an hour. You'll need to get to the airport about 45 minutes in advance. Also, you'll need to get to the airport somehow (let's say maybe 15 minutes if you live in the Metro area). Lastly, you'll need to get from O'Hare or Midway to the city (maybe 20 more minutes). That leaves us with a total of 2 hours 20 minutes.

So, that means that passenger rail to Chicago has to compete with a roughly $116 round trip price and a 140 minute travel time (across 408 miles). To match the travel time, the train will have to travel at least 177 mph. Now that is indeed a fast train. Bullet trains in Japan can perform this well. Most of the estimates I've seen for bullet trains in the US peg the reasonable train speed more around 150 mph. The would give us a travel time of 2 hours 42 minutes (22 more minutes than air travel).

I guess the question, then, is this: Can a 150 mph bullet train exist at at or below that $116 round-trip price point? I don't know. It would take a heck of a subsidy to make that happen. It will take clearly billions of public investment to lay the rail lines themselves. How do you feel about a 1-cent sales tax increase for the next 20 years to cover it?

Kinship Networks, Mobility, and Metropolitan Economies

2008-02-22T08:00:00.001-05:00

I got into a conversation tonight about (guess what!) urban economies. We were talking a bit about our careers and cities. I asked her: "Would you ever leave Minneapolis?" And to my great surprise, she answered quite quickly: "Yes!"

This response surprises me not because I'm a Minniephile (as I have well established in this blog by now). Rather, it surprises me because most people don't move away from cities once they have settled in. The vast majority of people--in this country anyway--stick close to home.

It's striking how often people end up living out their adult family lives in the region where they were raised. Kids move away to college. Most of the time, they go to the gigantic state university in their home state. Occasionally they go to Ivy League schools in the Northeast. Somehow, they always end up meeting their eventual spouses at school; those spouses often hail from the same region. These college kids graduate, marry, move around the country for a bit, and yet almost always settle back in the city closest to their hometown.

Kinship networks are strong. They are more than strong. They pull deeply at the soul of every human. People are born into families, churches, and social networks. They may seek education elsewhere. They may even live for a time in our cities, regions, and countries. But when they marry and produce children, they move home. The rhythms of their hometown run deep inside their blood.

Why does this matter from an urban studies perspective? It matters because metropolitan economic planning must take this into account. Cities are lucky in this respect. Cities can count on residents, in general, not wanting to leave. As long as cities provide a variety of lifestyle configurations and economic opportunity, cities will thrive in the long run. A city that follows this advice may not become vastly wealthy, certainly. But as long as young people feel that there is true economic opportunity "back home", they will return and they will continue to plant roots there.

Vacant Homes

2008-02-20T08:00:00.001-05:00

I just read in today's (6 Feb 2008) WSJ that the home vacancy rate in Cleveland has hit 10%. Wow. Ten percent, people. That's a lot of empty homes.

To be fair, this is not just a reflection of the mortgage crisis. Cleveland has been losing population fairly steadily, anyway, due mostly to economic factors. Between depopulation and a foreclosure bonanza precipitated by crummy lending practices, they've got one out of every ten homes vacant. Rokakis (the county treasurer) remarks in the article that, even if the city were able to make improvements on those homes, it is unlikely they could find buyers.

So what's to be done? Cleveland, like a lot of cities, has a real problem on its hands. Vacant homes drive down property values of neighboring homes. They're a great place for vagrants / criminals / teenagers to hang out and get into trouble. Theft of copper pipe from vacant homes is also apparently a time-honored hobby these days. Weeds grow over lawns, presently a public safety hazard. It's a nightmare.

Cities respond, quite reasonably, by taking possession of these homes and either turning them over to responsible tenants (NPOs, for instance) and, when that isn't possible, demolishing them. Who knows? Maybe in 50 years there will be a bunch of urban prairie lots in the middle of former industrial cities.

Beating the Blight of Surface Lots!

2008-02-18T08:00:00.001-05:00

Surface lots are the bane of urban downtowns. They are both a visual blight (who wants to look at giant sea of cars?), an economic blight (ROI per square foot is low compared to business-based usage), and a lifestyle blight (what kind of urban life is possible when you have parking lots scattered everywhere?).

Surface lots persist, however, because they usually make money for their owners. Parking is usually in strong demand in city centers, and Minneapolis is no exception. Owners of parking lots gladly charge monthly rates and make decent money on their investment. From their point of view, this is a great business to be in.

(On a side note: This is/was an issue back in Cleveland as well. There was a very interesting proposal to change property taxation rules so that taxes are based on potential property value rather than real property value. That is, normally you're simply taxed on the value of your real estate. Instead, you would be taxed on the potential profitability of your real estate. Since downtown land--because it can house office buildigns--is so much more potentially profitable, you have to pay higher taxes. This encourages owners of surface lots to develop their land!)

Anyway, moving on. Downtown Journal reports that Minneapolis is seeking to develop a surface lots at South 2nd St and 4th Ave South. This is the giant lot immediately south of the RiverWest condo building. It is quite a sizable lot, I assure you. This could be a great opportunity to put in more housing and ground-level retail. The city will require any new development to have at least 200 parking spaces, of course. At any rate, I'm optimistic. Downtown growth is a good sign!

Tapering Building Heights

2008-02-15T08:00:00.001-05:00

I got into a conversation about riverfront condo development recently. My companion observed how frustrating it is that wherever there's a river or a lake in a city, there's always some super tall residential highrise right next to it, obstructing views of the water from anyone not wealthy enough to buy into the building. Fair enough, it's a bit of a problem. If you do want to buy a condo with a lake (or river) view, you can only ensure you'll keep your view if you buy immediately adjacent to the lake. If you don't want to buy a condo but are a resident and would like to be able to see the lake once in awhile, you're also out of luck.

What about requiring that buildings have decreasing height as they approach a body of water? If planning commissions made such a requirement, developers could build highrises of ever-increasing height as they moved farther away from the water. In the long run, more units could be built with water views, thus increasing property value and returns to city coffers.

Seeing History in the Street

2008-02-13T08:00:00.001-05:00

I took a guest out on a brief tour of my neighborhood. Brief, because negative wind chills don't exactly make for pleasant strolls. Anywho, out on the Stone Arch Bridge I showed her the vista of St Anthony Main, which as you well know (since all my readers are students of Minneapolis history) is home to a number of older industrial buildings. Tucked among them are a few recent condo highrises, of course. (Not to mention the University of Minnesota steam plant which, any day now, will itself become a developer's new condo project. Imagine living in one of the giant turrets!).

My guest remarked how cool it is to be able to see history alive in the streets of a city. I couldn't agree more. Buildings, and roads, are arguably the longest-lasting physical creations we humans put on our planet. To see flour mills that date back over a hundred years is to feel connected to history. Those buildings are both signifiers of original use, as well as living beings themselves. They have adapted their use over time. Some lay long-abandoned, and are eventually torn down. Others become useful in residential form. The Stone Arch Bridge itself used to carry freight rail across the Mississippi. Now it carries families with kids and pets on sunny days. Occasionally it carries police cruisers and ambulances when newer bridges collapse into the river. The built environment reflects both original intent and ongoing, ever-changing uses. We see our own history and our own evolution as a community in this space.

Where are the middle class highrises?

2008-02-11T08:00:00.001-05:00

The Minneapolis housing stock is a curious beast. I've spent the past year reviewing the offerings of the condo market. I've found that there's an astonishing quantity of "luxury" condos and a so-so quantity of "non-luxury" condos. Where are the middle class highrises? Are there really so few people who want the advantages of non-single-family-home living but don't want: (1) Granite countertops (2) Viking ranges (3) Concierge services (4) Bamboo floors (5) High-end fixtures?

I'm really baffled by this. Surely there's enough latent demand in this market for condos around $220k (the median housing price in America). Or is there just so much single-family-home stock in this market that no one would consider an alternative?

Bizarre Condo Taglines

2008-02-08T08:00:00.001-05:00

In this sagging housing market, condo are particularly hard to move. I'm sure we all know how much the condo market has plunged in the Twin Cities. Speculation in the past few years led to the construction of quite a number of condo buildings. Not only did developers overestimate the total demand for condo units, they also overestimated the degree of luxury that condo buyers were in a position to pay for. The net result of this is a number of canceled projects, condo buildings being converted to rentals (check out Le Parisien flats by the Wedge), and returned deposits for buildings that never went up.

Condos are still available, however. I love the taglines marketers have invented to move these units. Check out Olin Crossings, for instance. Their motto is: "Where intimate & urban collide". What in the world does that mean? I get really cozy with the homeless panhandlers? The noise of traffic nearby comfortably settles in my living room? Maybe, by "collide" they mean that my bedroom is actually loaded into a catapult and shot directly into the IDS Center? I imagine that's possible.

Look, I'm not naive about this. I'm well aware of the image that the marketers are trying to create. They're doing battle with the long-held (at least, post-WWII-held) notion that "urban = bad". Somehow, they reason, if they put the word "intimate" next to "urban" they can re-brand "urban" to have positive connotations. I'm an urbanist, so it's not a hard sell for me. I'm not sure, however, if this kind of tactic really works for home buyers. It smacks of pre-housing-crash class warfare, in which all new city housing was "luxury" and the demographic of interest was empty-nest baby boomers looking for 2nd homes. In this market, how about a tagline based on value and quality?

What is your time worth?

2008-02-06T08:00:00.001-05:00

The average one-way commute in America is 24 minutes (21 minutes here in Minneapolis). I value my time highly; consequently I chose to live in a central location so that my commute remains low (12 minutes one way). I'm continually astounded by how much time my fellow Americans are willing to spend in their cars. Many of my coworkers have commutes in excess of 45 minutes one-way. When asked why they choose to locate so far from the metro center, I hear the same refrain again and again: you get more housing for your money. One guy justified the difference in housing cost this way: "The money I save on the house buys a lot of gas". In his mind, it's simply a question of dollars expended, not time wasted. How much time is reasonable to spend in a car in a given day? I find it difficult to fathom that this is such a high priority for people. Can anyone explain this to me?

The Dream Transit System

2008-02-04T08:01:00.001-05:00

With visions of light rail (Yay! Central Corridor!) dancing in my mind, I'm reminded of the many conversations I've had at work regarding transit. Many of my coworkers are similarly pro-transit, and the biggest complaint I've heard (and share) is that light rail connecting downtown St Paul and downtown Minneapolis is simply not good enough. We want a full-scale, metro-wide, underground subway system of the 1st class. We've been to cities with top shelf transit systems: New York City, Chicago, Paris, Taipei, etc. We've seen how transformative those systems can be for their host cities.

Sadly, of course, systems like that cost a fortune. The Central Corridor alone is probably going to run $850 million. A complete metro-wide subway system? I imagine we're looking into the tens of billions...

However, it's fun to speculate! If you had to pick, where would you put stations? There are a lot of obvious contenders: a few in Uptown, both banks of UMN campus, downtowns, intersections like Lex/Univ, Snelling/Univ, pretty much every campus in the area, and so on.

So what would it take to make this happen? Anyone got a spare billion?

The Dream Transit System

2008-02-04T08:00:00.001-05:00

So what would it take to make this happen? Anyone got a spare billion?

The Bridge is Coming...

2008-02-01T08:51:00.001-05:00

The I-35W bridge is coming along nicely. At night, the brighter-than-a-dwarf-star spotlights cast their welcome glow on the subzero construction site. I suppose the lights and the construction noise might be seen as a hassle. To my mind, they're the sound of progress: the bridge is coming back!

Will they really finish it by the end of the year?

The Central Corridor: Who is supposed to use it?

2008-01-30T08:01:00.001-05:00

With any luck, MSP will eventually build the central corridor light rail (see details here). The basic idea is to link both downtowns with a light rail line running down University Ave. There are still lots of details to work out, funding chief among them. Also, stakeholders have not agreed on the final route through the University of Minnesota.

One thing that has troubled me about this whole venture is this: Who is supposed to benefit from this line? Who really needs to travel back and forth between the two downtowns? I guess there are probably lawyers and government folk who would benefit, but do ordinary Twin Citians need to make the trip very often?

I imagine the demographic that stands to benefit the most is commuters. Except, well, I don't quite see how the Central Corridor will help commuters all that much. Unless you live within walking distance of University Ave (between Dinkytown on the west and Rice St on the east), you'll have to take a bus and transfer to get on the light rail line itself. But wait--you're already on a bus! And buses go downtown! Hmmm. Maybe I'm not seeing something.

Metropolitan Ecosystems

2008-01-28T08:01:00.001-05:00

Tonight, I got into a conversation with a fellow resident about (big surprise!) cities. I (as you know) have moved here to Minneapolis from Cleveland. He (the fellow resident, that is) moved here from San Diego. We talked a bit about why Minneapolis is a pretty cool city. There are, of course, a lot of advantages. Tonight, I want to write a bit about the city as a ecosystem which serves a broad and varied demographic.

A city works when it can provide enough variety of lifestyles in enough quantity to fulfill demand. Remember, there are two "enoughs" in that previous sentence: enough VARIETY, and enough QUANTITY.

Let's unpack that a bit. Take a look at Cleveland. Why is the region faltering? In many ways, the region is ideal. The suburbs are beautiful, well-maintained, with great houses and great schools. The cost of living is low, the amenities are great (visit the lake! visit the parks!), the transportation network is solid, and so on. These are all wonderful virtues of the suburban world.

But wait.... virtues of the suburban world? Now we're hitting on something. The Cleveland region provides a high-quality "traditional" suburban lifestyle to a huge number of people. And indeed, there are hundreds of thousands of families in the region who want just that lifestyle.

There are, however, demographics who do not want that lifestyle. I am among them. I am an urbanist, and want to live in a vibrant, diverse city with a lot of economic opportunity. I flatter myself to think that I am NOT the only former Clevelander who has these priorities. As a matter of fact, I know a number of people who left Cleveland for exactly this reason.

So what is Minneapolis doing right? It is still largely a suburban region. The vast majority of my coworkers have families and live in the burbs.

But not all of them. Many people still do live in the city. The housing stock in the city itself is fantastic. The fellow resident (from San Diego) just bought a place in southwest Minneapolis, a gorgeous neighborhood. The city offers a much more urban llfestyle, plainly put. The variety, and quantity, of cultural events is simply stunning. And, I might add, the availability of mid-level professional jobs is a significant incentive to locate here (more on that in another post).

Ok, enough blind praise for the moment. I'll write more about the economic ladder later.

Driving Rules India-Style

2008-01-23T23:25:00.001-05:00

In my previous article, I wrote a little bit about India and referred to the new super-cheap ($2500!) car from Tata motors. This reminded me of a rather hilarious and scary-as-hell YouTube video of traffic at an intersection in India. Please go ahead and watch it. It's intense.

(Pause while reader watches crazy video).

Ok, so why do I bring this up? What does this have to do with urban studies?

Well, obviously it's an amazing example of how it is indeed possible to have a functioning transportation network without the firm hand of the law AND without ingrained safety-minded behavior among drivers themselves. The astounding thing about this video is that there aren't any accidents during the whole thing. To be fair, accident (and fatalities resulting from them) are way higher in developing countries, India included. But still, this video should give you pause: It is possible to loosen restrictions on driving and still have a working system (crazy as it is).

In Holland, there are certain streets in which all forms of traffic are allowed, and no visual markers exist to delineate which portion of the street is available for which mode. Pedestrian, bikers (motorized and non), and cars all tool down the same street. Cars drive slow as hell, because there are people walking right in front of them. It's not exactly an efficient system from a driver's point of view, but accident rates are far lower and non-vehicular transportation modes are much more viable.

Back From the Dead

2008-01-23T23:13:00.000-05:00

Well, I'm back from a several-months hiatus. I suppose an explanation is in order: I started grad school (again!) last September. My time management is not so hot, and I found that schoolwork was simply taking up a lot more time than I had anticipated. With the new semester starting next week, however, I'm optimistic that I can devote the time necessary to post regularly. I'm shooting for three posts per week (Monday / Wednesday / Friday). With any luck, the gods of urbanism (Jane Jacobs, can you hear me!?) will smile upon me and grant my wish.

So let's get back to the plan: cities! What are they? What does it mean to live in one? Will they still exist 50 years from now? Is suburban sprawl and endless force marching over all we urbanists love? Will a Democratic administration (cross your fingers!) be a more urban-friendly administration?

Whoa there. That's a bit much to cover in one entry. I will, however, speak briefly about question #3: Will cities still exist 50 years from now?

The long-term viability of cities has been a fascinating question as long as urban studies has existed. Admittedly, that's not a very long time. Even before urban studies was called urban studies, however, people have wondered whether cities--or, more properly, urban agglomerations--would always exist.

There are indeed interesting arguments suggesting that cities won't last: chief among them is the influence that information technology has in making it possible to distribute work geographically. In a word: telecommuting. The no-cities-in-the-future-ists tell us that telecom allows for the geographic decentralization of work. Everyone can just call / fax / email / vpn his way to work, and voila! The economy will tick along, only no one will really ever need to see coworkers face-to-face.

It's an interesting trend, but it's unclear whether telecom in the long run will really break up cities. The number of telecommuters remains small (as a percentage of American workers, anyway). The more significant impact telecom has had on the economy is that it has facilitated connections between countries. India, of course, is the obvious example: The stunning boom in telecom (brought about by American innovation, no less) led to explosive growth in IT-services delivered by India. I'm sure we're all familiar with that.

And, by the way, go check out India if you think cities are headed the way of the dodo. Every week the WSJ publishes another article about Bangalore, Hyderabad, Mumbai, or Delhi; those cities are ridiculously huge and getting bigger. Hell, even a 37-hp Tata can't stop that!

Life on the Farm

2007-09-24T22:08:00.000-05:00

(Sorry I've been AWOL for a week; the semester started so life's a bit busy!)

I had the good fortune to head down to the CSA (Harmony Valley farm in southwest Wisconsin) this past weekend. Like all trips "outstate", it starts by making me want to cast off my urban existence and live and work in the fields. Then, after a day or so, I find myself longing for the (admittedly cliche) Sunday New York Times, a lobster omelet, and a jazz trio at the cafe near Nye's. (Supposedly the neighborhood is called "Near Northeast", although I haven't really heard it enter into common usage).

As always, however, trips to the farm remind me of the complex and amazing nature of modern civilization's supply chains. Recall that urban centers are possible only because vast supply chains for delivering food and energy exist. For the vast part of human history, resource production was essentially local (or regional). Energy itself is remarkably difficult to transport. Until the discovery of electricity (and electrical transmission), the vast majority of energy was transmitted by water power. Energy, in fact, was more commonly distributed as fuel (potential energy, that is).

But I digress. The farm is quite an operation. It takes a heck of a lot of training in chemistry to understand what goes into running a successful organic farming operation. I myself do not have this training. I am very pleased, however, that others do and are willing to grow excellent food and sell it to city folk like me. If you have the opportunity, I highly recommend visiting any farm that you commonly buy from at the grocery store. It's really impressive to follow the supply chain backwards to the point of production.

We're used to buying consumer goods in individual quantities (except, I imagine, for Sam's Club shoppers!). We buy produce a few pounds at a time. We buy packs of gum. We buy individual cars. We buy a table and four chairs. We get used to thinking of produced goods in terms of individual units. But goods are generally not produced that way at all. Go visit the farm, and gaze upon hundreds (or thousands) or tomato plants. I assure you, there are vastly more tomatoes than you could ever imagine eating. While you're at it, pick a few and eat them off the vine directly, still warm from the sun. While refrigeration may have made it possible to ship asparagus overnight from Chile, nothing beats eating veggies direct.

And You Thought I Was Done With Transit!

2007-09-12T22:12:00.000-05:00

To review, the first major step in revamping the city (and laying the groundwork for rapid transit!) is promoting community corridors wherever possible. The are numerous such roads in the cities right now, but there can (and should!) be more.

To achieve this, we need to start blocking off intersections. To see an example, go drive down Kasota Ave, just east of 15th Ave NE. You'll see that it runs for a good half-mile at 35 mph, and although there are easily a half-dozen residential roads that could intersect it, those roads are in fact closed off from Kasota itself.

This has the practical effect of (1) better insulating the residential neighborhoods from through traffic, and (2) turning Kasota into an arterial road.

I suggest we start examining all the road patterns in the city to identify where this pattern can be implemented. Obviously, I'm mostly familiar with my neighborhood (Marcy-Holmes and UMinn). What other roads are good contenders from this treatment?

The First Step: More Corridors

2007-09-12T11:49:00.000-05:00

The first step in laying the groundwork for a rapid transit system is to improve the number, configuration, and quality of secondary arterial roads ("arterials"). Also referred to as "community corridors" (see Marcy-Holmes neighborhood plan), these are roads that meet the following criteria:

(1) Unchanged speed limit of at least 30mph for long (multi-mile) stretches

(2) Intersections occurring at most once per half-mile

(3) The preferred mode of intersection prioritizes traffic already on the arterial

(4) Little if any street-side parking

Such roads already exist to some extent throughout the metro area. Though they are not highways, they make travel across the region much more viable and efficient.

So the first step is simply improving and extending the reach of arterials across the region. That is, we need to improve the non-highway skeletal transportation infrastructure for the Twin Cities. This will have immediate benefits for the existing modes of transportation, and will be particularly helpful for the existing bus-based transit system, since it will allow buses to maintain higher average speeds and improve crosstown trip efficiency.

Transit and Density

2007-09-10T22:34:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, I posted an initial foray into my Amazing Plans for Rapid Transit in the Twin Cities. To be fair, it wasn't given any such title, though. At any rate, I'm thinking through what it would take to get a real rapid transit system in place here in Minneapolis (and St. Paul). By rapid transit, I mean a system that travels at least 30 mph on average, and whose stops average less than 20 seconds.

An astute reader pointed out to me that the Twin Cities may very well not have sufficient population density to support such a system. Chicago, my favorite go-to city for practical and not crazy-expensive rapid transit, has a population density of around 11,000 people-per-square-mile. Minneapolis has less: around 6900 people-per-square-mile.

This is indeed a significant difference. Minneapolis has roughly 62% of Chicago's population density. Is this enough to support a rapid transit system? How many people do you need in one place to make it economically viable?

Clearly I'm not an expert on the field. But it seems possible. The Twin Cities have several distinct and high-population employment centers: downtown Minneapolis, downtown St. Paul, and UMinn campus to name a few. Its suburbs are nearby, have low to moderate population density, and ring the metropolitan region completely. Surely, even a commuter-based system should be viable.

Think about it this way: do you drive in from the suburbs to work in the city? If you do, ask yourself whether you can imagine more buses (or, gasp, trains!) running along the major highway routes (694, 394, 94, 35E, 35W, etc.). Given how much passenger car traffic is present on those highways, surely there is sufficient demand for park-and-ride rapid transit into the cities.

What do you think?

Mass Transit: The Plan

2007-09-09T15:11:00.000-05:00

I'm sure it's no secret by now that I'm a fan of (mass) transit. I've lived in (as well as visited) a number of cities with excellent transportation networks, and I'm convinced that the benefits of quality transit systems outweigh their problems. Paris, New York, Chicago, DC, London, and Taipei all have excellent transit systems. The people who use them are not somehow genetically different from all of us. They are not born with a special gene that makes them capable of using buses / trains / subways. They are normal people who make use of transportation infrastructure available to them.

As a new resident of Minneapolis, I would love to see a first-rate Paris-style subway system put in place. If I had a spare $10 billion, I would gladly invest it in a gigantic capital construction project to dig subway tunnels all over the city. Subways would be great: they're efficient, fast, reliable, and since they're underground they're less susceptible to the problems of weather. As you may have heard, it gets a bit chilly here in Minnesota during winter.

Sadly, I'm forced to conclude the political willpower necessary to raise sufficient construction funds for such a project is impossible. To build political support for a $10 billion bond measure would take decades of grassroots efforts, working at the neighborhood, municipal, county, state, and federal level. Maybe by the time I have grandchildren we'll have enough political support to actually build a subway system.

Faced with this reality, I'm forced to contemplate an incremental approach to building quality transit. How can we move, step-by-step, bit-by-bit, rail-by-rail, towards a viable transit policy? What improvements and changes are possible in the short run that advance us towards a full-scale high-quality mass transit system?

I'll be posting more on this subject, and would love to hear your input on the urban planning & political requirements to make this happen.

So Blue, Not on the Blue Line

2007-09-04T23:24:00.000-05:00

Awhile back, I wrote about what happens to transportation patterns when transportation arteries are (temporarily or permanently) closed off. The motivating example, in this case, was the closure of the Pittsburgh's outbound highway leading east. The major observation, not surprisingly, is that traffic really sucks when you close down a highway.

I spent some time in Chicago recently, a city that has the glorious distinction of being one of the few American cities with really great transit systems. Like most such cities (New York being a notable exception), Chicago's elevated train is a hub-and-spoke system. Downtown (the Loop) is the hub, and the train lines extend outwards therefrom.

The blue line runs northwest from downtown all the way to O'Hare airport. CTA is currently doing quite a bit of work on the blue line, and on the weekend that I visited a significant portion of the line was unavailable. Practically speaking, this means that I could not simply fly in to O'Hare, hop on the train, and travel downtown to my hotel. Quite frustrating, I must say! One of the great advantages of visiting cities like Chicago is being able to travel exclusively by transit.

A few urban thinker asked recently how we can mitigate the effects of disabled transportation infrastructure. I've given a lot of thought to it, and my answer is (unfortunately) simple and a bit sad: there's not much we can do. Usage patterns of infrastructure are clear: people use infrastructure as much as humanly possible. When you disable a portion of infrastructure (like the I-35W bridge over the MIssissippi), the practical result is chaos and frustration.

I still love Chicago, however. The construction on the blue line will be finished soon, and I'll be back.

Chicago!

2007-08-27T00:03:00.000-05:00

Hi folks! I've got tons of exciting, urban-planning-related stuff to write about, but for today I'm simply posting a photo essay of my recent weekend trip to Chicago. I'm certainly not the first person (nor the last) to discover the great architectural gem that is the 2nd City (or Windy City, if you prefer). Enjoy!

Revolving Doors!

2007-08-23T16:47:00.000-05:00

I recently ran across this great article on why revolving doors save so much more energy than normal swing doors. I'll leave the technical details to the cited article, but suffice it to say revolving doors are wayyyyyyyyyy more energy-efficient.

I've noticed that in Chicago many street-facing doors are, in fact, revolving doors. Given how cold (and windy!) it gets in Chicago in the winter, this makes perfect sense to me. Who among us has not sat in a coffee shop near the door during winter, only to be blasted by the frosty cold when someone opens the door!?

All of which makes me wonder why there are so few revolving doors in Minneapolis. Surely the winters are cold enough here to warrant it. Are they very expensive to install? Wouldn't the energy savings in winter offset the additional installation cost? Maybe the city could incentivize such construction...

Alternate Distribution Systems

2007-08-23T14:48:00.001-05:00

Pursuant to a discussion-via-comment thread on an affair with urban policy, I'd like to elaborate a bit on my ideas for an alternate goods-distribution system for a city. Before I get started, however, let me review the motivating cause for this idea.

As a transit advocate, I've been endlessly frustrated by Americans' tenacious love of their personal automobiles. This is a common emotion for transit boosters. "Why can't people take a bus!" we cry. Of course, I'm disingenuous--I drive myself to work just like everyone else. But this emphasis on personal transportation made me realize that car-as-people-mover is only one half of the equation. The private automobile is also a goods-mover. That is, people buy things, and then take them home with their cars. Aha! Light bulb moment!

What if there was a distribution system for goods in a metropolitan area? You go to the clothing store (by bus!), buy something, and then leave without it. You leave without it because you paid an extra 1% to have it delivered to your home in the next 24 hours. After you leave, the metro area delivery guys stops by the store for his daily pickup. He picks up perhaps 20 orders, and over the course of the next day delivers those various goods to locations around the area.

The logistics for such a system are not an easy thing. How would package drop-off work securely? How could you ensure that delivered goods weren't stolen?

My apartment building has a rather clever system for package delivery. There are perhaps 100 units in my building. In the mail room, in addition to the 100 mini-mailboxes, there are about a half-dozen fairly large package mailboxes. On any given day, there are perhaps a half-dozen packages delivered to the entire building. Each package is placed in a single large form mailbox. The key to the large form mailbox is placed in the resident's mini-mailbox.

The resident comes home, and opens his mini-mailbox. He takes the "parcel 2" key out of his mini-mailbox and opens the large form mailbox. The key opens the door, but once placed in the lock cannot be removed. The resident takes his package out of the large mailbox and closes it. The mailman swings by later and takes the package keys out of the large mailboxes. Voila! Quite a system!

Hennepin at Night

2007-08-22T22:17:00.000-05:00

The collapse of I-35W has forced us all to take all kinds of weird, alternate routes through our city. Especially with the Cedar bridge closed, anyone living within the city limits has probably had the (forced) opportunity to explore new neighborhoods. Our detours take us through neighborhoods we would never have visited otherwise. It's a colossal hassle (my trip to Uptown has double to 20 minutes--argh!), but it's been very interesting seeing new bits and pieces of the city.

In my case, I get to spend a lot of time on Hennepin (northbound) and 1st Ave (southbound) these days. These are some of the core north-south spines of the city's downtown, and the heart of the city's nightlife. As I drive back from an evening in Uptown, I'm astounded to see crowds on both sides of the sidewalk at midnight and beyond. The city is indeed alive at that moment.

The picture above, however, is not of the party crowd. It's a great shot of the Hennepin bridge, lit up at night. I'm certainly only one in a long line of people to celebrate the beauty of this bridge. It's particularly neat to see the visual transformation of the bridge at night.

Here's hoping the new I-35W bridge will express some of the beauty of its near-western neighbor...

Office Parks

2007-08-20T23:28:00.000-05:00

Boy meets City. Boy and City fall in love. Boy moves to city. Boy thinks: "I'll get a job in the city!" City has huge downtown office market, with millions of square feet. Boy hopes to walk to work. Boy finds great job. Job is located in office park outside of city center. Boy is confused.

Why are so many offices located outside the downtown core? This is a phenomenon not special to Minneapolis--I've seen it in many cities (Cleveland certainly among them). I'm baffled. Cities grew up as (among other things) vast employment centers. Developers have spent millions (and billions even) on million-square-foot skyscrapers. And yet, somehow, businesses open operations in suburban office parks, taking no advantage of the physical concentration of resources that a city would provide.

Ah well. I'm not naive about the market forces driving this phenomenon. Suburbs offer huge tax breaks, proximity to peripheral highway systems, cheap parking, and pretty landscaping. It's hard to fight that kind of economic logic. My main complaint is that it's hard to find lunch options in the 'burbs.

Infrastructure and Politics

2007-08-16T22:08:00.000-05:00

I guess I'm just a glutton for democratic politics. For the second day in a row, I attended a public meeting for the discussion of (what else?) the I-35W bridge reconstruction process. Hosted by MPR (yay!), paneled by Rybak, a state senator, an engineer, and a half-dozen policy wonks, attended by seventy or so concerned citizens, it was a great open forum to discuss the state of public infrastructure, funding sources, good (or bad) governance, and public faith in the government's ability to maintain said infrastructure.

The debate revealed an essential problem in the public discussion of infrastructure. On the one hand, discussions of infrastructure are necessarily scientific and dominated by engineers: what kinds of roads can be built at all? what kind of volume can they handle? how long will it take to build a certain bridge according to certain specifications?

But as soon as the discussion turns to funding, the discussion becomes necessarily political. Despite one participant's observation that the state once experimented with requiring a cost-benefit analysis for all expenditures, the fact remains that the process by which a budget is formed is a fundamentally political, not scientific, endeavor. In the best of all worlds, we would have limitless funds to support all the wonderful things we want government to do. But the pie is only so large, and unless we find new revenue sources (er, raise taxes) additional funding for project A must come at the cost of other projects.

What is infrastructure worth to us as citizens? One economist in the audience cited statistics that investment in infrastructure pays back tenfold. Successful economies, he said, are built on strong infrastructure, including roads, sewers, telecom, and human capital.

The bridge collapse goes beyond any normal, understandable kind of governmental failure. When pavement deteriorates and our car suspensions wear out faster, we complain that government is not properly investing in maintaining the roads. When a bridge falls out into the Mississippi, killing a dozen or so people and forcing 140,000 cars to find alternate routes across the river, our reaction is a bit more intense: we are stunned by our government's failure. The initial question at tonight's meeting, as put by our moderator, was this: "What do people expect of government when it comes to our roads?" Perhaps the best answer came at the end, when one gentleman said this:

"People expect not to have to worry about bridges collapsing into the river."

Notes on I-35W Bridge Rebuilding

2007-08-15T20:48:00.000-05:00

Hi folks! I had the good fortune to attend a community meeting tonight (Wednesday), in which residents from Marcy-Holmes, St. Anthony, and the University area (as well as a St Paul contingent) got to discuss their concerns regarding the I-35W bridge reconstruction efforts with a host of elected officials and MNDot representatives. Overall, it was a good meeting. The panel of politicians & engineers were clearly interested in getting active community feedback about the reconstruction process.

And feedback they got! The one clearly overwhelming concern that the community expressed was that the reconstruction effort should not go too fast. There are a lot of factors to take into account, and if the state moves too quickly on the issue we risk making lasting mistakes.

The underlying difficulty in discussing bridge reconstruction is that it is essentially two discussions. The first is a micro-level discussion regarding the specifics of the new bridge: how big will it be? how many lanes will it have? will it be pretty? The second question, however, is macro-level in scope: how will the bridge fit into the overall regional transportation needs? will the bridge accommodate mass transit? what's going to happen to the regional commute as the population grows?

Residents in the neighborhoods immediately north (and south) of the bridge have been disproportionately affected by the bridge collapse. Traffic inbound to the city has been rerouted through neighborhood streets. As a city planner pointed out in the meeting, 140,000 drivers who used to take the bridge are now spilling onto neighborhood arteries to get around.

One resident suggested that park-and-ride lots could effectively deal with much of the increased road volume. It's not a bad idea--why not stick as many park-and-ride lots around the city as possible? If it works for the state fair, maybe it'll work for downtown-bound traffic...?

Hidden Alleys

2007-08-14T22:53:00.001-05:00

The alley pictured above lies between two commercial buildings in Portland, Maine. I snagged a picture of it because it struck me as somehow alien. Certainly there are tosn of alleys between tons of buildings in tons of cities, but I've never seen one so nondescript, clean, and devoid of any inhabitants or stuff. It's totally empty, and has no lighting sources, so it's completely dark at night. It is located in an otherwise well-frequented part of Portland's downtown; the buildings on either side are commercial and house successful stores. But there's nothing in the alley... no detritus... no trash... no graffiti... nothing. Odd.

Zone defense: The lowdown on mixed zoning and downtown living

2007-08-12T13:23:00.000-05:00

(Today's post comes from Generalissimo)

An eco-conscious college professor happily moves into a Cleveland downtown apartment from the suburbs. He’s thrilled that he won’t have to drive to work and many favorite attractions are within walking distance. The newly leased luxury apartment meets his needs, for he’s meticulously asked all the right questions and heard the right answers. Well, that is until 4 a.m. rolls around and there’s jackhammering outside his window. This goes on not for a day or a week but for more than two months. Putting it nicely, he hits a breaking point.

Come one more noisy 4 a.m., he loses it and telephones his councilman, who happens to pick up. How can this be, he screams at his councilman, sticking the phone out the window to let him have a sampling of it. The official answers tepidly, that the area has mixed purpose zoning. And, well, the construction in the street is considered commercial so that the hours are not as restrictive as in a residential zone. Furthermore, the city has plans to replace several water pipes, which is anticipated to take two years. The echo and reverberation of heavy construction equipment will certainly reach the professor’s apartment for many, many months. (Not so funny, but in the middle of metal rapidly breaking up asphalt, one could hear a pin drop.)

The moral of the story is to remember to ask about zoning ordinances in before renting that luxury apartment or buying that dream condo. Don’t trust the leasing agent, instead call city hall. Agents and realtors are not likely to tell you about such things. Giving them the benefit of the doubt, perhaps they don’t know themselves. Securing knowledge is priceless. Ask about noise ordinances, construction ordinances, and pending city projects. These factors could be deal breakers.

Generally speaking commingling businesses and residences makes for good urban policy. The theory being that close proximity stimulates an active local marketplace. Having convenience at one’s doorstep is simply wonderful. There is an intangible quality of being able to walk to a coffeehouse or restaurant. Nothing compares to it, especially for those of us stuck in cars, buses, trains or planes most of the week. We get the chance to socialize, walk around and spend time outside. And jackhammering at 4 a..m.., well there’s nothing like that either.

Stone Arch Night Market?

2007-08-11T13:51:00.000-05:00

If you read this blog regularly, you know I'm a big fan of the Stone Arch bridge. It's a beautiful piece of engineering, and has lasted more than 100 years (more than I can say for other bridges in the neighborhood!). On sunny afternoons, it's swamped with people: families, couples, singles, retirees, joggers, runners, bikers, dog-walkers, and so on. Last month, I wandered out for my usual afternoon walk and was stunned to find myself in the middle of a Mississippi river celebration performance, featuring red-garbed dancers scattered all across the area with ethereal music wafting up from under the bridge. Quite an experience!

Anyway, I've been exploring the bridge at night. It's really a different feel: quieter, yet more alive. The crickets chirp. The late-night runners are bathed in surreal light. The downtown buildings are more visible by their window lights and outline lighting than by anything else. The wind blows cooler. It's like being part of some secret society.

I've been thinking that we here in Minneapolis could better capitalize on this resource (the bridge, that is). When I visited Taipei last year, I got to check out their night markets, which were really cool. The basic idea is that they take a stretch of road in the city, line up stalls (mostly food vendors) cheek-by-jowl all along the road, and close off all traffic to cars. The market opens at night and stays open late. How about a night market on the Stone Arch bridge? Perhaps, one evening every month? What kind of vendors could we line up? How could we ensure that it stays lively but safe and not too noisy for the locals? Let me know if you think it's feasible...

Urban Camping

2007-08-09T23:35:00.001-05:00

There's nothing like hunting about for firewood in the middle of a city. Quite a bizarre endeavor, I assure you. A neighbor of mine has the good fortune to have a patio, which she has decorated with a handy outdoor wood-burning fireplace. But alas, we were low on wood! So we foraged into the... er... concrete wilderness in search of wood.

The city is a place of so much plenty: such diversity, such food, such architecture, such variety of experience, such arts, such culture, such lights and darkness, sound (and fury?). It is not, however, a place teeming with spare wood. The one thing that would be unavoidably abundant in a rural setting is impossible to find in an urban one. It makes you realize that cities don't offer everything...

Gathering Spaces

2007-08-07T22:19:00.000-05:00

Apartment buildings are strange, contradictory places. You've got dozens, maybe hundreds of human beings living in close proximity with each other. One might imagine that this physical proximity would produce a sense of community, or at the very least encourage the growth and development of relationship between fellow residents.

And yet the design of most apartment buildings discourages such relationships. Fire codes require multiple stairwells, and consequently it is far easier to slip out of a building rather than pass through a centrally located (and more commonly used) passageway. If the building has a garage, residents can zip down to the garage level, hop in their car, and never have to pass through a common area. Sound shielding between apartments reduces the chance that you might hear anything of your neighbor's life.

Some buildings have design elements that encourage community gathering. Laundry rooms, mail rooms, and lounges are chief among them. But do these spaces really help? I wonder. Apartment culture discourages meeting one's neighbors. The transience of residents doesn't help much.

Have you made any friends in an apartment building? Have you seen quality design in a building that encourages meeting fellow residents?

Invisible Highways

2007-08-05T09:24:00.000-05:00

Like most people living near the I-35W bridge, I hustled to the scene of destruction within a few minutes of the collapse. It was still another ten minutes before the cops showed up, so the crowd was able to approach very close to the edge of the north bank of the river. What we saw took our breath away: it looked like someone had dropped a concrete ribbon directly across the river, from bank to bank, and littered it with small toy cars. For me, there was an overwhelming sense of displacement--my brain couldn't seem to process the juxtaposition of chunks of highway and cars in a riverbed. (The Dadaists, and to some extent the Surrealists, were fans of juxtaposition, because they believed it would cut a short-circuit through your brain and tap into a deeper elemental response. Maybe they were right.)

Part of this feeling of displacement, however, emanates from the fact that the bridge in question was designed to be hidden, in a fashion, from pedestrians. Most highways that pass through cities (such as the trenched highway in Cincinnati, pictured above) are designed so that they do not impinge upon pedestrian life. This means shielding them visually by erecting concrete divider walls, "sinking" the highways below grade ("trenching" them), or elevating them well above normal traffic (see Taipei for more). Although I, like most Twin Citians, drove on that bridge several times every week, I was very much unaware of its presence when walking in my neighborhood (even though the bridge passes directly through it).

This unawareness, from a pedestrian perspective, is a testament to good urban planning. Highways are noisy, ugly beasts that, if exposed, can ruin the experience of a city. Planners do a great job of concealing the fact that a 100-foot wide ribbon of concrete, upon which thousands of 3000-pound hunks of metal hurtle at 70 mph all day long, pass through neighborhoods of great population density.

With the I-35W bridge now lying in the Mississippi river, I wonder if its replacement will again embody the principle of concealment of urban highways. Though it will still be visible directly from the riverbank, will engineers again try to hide its existence from the residents of Dinkytown, Marcy-Holmes, and the West Bank of UMinn?

What Happens When You Damage Infrastructure?

2007-08-02T21:37:00.000-05:00

A few weeks ago, I wrote a couple of entries addressing what happens to transportation in an urban area when a segment of the transportation infrastructure is disabled. I was inspired to write about it because I had recently spent time in Pittsburgh, PA. At the time, a major section of I-376 (the major highway connecting downtown Pittsburgh to all points east) was completely shut down. Completely shut down. Not a single lane was available in the eastbound direction. I was astonished to see how paralyzed travel had become.

Well, I guess I have the opportunity to reflect on the situation again, because as you probably have heard the I-35W span over the Mississippi just collapsed into the river yesterday. It happened during rush hour, but since there was active construction on the bridge there were fewer cars than normal. At any rate, it's quite a disaster.

In case you're not from Minnesota and want to understand a bit better how catastrophic this is for our metropolitan transportation, allow me to elaborate. I-35 is the major north-south interstate for the whole damn state. I-35W is the portion of I-35 that passes through Minneapolis (I-35E passes through St. Paul). It is the major north-south connector for the region. While there are other bridges nearby, none of them will be able to handle the load (100k cars per day) that I-35W did. Traffic is going to be a nightmare, especially for anyone wanting to make a crosstown journey.

Government is working very hard here to figure out transportation remedies. One of the most interesting is that they're upgrading a quasi-highway into a full-fledged highway, at least temporarily. This means taking a 55mph road with a few intersections and completely closing off those intersections. It's fascinating to see how existing roads can be adapted for new uses. If you doubt me, you should have seen what MLK Blvd in Cleveland was like when they closed it to all vehicular traffic. The major commute route was instead flooded with walkers and bikers. Quite a site (er, sight) !

The Rite-Aid Nazi: No Beer For You!

2007-07-31T22:14:00.000-05:00

I recently spent a lovely weekend in Portland, Maine, a really cool city in New England. I've got tons of urban-planning-related issues to write about, but I'd like to start first with a point of contention.

I was shopping in a Portland Rite-Aid for various sundries, and noticed that Rite-Aid (at least in Maine) sells liquor. Mostly beer and wine, anyway. Directly in front of the liquor case was a sign (pictured above) that indicated in no uncertain terms that out-of-state drivers licenses were not acceptable identification for purchasing alcohol.

This strikes me as pretty bizarre. The last time I checked, the Full Faith and Credit clause of the US Constitution requires any individual state to recognize the validity of documents issued by other states. This is why, for instance, you can drive your car (with your Minnesota drivers license) across the border to Iowa. Incidentally, this is always why one state's legalization of gay marriage is problematic for other states that seek to ban it: the Constitution requires them to recognize the validity of the out-of-state gay marriage license.

But apparently not in Maine! In Maine, Rite-Aid is pleased to deny you your rights as a US citizen. I'll be following up with Rite-Aid on this note--surely I'm not the only one who has noticed this illegality.

The thing that's particularly bizarre about Rite-Aid's practice is this: Portland is a tourist town. A huge amount of Portland's revenue comes from seasonal tourists who flock to the area for its great shopping, excellent seafood, harbor cruises, hiking, skiing, and so on. These tourists come from (gasp!) places other than Maine! They come from Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and often Canada! What if they want to buy a bottle of wine while visiting Portland? Apparently, the city of Portland (or at least Rite-Aid) is not interested in making any money off of them.

When traveling to new cities, you have to take local customs into account. You can't just assume that you'll be able to do whatever you want in this or that new city, just because it was available to you in your hometown. I lived in France for a few months, and despite the presence of several million people in that metropolis I still couldn't get a decent pizza after 11pm. When in Rome, I guess...

Thy Urban Neighbor – the labors of love, push and shove for quiet enjoyment

2007-07-30T21:45:00.000-05:00

(Generalissimo is posting an entry on the blog today--enjoy!)

After taking the morning train, working 9-to-5, and taking another one home again, what do I find waiting for me at home? Well, not someone lovely such as Dolly Parton or Sheena Easton at her respective peak. Nope. Instead my neighbor greets me everyday with his stereo system, replete with a subwoofer, which shakes my floor. I see red. I want to give him a knuckle sandwich and a karate-style whuppin’.

The angel of my better nature wins out, thankfully. I calmly, yet sternly, complained to the management-- who after receiving series of letters from me-- settled the matter to my satisfaction. Ah, the sounds of silence… The whole time, I was wondering, how can this guy not realize how rude he is? Maybe he feels entitled? Perhaps he needs an education about being a good neighbor?

Neighbors can make or break one’s quality of life, especially for urban apartment and condo dwellers. Neighbors are unknown territory – the X factor in the equation for happy urban dwelling. One can make calculations about rent, community, schools, night life but the persons next door, above and below are beyond the pale of one’s own control. A move-in is a leap of faith of sorts. Thankfully, most of my experiences have been positive and neighbors through action and restraint have made my quest for quiet enjoyment a reality.

So what do good neighbors do?

Good neighbors watch out for the safety and wellbeing of everyone by reporting criminal activity. Good neighbors play audio systems at unobtrusive levels. When having a party, they have the courtesy to tell you in advance. Good neighbors are often invisible. Better neighbors are friendly and may become friends. But hey, I’ll take a good neighbor any day over the negative alternative.

Bad neighbors can turn a good man bad with late night gatherings, loud music, untidy habits that bring vermin and insects, et cetera. Bad neighbors are in one’s face – via his/her inconsiderate actions. Bad neighbors have to go! They are bane and fill a person with anger that can ruin one's ability to have inner peace.

Are you a good neighbor? Do you take out the trash before it starts to reek? Do you run a fan when cooking heavily scented foods? Do you play audio systems at unobtrusive levels? Do you think it is all about you, because you pay rent? Or do you stop swinging your fist right before reaching the other guy’s nose? Remember between me and you is we, neighbor.

By the Banks of the Mississippi

2007-07-25T23:01:00.000-05:00

I snapped this photo from the bike path on the west bank of the Mississippi. Summer is pretty astoundingly beautiful out here, isn't it?

So what happens in the winter to all the bike lanes? Does the city plow the snow of them? Do people just store their bikes in their garages and wait till the snow melts?

Mmm... Burgers...

2007-07-23T21:58:00.000-05:00

Well, I did it. I purchased 55 pounds of beef this week. That's one eighth of a cow, in case you're wondering. The beef is delivered to my home, butchered, wrapped, sealed, and all set to take up two cubic feet of space in my freezer. It comes courtesy of Thousand Hills Cattle Company, an organic, grass-fed cattle ranch here in Minnesota.

In seemingly unrelated news, I also just ran across a great article
in the New York Times in which a woman tells all about adjusting to life in Shanghai. She describes life along one of Shanghai's alleys, a delightful and bizarre communal existence. One detail caught my eye: she reports that vendors regularly pass through these alleys, hawking all sorts of common household necessities.

What do these two things have to do with each other?

It's all about urban supply chains. If we can agree that we live in a world in which too much energy is expended transporting things all over the planet (think fresh asparagus from Chile in December flown overnight via 747), then these two examples may show us how it's possible to reduce energy costs and still transport goods.

In the first case, by stocking a hell of a lot of beef at home, I'm saving a fair amount of gas that would be otherwise expended in countless runs to the grocery store. In the second case, residents of the Shanghai alley don't have to travel to various stores for all sorts of stuff, because roving vendors stop by their neighborhoods. In both cases, residents travel less altogether, spend more time at home, and consequently have more opportunity to build community (theoretically, anyway).

There is significant possibility in this different supply chain model. Bring the goods--the store, that is--to neighborhoods rather than the other way around. I just heard recently that there's a traveling farmers market--kind of like a bookmobile--that travels to poor neighborhoods that otherwise wouldn't have access to fresh vegetables. Is this a positive direction?

Unemployment Numbers

2007-07-21T12:48:00.000-05:00

A recent discussion on the Plain Dealer's website got me thinking about metropolitan unemployment levels. The big concern in the Cleveland area (and it's been a big concern ever since the PD started its "Quiet Crisis" series something like 5 years ago) is what's called "brain drain". The phenomenon of brain drain is, roughly put, that smart, well-educated recent college grads move out of their home territory for better jobs abroad. This has been a big issue in the Cleveland area; a lot of kids get their educations and take off for better jobs elsewhere. Many of them don't return, so it ends up as a net loss for the region.

On that note, is unemployment really that bad in the Cleveland area? According to these statistics from the BLS, it may be. It's particularly interesting to compare actual metropolitan unemployment rates to the regions' respective reputations:

Cleveland clocks in at 5.6% (up from 5.0% a year ago), which is not so hot. Out here in the Twin Cities, we're at a very strong 4.0%, although last year we had a stunning 3.2% rate. At 3.2%, it's one hell of a competitive market for workers: wages are driven up fast (then again, that's how you get inflation!). Portland (Oregon) surprises me at 4.5%. This is a surprise because Portland has a reputation for a really difficult job market. I suspect that the 4.5% unemployment rate there reflects the regional, rather than urban, job market.

Many of the cities on the list show an uptick of around 0.5% in unemployment over the past year. Are we heading for a recession?

If you've looked for work recently, how has the process been for you? Are jobs plentiful or scarce?

Wealth in the City

2007-07-18T22:45:00.000-05:00

The picture above is a house right next to Lake Calhoun. As you can plainly see, it's a beautiful, gigantic wonder of a residence. I imagine its market value is, to the least, beyond the means of mere mortals such as myself. Moreover, the street on which it's located (Zenith Ave. South) is rife with similarly opulent and beautiful homes.

These homes, of course, are located within the city limits of Minneapolis. While this fact may seem ordinary to some readers, I assure you that as a recent resident of Cleveland, Ohio I am stunned that such wealth exists so prominently in the actual center city of a metropolitan region.

In cities like Cleveland, people who can afford mansions tend to locate outside the city itself. With the notable exception of the far west side along Lake Erie, you just don't find a lot of mansions in Cleveland. Here in Minneapolis, however, there are quite a number of them. This tells me that Minneapolis has done something right; or, at the least, economic catastrophes have not befallen Minneapolis the way they have in Rust Belt cities.

Minneapolitans, Take Heed: Do not take for granted your Rich Folk, for their Mighty Presence signals your Economic Health! Remember to always vigorously pursue Quality of Life crimes, for if left Unchecked they are the Harbingers of Neighborhood Degradation! Let us bask in the glory of great, expensive architecture and remain thankful that the waterfront of lakes such as Calhoun are fully Publicly Accessible.

(Small note on that front: Guess how much of the Lake Erie coastline is publicly accessible within Cuyahoga County. If you guessed more than 10%, go to Jail and do not collect $200).

P.S.: I'm going to write some nice, approving posts about Cleveland next week!

A Wall In Need of a Mural

2007-07-17T23:56:00.001-05:00

There is a lot of great, vibrant, urban, pedestrian-friendly energy on St. Anthony Main (the stretch of Main St NE running from Hennepin Ave to 6th Ave NE). The half-mile portion of Main St. has excellent riverfront views, two parks (one grass-covered with trees & outdoor grills, the other cobblestone with close-up views of St. Anthony Falls), several restaurants and bars, tons of outdoor seating, a movie theater, and (drumroll please!) a Segway store. If you visit the area on a weekend evening, you'll find it is packed with people and live bands from early till late evening. There is also significant residential real estate planned for the site, including two towers (22- and 27-stories!) on an undeveloped portion of the street.

One problem, however, is that there is a stretch of nothingness along Main St, between Kikugawa (a sushi restaurant) on the western portion, and the rest of the businesses on the eastern portion. These two segments of the street are separated by roughly 300 feet of unadorned space (pictured above). There is a large concrete retaining wall, behind which nothing could be built, unfortunately.

I've been thinking lately that St. Anthony needs to address this problem. It's not just that it's an ugly portion of the road. It kills the pedestrian energy! Panhandlers set up shop right in the middle of the stretch, and believe you me DINK and baby-boomer couples are NOT happy dealing with that. If the street is going to continue to grow, planners need to address this weakness.

My suggestion, for the moment anyway, is that the city commission a mural for the concrete wall. It's at least 100 feet long, 8 feet tall, and totally undecorated. Given the successful decoration at the B-Girl summit last month, why can't we replicate it here on Main Street?

Freedom From Realty?

2007-07-16T22:33:00.000-05:00

I noticed that Financial Freedom Realty's office in Uptown (corner of Hennepin & Lake) has been vacated recently. Interesting, isn't it, that the office hawking high-end Uptown listings has itself been unable to keep its space occupied? I suppose the office space could be renamed Freedom From Realty now (haha).

The housing market, if you haven't heard, is not exactly the strongest segment of the economy these days. Foreclosures have rippled through the housing sector, pulling down prices and keeping houses on the market for much longer than normal. Realtors and lenders are feeling the burn, it would seem.

So what's going to happen to Uptown's high-end homes? Will Mozaic keep selling? Or will financing fall through and the project get canceled? How about those open-floor plan units on the Northeast corner of Lake Calhoun that go for a cool million?

Trends in Urban Architecture

2007-07-12T10:36:00.000-05:00

A recent stroll through Minneapolis' downtown brought me face-to-face with the building pictured above. I think it's another condo building. Anyway, the concave wall caught my eye--a striking design!

Has anyone else noticed that condos--especially "luxury" condos--tend to follow certain design trends? Planners seem to have decided to equate modernist elements (clearly delineated rectangular forms, protruding triangles, non-functional overhangs, skewed lines) with high residential prices. Not that I'm complaining, per se, but it is a bit weird. Why not build a decent but otherwise plain building, and spend the leftover luxury funds on great cabinetry, flooring, and HVAC?

Sidewalk Dining

2007-07-10T22:49:00.001-05:00

Another thing I love about Minneapolis is the profusion of sidewalk & patio dining available at so many restaurants. As soon as the weather turned nice in May, every restaurant with a spare square foot outside found a way to squeeze in a table. All of a sudden, there are tons and tons of restaurants where you can eat outside! Woohoo!

I don't get it, though. Back in Cleveland, we had a beautiful summer, lots of restaurants, and lots of sidewalk space. And yet, it was always very difficult to find al fresco dining. Why? Was there restrictive zoning regulations? Did restaurants not realize to how great an extent people like to eat outside? Why is Minneapolis so different in this respect?

Urban Assumptions

2007-07-09T22:44:00.000-05:00

It's amusing and revealing to take a look at suburbanites' casual observations regarding city life. I was chatting with a friend last week about the July 4th fireworks. I asked him if he was planning on coming into the city for the fireworks over the river. He said he wanted to, but parking downtown was really a hassle.

Parking downtown a hassle? Well, good point! Parking downtown for July 4th is indeed difficult. But isn't it interesting to think about the assumption that the automobile is the default method of transportation?

For that matter, why do we always assume that to get from point A to point B we need an automobile?

Non-Grid Cities: When Roads Shut Down

2007-07-08T20:03:00.000-05:00

What happens to a non-grid metropolitan transportation network when a section of a major highway shuts down? Is traffic efficiently re-routed around the closed-down portion of the artery? Are cars merely delayed, or does ordinary travel suddenly take ten times as long?

I had the opportunity to find out last month. In Pittsburgh, a major portion of I-376 eastbound was closed for repairs. This is the road the runs away from downtown towards the eastern suburbs. If you want to see a rather good map of the closed portion, you can see it at this site. Anyway, the big problem is that since Pittsburgh is a non-grid city, detoured traffic can't simply cut up, over, and back down to get past a closed portion of a highway. Instead, detoured traffic has to wander around, up, and down myriad hills in 25mph residential neighborhoods. A trip that normally would take about 15 minutes (getting to I-76 from downtown) took around 2.5 hours. Yikes!

So, as much as I find non-grid cities interesting, this is a serious weakness!

Alternate Distribution Systems

2007-07-05T23:03:00.000-05:00

If you're like me, you probably assume that the system that gets a consumer good from point of manufacture to point of sale is logical, understandable, and reliable. When it comes to the big national retailers (Wal-Mart, Target, K-Mart, many car companies, etc.), that assumption mostly holds true. Companies that are large enough to span the country (if not the world) have the resources necessary to construct unified supply chains. Using reliable database backends, these national supply chains ensure that trains, plains, and trucks (er, automobiles!) get shipments of goods from point A to point B.

When you change your focus to look at regional, and even local, supply chains, the notion that the physical transportation of goods is logical breaks down quickly. At this level, there is far less automation, and far more manual intervention. There are plenty of people whose jobs require them to monitor regional supply chains, fill out orders, and follow up with delivery systems to ensure that those orders make it to their respective destinations.

I've been amazed to discover that for very small business operations, there is actually a workable supply-chain / distribution model that is low-cost and can get goods shipped within a 200-mile radius. I recently signed up with a CSA (that's Community-Supported Agriculture), which is basically a membership with a local farm (well, Wisconsin isn't that far!). Every week I get a box of whatever has come into season at the moment.

So how do I get my box? Do I drive to Wisconsin? Nope! Does the farm ship boxes to every possible grocery store in the Twin Cities? Nope--it's not nearly big enough.

Instead, there are volunteer farm subscribers who agree to let the farm use their land (usually their garage, in fact) as a distribution node. Every Thursday, I drive to a residential location in St. Paul, pull into the back yard, and take a box of vegetables. That's it--quite a system. It's totally bizarre and runs against all your traditional notions of how you should pick up retail goods. There's no storekeeper to make sure you show up and that you only take your one allotted box. Instead, it's an honor system--you pays your money, you gets your veggies. It's great--a medium-sized farm can effectively distribute over a fairly large region without investing heavily in traditional supply-chain technology.

Getting Directions

2007-07-04T23:29:00.000-05:00

In grid cities, addresses are effectively directions. If you know the numeric location of a site (say, the intersection of 1st and 1st--the nexus of the universe), then you necessarily know how to get there. In non-grid cities, you give directions in terms of landmarks. Where is Great Lakes Brewery? It's next to the West Side Market. Where is CWRU's library? It's near the Art Museum. Where is the FedexKinkos in Corapolis? It's in the shopping center with the Mens Wearhouse. You get the picture!

I've found it very interesting living in non-grid cities. Since directions are generally given in terms of landmarks, you find yourself conceiving of the city as an interconnected series of nexuses, rather than a system of criss-crossing lines along which buildings happen to be located. Minneapolis is somewhere in the middle of the grid / non-grid spectrum. I find that I often give, and get, directions in terms of major intersections (Grand & Snelling, Franklin & Hennepin, for instance). These aren't exactly landmarks, but it's not a number-street system either (with the exception of South Mpls, of course).

Non-Grid Transportation Networks

2007-07-03T21:03:00.000-05:00

A number of people have asked me recently to write about cities (and regions) that have non-grid highway networks. Having just spent a week in an excellent example of such a city (sunny Pittsburgh!
), it seems like an excellent time to address the issue.

If you've ever been to Manhattan, you have probably discovered one of the truly amazing urban planning phenomena on this planet: there is no need for driving directions. If you know the address of a location, then you know how to get there. Nobody ever asks "What is the address?" and then follows it up with "How do I get there?".

The second question is never posed because New York (at least Manhattan north of Houston) is grid network that follows strict naming conventions. Avenues run north-south, and increase in numerical name from east to west. Streets run east-west and increase in numerical name from south to north. If I know that a restaurant is located at 5th Ave and 85st Street, and I'm at 3rd Ave and 45th Street, I need to go 2 blocks east and 40 blocks north. Voila!

There are a number of cities in this country (and in the world, for that matter), that have predictable and logical grid networks. Central Washington DC, much of Cleveland, downtown Philadelphia, and Chicago (in the Loop, anyway). I would venture to guess that tourists get lost far less often in these cities than in non-grid cities.

Cities that have non-grid transportation networks are usually built that way because of topographical difficulty. As I mentioned above, Pittsburgh is a great example. The center of Pittsburgh was originally Fort Pitt (a military fort), located at the tip of land where the Allegheny and the Monongahela meet to form the Ohio river. These three rivers have, over a few million years, carved remarkably deep (and steep!) river beds. It is impossible to build roads along straight, grid-based lines. Elevations change wildly as one passes between mountain peak and valley. It's a common sight to be driving along one highway and go underneath an overpass 150 feet above your head. The elevation varies a lot!

Ok, I'll stop here for the moment. More to come.

What is crowded?

2007-06-26T14:14:00.000-05:00

I had an enlightening conversation with a coworker recently. We were discussing my interest in moving to Uptown. The conversation went something like this:

Me: "I want to move to Uptown! There's lots of energy and diversity and great food and public life!"

Coworker: "Ugh! Why would you want to live there? It's so crowded!"

This got me thinking about what a person means when he says a place is "crowded". In this case, "crowded" is actually a code word for an entirely different worldview. A worldview, I might add, that is decidedly non-urban in orientation.

First, let's back up a bit. Is Uptown really crowded? Is it!?!? If you think Uptown is crowded, go visit NYC's Chinatown on a Saturday afternoon. That is crowded. In NYC, I've been on a sidewalk completely suffused with human beings, fighting my way through the crowds. Crowded is World Cup 1998 Finale on the Champs Elysees, when 1.5 million people flooded the one-mile stretch of road. I was there. Believe you me, that is crowded.

Don't get me wrong--Uptown is a busy, happening place! There are indeed a lot of people there, especially on Friday & Saturday nights. And certainly on festival days there are big-time crowds.

But let's get back to me and my coworker and our respective perspectives on urban life: for me, I associate many positive things with high population density: lots of restaurants, a rich variety of human beings, easy access to mass transit, public life (read more of my previous posts if you want). My coworker, however, associates negative things with high population density: lack of privacy, noise, lower air quality (because of car exhaust), physical danger & crime, lack of space.

Why is it that we have totally different visions of the same space? Am I missing something? Am I failing to sell urban-ness to the suburban set?

Weather and Mass Transit

2007-06-20T19:02:00.000-05:00

As warnings of hailstorms over St. Cloud roll in this Wednesday evening, my first reaction is to think: "Be careful driving!". My immediate concern is safety; hence I naturally worry about road safety in inclement conditions.

This worry, however, is a product of the nature of our car-dependent transportation systems. If Minneapolis had a city-wide subway system, for instance, thunderstorms would not be so much of a problem. You might get a little wet walking down the sidewalk to the subway stop, but once underground you wouldn't have to worry about the train hydroplaning into another train at 70mph. Instead, you could relax, get to work (or home) on time, secure in the knowledge that the bad weather above couldn't hurt you, the passenger, below.

This is particularly relevant given that Minneapolis is plowing ahead with a mostly above-ground light rail plan. When you consider how long and bad the winters can be in this part of the country, it is worthwhile to consider the underground option.

A subway system is largely impervious to inclement weather. It will run in rain, sleet, snow, or hail. It is also, incidentally, pretty much free of traffic!

I'll try to write more in the next week or so on what a subway system in the Twin Cities would look like.

An Office... Downtown?

2007-06-17T20:49:00.000-05:00

Good news for Cleveland (though I'm reporting this one a bit late)! Stark Enterprises (the folks who brought you Crocker Park) is
relocating its corporate offices from Woodmere (an outer-ring suburb) to Cleveland's downtown. That's right, folks: a company is actually moving from the suburbs to the downtown core. Heavens!

Robert Stark (the head of the company) has spoken often about his vision for a vibrant, urban life in downtown Cleveland. As an urbanist myself, I was always glad to see his pro-center-city opinions quoted in the newspaper. Until now, however, it's been all theoretical. In fact, Stark's major accomplishment (Crocker Park) is a decidedly suburban achievement. Even though Crocker Park replicates some elements of the urban lifestyle, its location in the center of West Side Wealth belies any notion that it truly recreates the life of the city.

But by moving his headquarters downtown, Stark demonstrates that he's willing to walk the walk (or is it walk the talk? I forget). Hopefully his company will remain successful and his presence downtown will strengthen and grow. Then again, assuming he follows through with other downtown development plans it's really just a question of a real estate gamble: is there really latent demand for office, retail, and residential space in Cleveland's downtown core?

Big City or Small Town?

2007-06-17T20:38:00.000-05:00

Is Minneapolis a big city or a small town? Is it a cosmopolitan, bustling, urban adventure or is it a more relaxed, steady, Midwestern large town? A conversation on MNSpeak got me thinking about what degree of urban-ness is present in this city. At issue is the proposed crackdown on panhandling (read more on the above link if you want to learn all about it). The comments on this post reveal two general trends of thinking about how to respond to panhandlers:

(1) Ignore them. Don't make eye contact. Walk past. Don't be afraid to be firm with strangers. This is a big city. There's poverty. Realize it, and move on.

(2) Give 'em some change once in awhile. Try to be decent. Recognize that there are poor people in this city we share and maybe we should try to help them out.

Ok, so I'm probably over-simplifying the variety of views on MNSpeak. But I do think there's are two distinct worldviews underlying--or should I say informing?--the discussion of how to respond to panhandling. If Minneapolis is truly a "Big City", then we should step outside with our Big City game faces on. When you walk around New York City, you don't make eye contact with strangers, or smile at them, or say hello. You walk on by. If you don't, there are plenty of people who make their living off of unsuspecting visitors.

In a smaller town, the rules are totally different. Strangers aren't the (potential) enemy. It's ok to smile and say hello. You're encouraged to do so, in fact.

Obviously, it's ridiculous to suggest that Minneapolis is one way or the other entirely. Culture is a complex, dynamic thing, always changing. This city is, however, moving towards becoming a more significant regional (and national) player, and with that change comes certain transformations of urban culture.

Or am I just reading too much into it all?

The Urban Form

2007-06-16T21:31:00.000-05:00

Maybe it's because of all the environmentalists; maybe it's because of skyrocketing refined petroleum (er, gasoline) prices; maybe it's because I'm walk, bike, and drive; but I'm starting to look at the city as one giant mechanism for the distribution of physical resources.

I don't see coffeeshops anymore. I see the retail end of a long supply chain originating somewhere in Central America where farmers raise coffee beans. I don't see sidewalks. I see slabs of concrete stretching on endlessly throughout the metropolitan area. Underneath those slabs of concrete are hollow tubes of metal, bringing in H20 (200 gallons a day per person on average in America), carting away sewage (no stats spring to mind on volume). High above the trees are long-distance power transmission lines, bring energy transformed from kinetic (hydroelectric), nuclear (mine deeper!), coal-fired (gas-powered turbines, essentially) sources into electricity to be turned back into thermal (heating) or kinetic (motors) energy. Not to mention highways for bringing in consumables (as well as shipping them out), FAA-regulated airspace (for shipping people and goods longer distances), humans themselves (consuming oxygen and carbon-based matter, exhaling carbon dioxide and other waste), urban parks (turning that CO2 back into O2), and so on.

Is the city particularly well-suited to the distribution of resources for a population? Indeed it is. Because humans live more densely in a city, the physical distance over which a resource must be transmitted prior to its use is shorter. The overall scale of a city's demands ensures that incoming pipelines for resources are huge (think about those electrical transmission lines again).

Cleveland: A Suburban City At Last?

2007-06-10T23:39:00.000-05:00

For a long time, I've watched the city of Cleveland battle for attention in the public life of the Cleveland metropolitan region. The city center itself, while healthy, is surrounded by a Rust Belt city that has been on the decline since the late 1930's. Bit by bit, the last vestiges of an urbanist population have been eroded. The region's population is now overwhelmingly suburban, both in numbers (the population of the city has declined while that of the suburbs has increased) and in mindset.

The very notion of an urban, bustling, vibrant center city population is a remote one for Cleveland. Efforts to revive it have stalled over the years. Now, I have heard reports that new housing in the city replicates the suburban pattern: large lots, spaced apart. It would seem the city is finally going to become a suburb of itself.

Maybe it makes sense. The city's population has declined from a high of about a million (80 years ago) to around 460,000 as of 2005. With the population density cut in half, there is a heck of a lot of space available for development. Why not build larger homes on larger lots, as long as this is what home buyers want? Clevelanders have solidly demonstrated a persistent desire for suburban homes: large lots, front and back yards, attached garages, privacy, and a car-friendly lifestyle. Now the city of Cleveland is getting on board.

The question Cleveland faces is precisely this: is there any possibility of a real urban lifestyle in the city limits of Cleveland? Or is there simply a relentless march towards the final suburbification of the center city?

Could it be... Independent Retail?!?

2007-06-06T22:49:00.000-05:00

Ah, my fellow Minnesotans: you have it so good, but do you realize it? Do you wake up every morning thanking the gods for your good fortune?

Another thing that blows me away all the time about Minneapolis is the huge quantity and variety of local, independent retail stores. If you're from the Twin Cities, you may not realize how rare it is that a huge percentage of the businesses in the cities are independent.

Back in Cleveland, we were continually confounded by the lack of independent retail. Where was the American entrepreneurial spirit? Why was every strip mall an endless parade of Paneras, Cingular (er, AT&T) Wirelesses, Dunkin' Donuts and RadioShacks? What ever happened to that fabled "mom&pop" operation?

I spent huge amounts of time debating whether or not public policy could rebuild independent retail. Did we need more business incubators? More training for entrepreneurs? A tax code that favored small businesses?

And then I moved out here, and wow! Everywhere I look I see independent businesses. Besides the restaurants (big fan of Barbette & Three Fish), I see record stores (Electric Fetus), clothing (Cliche), quirky Asian imports (Robot Love), audio repair (The Good Guys), jewelers (Gerber, Gold'n Treasures), and more. Grand Avenue (with the exception of the Pottery Barn stretch) is a real testament to the strength and vitality of independent retail in the Twin Cities. How did you do it? Is there just an incredible commitment on a cultural level? Are there public policies of which I'm unaware that foster this growth?

Lots of Newspapers!

2007-06-05T21:49:00.000-05:00

Another thing that I love about Minneapolis is the huge number of local papers. It's really amazing when you walk into a coffee shop, glance down at the requisite pile o' papers in the foyer, and realize that among the half-dozen weeklies there is usually at least one or two papers local to the neighborhood you're in. It gives you a real sense of place. These journals are generally not paragons of high-minded journalism; rather, they're honest and decently put together snapshots of community activity.

And I guess the real thing that strikes you when you keep running into these locals papers is exactly that: community. It's a much celebrated term. Politicians trot it out when they want to drum up support. Corporations claim to nurture community when it benefits them. But you don't actually see such genuine communal artifacts that often.

I'll close by giving a list of links to a variety of Twin Cities-based neighborhood papers:

Southwest Journal

Downtown Journal

The Bridge (no link available)

I've only listed three, but I'm pretty sure there are at least a dozen. Very impressive!

Road Systems

2007-06-04T21:49:00.000-05:00

One thing that continually amazes me out here in Minneapolis is how well-organized the road system is. As you can see above this paragraph, I've given you a fairly good birds-eye view of the Twin Cities' highway system. Given that there are two cities within the metropolitan region, it's particularly interesting to see how planners have, over the years, decided to route traffic.

Let's start by reviewing some of the high points of the system:

The region is ringed by a complete beltway. This means that no matter where you are in the inner-ring and middle-ring suburbs, you can count on being within ten or so minutes of interstate access. Contrast this, for example, with Richmond (VA), which last time I checked had only a 75% beltway system (quadrants 2, 3, and 4 I believe). The incomplete beltway is a hassle--if you're at one end of the beltway and you want to get to the other, you have to go all the way around (a trip three times longer than necessary!).

Excellent secondary arterials! I've written about this one before. By secondary arterial, I mean roads with at least 35 mph speed limits and little to no traffic lights or stop signs. People often overlook these roads in evaluating the quality of a road system; they instead look to formal highways to assess how easy it is to get around. They miss, however, the fact that even though these secondary quasi-highways are slower (even 35 mph, as I said), the small number of traffic lights makes them very efficient for travel. Some examples include: Route 55, Snelling Ave., and many of the north-south avenues on the southside of Minneapolis (Portland, Nicollet, for example).

Controlled highway access: many highway on-ramps feature gated access. If you've never seen this, here's what it looks like: a normal on-ramp, only there are traffic lights halfway down the ramp on either side. Normally, these lights stay on blinking yellow. In rush-hour, they switch to alternating red/green to allow two lanes of on-ramp traffic to take turns merging. It effectively reduces the vehicle load on the actual highway by shifting it to the ramps themselves. While it's not a total solution to under-capacity, it minimizes bumper-to-bumper slowdowns on the highways themselves.

Back From Hiatus

2007-06-03T17:43:00.001-05:00

After a week of frantic wedding planning, I'm getting back in gear with this blog. But besides the upcoming nuptials, a second factor has contributed to my... reluctance?... to keep hammering out blog entries. I thought a bit about this second factor, and realized that it itself merits an entry.

The fact is, Minneapolis is really cool. So much of my writing on urban planning has stemmed from my observations of what doesn't work in this or that city. I see something that doesn't work very well, and I ask: How can we make this work better? I've been very much focused on asking how to improve cities.

The problem, of course, is that Minneapolis is a strikingly well-run and well-organized metropolitan region. I do not constantly run into bizarre and annoying quirks of urban planning on a daily basis. Thus, I'm a bit stumped for content, ironically!

But the challenge, then, is to work harder at identifying what elements work so well in this city and why. Great urban planning is often--from the ordinary citizen's perspective--unconscious urban planning. That is, when an urban element works well (such as a neighborhood, park, retail district, etc.), the users of that space find it so easy to use that they don't waste time wondering why it works so well. Great design is unconscious design, from a consumer perspective.

(To be fair, the "unconscious" quality of great design is anything but! Behind all great design is a lot of very conscious reflection on how best to organize space.)

I'll try to address this in more detail this week, focusing on which urban elements of Minneapolis-St. Paul work so well that even a cynic like myself can't help but be impressed.

More soon...

American Apparel: A Leading Indicator?

2007-05-20T22:36:00.000-05:00

Economists have a rather interesting term called the "leading indicator." It breaks down like this: economists are pretty much in the fortune-telling business. That is, they try to predict the (economic) future. In order to predict long-term patterns (growth or decline, for the most part) they often look for "leading indicators". In this sense, a "leading" indicator is some thing that tends to "lead" the economy. For instance, a spike in energy prices is a leading indicator of inflation (gas gets more expensive, so transportation gets more expensive, so consumer goods get more expensive, and voila! inflation!).

I'm starting to wonder whether the arrival of American Apparel in urban centers is also a leading indicator. It was big news when they opened a location in Cleveland Heights (Ohio) last year. AA leased space on Coventry, a used-to-be-cool retail strip in one of Cleveland's more progressive inner-ring suburbs. The future of Coventry is still very much undetermined. While vacancies persist, there has been progress in retooling the district to better attract college students. There is very little clothing retail on Coventry, however, which makes AA decision to locate there questionable. Does AA think it can tap into latent demand in that area for clothing?

AA has also recently decided to occupy space here in Uptown (in Minneapolis). The trend seems similar: Uptown is a trendy, successful retail district that in the past year or so has declined a bit (though not as much as Coventry). Vacancies are on the rise, and there's a growing trend of chainification in the retail mix. Certainly, there are differences: Uptown has a lot of clothing vendors, so it's not a stretch to think that shoppers will consider buying clothing there.

Ok, so is AA a leading indicator? Does the arrival of American Apparel in declining urban retail districts portend an urban rebirth? Or are they simply capitalizing on cheaper rents?

Coming this week:
Monday: A Paean to the Stone Arch Bridge
Tuesday: Find This Door
Wednesday: Residences for Retail
Thursday: American Apparel: A Leading Indicator?
Friday: Pedestrians Make Their Own Paths

Residences for Retail

2007-05-20T22:29:00.000-05:00

One of the most frustrating things about shopping in America--particularly in the suburbs--is the dull banality of commercial architecture. The ubiquitous strip mall drives me totally nuts. Strip malls are bland, boring, and ugly. They communicate no personality, and they make it exceedingly difficult for their tenants to stand out as unique operations. They hide individual identity.

Of course, I'll grant you, they're cheap. And because they're cheap, strip malls can offer lower rents. Lower rents mean less financial burden on tenants, which means local / independent tenants can establish themselves more easily. So maybe it's wrong of me to complain about strip malls and how they make ordinary llife unpleasant.

But rather than just complain about cheap commercial architecture, let me offer a contrast: the residential home as place of business. Maybe you've seen it elsewhere: a street with beautiful homes, well-maintained, unique, with personality, and business signs out front. I snapped a picture of one (above) to demonstrate the effect. It's amazing--instead of feeling alienated in a concrete sea of a parking lot and a vinyl-sided emotionless edifice, you shop in a home, with trees outside and a certain je ne sais quoi.

Of course, this is only feasible in areas where such houses are already built. Developers are certainly not going to built century homes in the exurbs just because an urban planner like myself said they're a good idea. And since such areas are usually zoned for residential use, it takes governmental action to allow commercial activity there. But what an effect!

Coming this week:
Monday: A Paean to the Stone Arch Bridge
Tuesday: Find This Door
Wednesday: Residences for Retail
Thursday: American Apparel: A Leading Indicator?
Friday: Pedestrians Make Their Own Paths

Find This Door

2007-05-20T22:27:00.000-05:00

I found this rather cool wood-carving alongside a house's front door somewhere in the Twin Cities area. Can you guess where it is? (Obviously, I've already given away the street number!)

Coming this week:
Monday: A Paean to the Stone Arch Bridge
Tuesday: Find This Door
Wednesday: Residences for Retail
Thursday: American Apparel: A Leading Indicator?
Friday: Pedestrians Make Their Own Paths

A Paean to the Stone Arch Bridge

2007-05-20T22:16:00.000-05:00

To kick off the week, I'd like to take a moment to reflect on some of the more beautiful aspects of the Minneapolis. I live near the Stone Arch Bridge. It is unbelievably beautiful. These days, we're all very much used to civil engineering architecture to consider beauty an afterthought. After seeing countless ugly concrete overpasses and otherwise ho-hum office highrises, I'm delighted to see a beauty such as the Stone Arch bridge. If you want to read all about its history, follow the link I've given above. I'm writing today simply to meditate on its beauty.

The Stone Arch bridge spans the Mississippi, touch downtown on its southern terminus and Father Hennepin Park on the north. Although it's not particularly wide by contemporary automobile-based standards, since motorized vehicles are banned it is effectively very wide. The central lanes are reserved for bikes, and the outer lanes are for walkers / runners. On sunny Saturday afternoons, it is flooded with people. It's amazing to see how wide a variety of people use it--unlike a lot of urban leisure amenities, its use is not restricted to middle-class families. You'll see people of all colors and ages, families, couples, singles, retirees, and so on. When it gets really hot, ice cream vendors are there too.

I should also point out that the bridge serves as a vital weekday commute route for downtown workers. There are a fair number of people living in northeast Minneapolis who work downtown, and many of them commute via the bridge.

From the center of the bridge, you have an excellent view of the St Anthony falls, not to mention much of the downtown skyline. To the east lies the University of Minnesota, to the west the 3rd Ave and Hennepin bridges. To the north is a flank of former industrial buildings (soon to be condos, of course!). It's quite breath-taking.

Coming this week:
Monday: A Paean to the Stone Arch Bridge
Tuesday: Find This Door
Wednesday: Residences for Retail
Thursday: American Apparel: A Leading Indicator?
Friday: Pedestrians Make Their Own Paths

Urban Parks

2007-05-13T23:44:00.000-05:00

Now that the weather has turned beautiful, I've had the opportunity to start exploring the region's excellent urban parks system. It's been a really neat way to get to know the city, and I've noticed that there's a distinct difference in the look-and-feel of the park systems of Minneapolis and Cleveland.

Cleveland's Metropark system is, for the most part, designed to take you away from the feeling of being in a metropolis. The great jewels of the system--Cuyahoga Valley (strictly speaking not a metropark, I believe), North Chagrin Reservation, Rocky River Reservation--make you quickly forget that you're in a county of a few million people. It's quite amazing to be driving along in strip-mall chain land, take a quick turn, park, and suddenly find yourself enclosed by tall trees and the sound of rushing water.

Minneapolis' system, on the other hand, is oriented towards urban engagement rather than urban escape. Much of the park system is designed around water: either the Mississippi, or the numerous small lakes that dot the region. The parks usually include paved paths that traverse the length of these waterways. As I've noted in an earlier post, Minneapolis has done a great job of allocating space on the pathways for pedestrians and bikers alike. Minneapolis' urban parks do not have the same extensive tree cover as those of Cleveland; consequently it is often possible to look up and see downtown buildings in the distance. It reinforces one's connection with the city center.

I'm not sure that either approach to urban parks is a superior one. I do know that there is a big difference in the firsthand experience of these parks.

Anyone care to weigh in on what they do / don't like about urban parks?

Monday: Transit Ideas
Tuesday: Scooters for Everyone!
Wednesday: Apartments Without Kitchens!
Thursday: Even More Ridiculous Transit Ideas
Friday: Urban Parks

Even More Ridiculous Transit Ideas!

2007-05-13T23:42:00.000-05:00

Damn it, I'm going to rid our cities of the blight of the automobile if it kills me! Even if it kills the very mass transit passengers who sacrifice their dear lives on the altar of alternate transport! To the idea lab!

Mass transit is a great thing, no? Its most common forms include subways, light rails, buses, and elevated rail. But surely there are ways to transport people around a metropolis that don't require rails, gasoline combustion, Can we find a way to move people without investing billions in new infrastructure? Miles of roads that get torn up by snow every winter and have to be repaved?

I've got two ideas for you urban planners out there today:

Pneumatic tubes: Apparently, back in Ye Olde Old Timey Time Days of Yore, builders had the brilliant idea to use pneumatic tubes to deliver documents all over an office building. If you don't believe me, check Wikipedia. Why can't we extend this system to handle people as well? Imagine that instead of stepping out of your home and into the parking lot to get in your car, you instead lie down in a little hole in the sidewalk, seal yourself into a small plastic capsule, and instantly are whooshed away to your destination. Sure, you might get a little dizzy, but the cool factor is high.

Zip lines: Here's how we'll make it work: First, we build towers (say, 200 feet tall) all over the city. Then we install a spiral escalator that continuously brings passengers to the top. Then we connect the top of the towers to the bottom of other towers via zip lines. All you have to do to get around the city is go to the nearest tower, take the escalator to the top, grab onto zip handle, and zoom a mile or so. What could go wrong?

Monday: Transit Ideas
Tuesday: Scooters for Everyone!
Wednesday: Apartments Without Kitchens!
Thursday: Even More Ridiculous Transit Ideas
Friday: Urban Parks

Apartments Without Kitchens!?!?

2007-05-13T23:40:00.000-05:00

As I said in yesterday's post, space in an urban center is at a premium. Certainly rents are cheap enough in Cleveland (!), but first- and second-tier American cities can get costly. Is there some way renters (and home-owners, for that matter) in densely-populated urban centers can reduce their need for square-footage and still enjoy their lives?

Here's one idea: get rid of your kitchen! That's right, get an apartment with no kitchen whatsoever. No stove, no fridge, nothing! That would eliminate maybe 100 square feet from your home, and reduce your energy costs. Less space = lower rent!

But wait a minute... don't you have to eat?

Of course you do, but you live in a district where no one has kitchens, so there's a lively 24-hour food stand market on the sidewalks. If you want to eat, just go downstairs and buy some sandwiches / dumplings / burritos from the food vendors.

Think this is crazy? It isn't--it exists in Taipei, apparently. I had the good fortune to visit Taipei about a year ago, and believe it or not there are residential districts flooded with sidewalk food vendors. You can actually get an apartment without a kitchen, and subsist entirely on street food. It's great!

Now, what would it take to make this happen in America...?

Monday: Transit Ideas
Tuesday: Scooters for Everyone!
Wednesday: Apartments Without Kitchens!
Thursday: Even More Ridiculous Transit Ideas
Friday: Urban Parks

More Transit Ideas: Scooters for Everyone!

2007-05-13T23:39:00.001-05:00

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: the personal automobile is the central challenge / problem / hurdle / issue of all urban planning. Cars are essential to modern American life. They provide us with mobility, leisure, entertainment, an outlet for conspicuous consumption, freedom, and class status. They also saddle society with carbon emissions, run over pedestrians, make biking difficult (if not intolerable in places), insulate (and isolate) us from our fellow humans, encourage urban sprawl, make a lot of noise, etc.

I'm trying to think creatively these days about how to reduce our dependence on the private automobile. We cannot simply remake our entire urban (and metropolitan) systems at once. We must, instead, pursue an incremental approach. It is with this in mind that I'm thinking more about scooters (and full-size motorcycles, for that matter) as one possible solution to the problem of the car.

Scooters (mopeds, whatever) are excellent in cities that do not depend on highways for intra-city travel. They get great gas mileage (60+ mpg), cost a lot less than cars, and very importantly take up very little space. Since space is at a premium in an urban center, any device that can reduce an individual's spatial needs is great news. In the space of one parking spot (15' x 10') your can easy park a half-dozen scooters.

To be fair, there are indeed drawbacks: scooters are much more dangerous, especially at night. They require additional training to operate, and unless people buy full-size motorcycles highway travel is out of the question. Nevertheless, I think it's feasible. If you doubt that a population can, as a whole, embrace the scooter, I'll leave you with this image of scooters parked in Taiwan:

Monday: Transit Ideas
Tuesday: Scooters for Everyone!
Wednesday: Apartments Without Kitchens!
Thursday: Even More Ridiculous Transit Ideas
Friday: Urban Parks

Transit Ideas: Roving Cabs

2007-05-12T14:07:00.000-05:00

The big difference between cabs in New York City and cabs everywhere else in the country is this: the Big Apple has roving cabs everywhere, whereas most other cities have dial-a-cab service and, if they're lucky, roving cabs in specific districts.

I got to thinking about this issue because I often wonder what it would take to reduce our rate of personal car ownership. Mass transit, for the most part, addresses the commuting transit needs of an urban population. But people still need trip-specific point-to-point travel services, especially for leisure & entertainment. Cabs are perfect for this kind of service; unfortunately, however, in areas where cabs can only be obtained by calling in advance (and then waiting 20+ minutes), it's not a very desirable option.

Contrast this with New York, where generally speaking you're always within a few blocks of a road swamped with cabs. It's a sea of yellow much of the time! In this situation, you really don't need a car at all. Between the subway, buses, and cabs, most of your transit needs are supplied without having to own your own automobile. Fantastic!

I'm not sure how to get such a system in place outside of New York. Even if some enlightened billionaire invested a huge amount of money to blanket a city with roving cabs, it would take years before the per-capita car-ownership rates would decline sufficiently to ensure a stable profit margin. Any ideas?

Monday: Transit Ideas
Tuesday: Scooters for Everyone!
Wednesday: Apartments Without Kitchens!
Thursday: Even More Ridiculous Transit Ideas
Friday: Urban Parks

Reader Responses

2007-05-06T22:45:00.000-05:00

There have been some really great comments in the past month or so, and I'd like to offer some thoughts on them:

Regarding my diatribe on the much-talked-about Muslims-won't-scan-your-bacon story, G points out that if you take a stand on an issue you have to live with the consequences. It's a good point: if you are morally opposed to some widespread practice in your community, then you certainly have to realize that actively opposing it means putting yourself in a significantly awkward position to say the least.

Tara is really nice and agrees with me that teenagers can indeed be annoying and, when gathered in groups, present potential security problems. Just because kids making a ruckus isn't criminal doesn't mean it doesn't scare off ordinary folks who otherwise want to shop and lead an adult life!

Anonymous points out that in my article on airport accessibility I didn't include mass transit travel times. Good point! I'll look into it and see if I can get numbers for y'all...

A couple folks also share my frustration with coffee shops that are reluctant to use mugs instead of disposable cups. I guess we're not alone, what with San Francisco and the plastic-bag-ban thing. Progress!

Bonnie also is annoyed by a lack of clarity in real estate advertising. She asks what the word "flat" really means. I've got no idea at this point. I think it means "expensive", or at least "British". Maybe if you live in a "flat" you drink scotch and talk about the glory days of the colonies?

My friend in DC writes that DC residents are content with 30-to-90 minute one-way commutes. He points out, and I agree, that that is totally insane. He also asks whether people calculate commutes in terms of drive time, or door-to-door time. That's indeed interesting--I wonder if the census bureau stat (average one-way commute = 24 minutes) takes that into account.

Coming this week:

Monday: Blogabout!
Tuesday: Blue Sky Guide
Wednesday: Getting Around: Highway Access
Thursday: Downtown Living
Friday: Reader Responses

Downtown Living

2007-05-06T10:38:00.000-05:00

The great dream of urban economic development departments is the ever-elusive residential downtown. Pointing to New York as the classic example, city planners make fast deals with real estate developers to turn unused warehouses into high-end tax-abated condos. One can only imagine the hoped-for demographic: 20-something childless professionals and dual-income empty-nesters prowling the streets in search of sushi, Eames furniture, and $10 cocktails. Life will return to the city core! If only more rich people move in, surely the city's coffers will overflow with new income tax (though none of that abated property tax!), improving education and thereby attracting the middle class back to the city.

But as I look at the prospects of a residential downtown, I'm skeptical. The vast majority of downtown housing, at least here in Minneapolis, is luxury housing. And the existing office buildings are sufficiently densely packed that you can't intersperse them very effectively with residences. I suspect that downtown office districts are going to remain 9-to-5 office districts for quite some time. While there may indeed be hope for the less dense but still "downtown" portion of the city, the office core is probably going to persist as an area primarily for office use.

How about repurposing those downtown office buildings for mixed use? The lower half could be designated for offices, and the upper half could be converted to residential use? A pie in the sky idea, maybe, but at least it would cut down on the single-use density problem...

Coming this week:

Monday: Blogabout!
Tuesday: Blue Sky Guide
Wednesday: Getting Around: Highway Access
Thursday: Downtown Living
Friday: Reader Responses

Getting Around: Highway Access

2007-05-06T10:24:00.000-05:00

You move into an urban area. You buy a scooter. You ditch the car. You walk to the local coffee shop. The automobile is a thing of the past! You're living the perfect pedestrian-friendly life, where mass transit and population density combine to make private car transportation unnecessary. Ah, the pure bliss of the urban wonderland!

Then you wake up and realize it's still a dream. Let's face it: you need a car if you live in America (ok, car-free bloggers and New York City residents, I'll grant you an exception). How else can you get your IKEA bookshelves and Target footstools back to the apartment? How else can you get to work if the existing transit system isn't convenient for your work location? How else can you visit friends on the other side of the city?

Furthermore, since cities function more as metropolitan regions than self-contained municipalities, car transportation demands that a viable regional highway system be available. Consequently most urban regions have large and complex systems of highways connecting center cities with their respectives suburbs. In Cleveland, I-90 runs along the shoreline of Lake Erie, with I-77 and I-71 heading south and southwest and I-480 and I-271 functioning as beltways. In Minneapolis, I-694 and I-494 form the outer beltway, while I-35E and I-35W run north-south through Minneapolis and St Paul and I-94 acts as a direct inter-city connector. Without these highways systems the network of suburbs could not function. Commuting would take an unacceptably long time. The metropolitan economy would not work.

The quality of life of any metropolitan resident, then, is in large part determined by his proximity to a highway access point. If you live close to an on-ramp, you're in good shape: you can probably get to work more quickly, and you can travel to visit friends, family, and other businesses easily. If you don't live close to an on-ramp, your commute is likely long, and your social and retail choices are severely geographically limited.

Although community and local-retail advocates may very well point out that this lack of highway access can strengthen a community (by encouraging its residents to shop locally), I would argue that it hurts the metropolitan region as a whole. Metropolitan residents participate in metropolitan economies, and lack of convenient highway access means longer commutes and an inefficient metro economy. Cities should consider their highway networks carefully, and remember that they are indeed the lifeline that drives any given region.

Coming this week:

Monday: Blogabout!
Tuesday: Blue Sky Guide
Wednesday: Getting Around: Highway Access
Thursday: Downtown Living
Friday: Reader Responses

Blue Sky Guide

2007-05-06T10:09:00.000-05:00

At the Living Green Expo this weekend, I had the good fortune to meet one of the people behind Blue Sky Guide, the rather nifty coupon book that you've probably seen for sale around the city. Previously, I hadn't really thought much about the relationship between urban policy and a coupon book, but on this occasion I realized that there is indeed a connection. Bear with me, and I'll try to explain.

The Blue Sky Guide is not simply a coupon book. It's a coupon book that seeks to bring together retailers and service providers who have a shared commitment to sustainable business practices and community involvement (big surprise they're at the Living Green Expo, huh?). The Guide, to some extent, brings together people who are interested in sustainability, and by marketing itself primarily in metro areas it promotes an urban perspective on said sustainability.

The Guide is doing well in the Twin Cities (six years running, apparently) and they're seeking to expand into other markets. We got to talking about whether Cleveland-Akron has enough vendors (at least 300 ideally) who meet the criteria for participation. I suspect that the region does indeed have that many, but without an existing institutional framework connecting them all (formally and informally) it's difficult to rustle them together. There's definitely a solid population of people interested in sustainability in the Cleveland-Akron area, but are they organized and self-aware as a group?

Moreover, can a market-driven institution--such as Blue Sky--be a driver of that self-realization? What forces can bring together like-minded people who have not yet fully grasped how many people in their region feel similarly?

Coming this week:

Monday: Blogabout!
Tuesday: Blue Sky Guide
Wednesday: Getting Around: Highway Access
Thursday: Downtown Living
Friday: Reader Responses

Blogabout!

2007-05-06T09:47:00.000-05:00

Wait a minute... "Blogabout"? What is Steve talking about?

A blogabout is just like a walkabout, only instead of wandering around Australia in search of unique flora and fauna, we'll wander around the Internet in search of cool urban planning blogs. I thought it might be interesting for my readers to see which sites I visit regularly to keep up on urban planning. So here goes:

Planetizen is an excellent blog covering all things urban. It works primarily as a link site, providing a few new links every day to urban planning articles in the mainstream press. It reliably delivers fascinating articles every day. Particularly cool is the fact that Planetizen covers urban planning news from around the world, so you get a great international perspective on the field. For instance, today's article list includes stories on Perth's water shortage, the US Congress' efforts to address parking problems, and how European cities are encouraging people to drive less.

The Project for Public Spaces is an excellent organization devoted to promoting public spaces. They have tons and tons of case studies, and their recent issue on urban waterfronts is particularly insightful.

St Paul Real Estate and Real Estate Snippets, both of which are blogs about Twin Cities real estate (and the real estate world in general). In the academic world of urban studies and urban planning, it's easy to ignore the market forces that fundamentally drive the construction (and destruction) of buildings, and instead ponder the abstract philosophy of the field. I find it useful to keep myself grounded by keeping up on actual, quotidian, residential real estate.

The Next American City, to be fair, is not a blog (though it does have a web presence!). It's an excellent quarterly academic journal that regularly looks at the development of American cities. Dare I say it "challenges dominant paradigms"? Well, buzzwords aside it does an excellent job of fully investigating the dynamic life of cities. The most recent issue was all about historic preservation. Quite awesome.

An affair with urban policy takes a practical look at urban policy at the ground level. The author recently relocated from Minneapolis to New York, and I'm eager to hear his perspective on the Big Apple.

Urban Places Urban Spaces looks at a wide variety of urban planning issues. Featured on the blog today is an article on flea markets (and public markets).

Coming this week:

Monday: Blogabout!
Tuesday: Blue Sky Guide
Wednesday: Getting Around: Highway Access
Thursday: Downtown Living
Friday: Reader Responses

Bus Safety Vol. II

2007-05-03T23:08:00.000-05:00

Last week, I suggested that the folks in charge of the MSP bus system consider a volunteer enforcement system to improve security on the buses. My thinking goes like this: if a significant percentage of ordinary folks want to ride the bus in peace, and at least a small number of those responsible types would be willing to face down the unruly ne'er-do-wells making life hell for the rest of us, then maybe those responsible types should get organized! Similar to a neighborhood watch group, these volunteer enforcers could work with law enforcement groups to identify repeat offenders and ensure that buses remain safe.

I was pleased, then, to read that I'm not the first person to think of such an idea. Currently, the following groups are actively working with Metro Transit:

The Guardian Angels: according to Daily Planet, The organization’s members wear red berets and white T-shirts as they patrol communities in an attempt to deter violent crime. They don’t carry weapons, but they are trained in martial arts, first aid and citizen-arrest law.. Nothing says "safe and secure environment" like tough dudes in berets. Seriously, check out the article. These dudes look scary.

MAD DADS: A community activist group promoting responsible behavior. According to their website: MAD DADS members have mobilized communities, trained residents to be positive “REAL Models” and, secured neighborhoods, via organized Street Patrols; positive community events, along with crime and violence reduction projects, for and with our youth for more than 16 years. These facts are part of our organizational ministry and mission.. They also will be establishing a presence on the buses.

Therefore Go, a Christian group. I haven't been able to find a website for them yet, but again, according to Daily Planet, it would appear they too will be riding the buses and trying to reduce violence.

Where Do You Spend Your Money?

2007-05-02T08:59:00.000-05:00

Earlier this week, I posted an entry on MNSpeak, also titled "Where Do You Spend Your Money?". Having recently signed up with a CSA (Community Supported Agriculture, a.k.a. a local farm), I got to thinking about how well (or badly) the interest in local & regional economies intersected with consumers' actual spending habits. That is, I hear a lot about keeping my money local, but does anybody actually commit to spending their money that way?

The MNSpeak post went well (over a hundred comments--woohoo!), and I'd like to use today's post to summarize and analyze those comments. Here's what I found:

Restaurants: Lots of people spend money on local restaurants. This doesn't come as much of a surprise, but it's good news anyway. I saw very few chain restaurants mentioned, although I've been given to understand that Americans by and large are big fans of chain restaurants. I suspect that the readers (and posters) on MNSpeak are skewed in favor of local restaurants over chains. I did see fast food places mentioned a few times.

Groceries: People seem to be very committed to their local groceries. No one mentioned shopping at Walmart, even though it's the nation's largest grocer. Posters were very supportive of Lunds, Kowalskis, and the various co-ops in the area.

Media: When it comes to books and music, there were people on both sides of the fence. Some posters preferred to buy their media from a local store (Cheapo, for instance), while others favored online retailers like Amazon.

How Did the Chicken Cross the Road?

2007-04-26T23:42:00.000-05:00

A friend of mine recently called my attention to an unfortunate accident in Washington DC, in which an MTA bus struck, and killed, two pedestrians. The victims, it appears, were crossing the road at a crosswalk, with the proper right of way. Nevertheless, the bus sped through a turn and plowed through them. Ghastly, huh?

A quick Google search of car-on-pedestrian accidents is telling: people get hit by cars a fair bit when crossing intersections. Urban planners are certainly aware of the problem, and try to address it with a variety of tactics: awareness education (for drivers and pedestrians), better signage, clearer lines-of-sight for drivers, lower speed limits, better traffic light timing, and so on.

I was very impressed with one great example of pedestrian-friendly intersection design. At the intersection of King St and Main St in Northampton, MA, there is a quite a lot of vehicular and pedestrian traffic. It's a college town, and there are tons and tons of college kids crossing the street at all hours of the day. It's also a regional commuter route, connecting a number of small cities and towns in western Massachusetts, so there are a lot of cars on the road much of the time.

In a traditional intersection, the pedestrian crosswalk rights-of-way run parallel to the vehicular rights-of-way. When cars can pass through an intersection one way, so to can pedestrian cross in that direction.

At King & Main, however, the system is different. The traffic light operates in a 3-stage pattern: first it allows cars to travel along King; then it allows cars to travel along Main; then it stops all car traffic and permits pedestrians to cross both King and Main simultaneously.

One might think that such a system would be less efficient than a traditional two-stage system. A two-stage system, however, often does not adequately provide for the safety of pedestrians. It is far too easy for a right-turning car to hit a pedestrian, even when that pedestrian indeed has the right of way. By stopping all vehicular traffic, the King & Main system puts pedestrians' safety first.

Practical Ideas for Bus Safety

2007-04-24T19:53:00.000-05:00

There's been a fair amount written about the bus shooting in St Paul. The incident prompted a heck of a lot of online discussion, as can be seen on Roadguy's blog. There are 115 comments on this post at the moment (!). Although the seems to be general consensus among those commenters that travel on buses, at least during non-commute hours, is dicey on occasion. The common techniques for pre-empting conflict on the bus are heard again and again: wear your headphones, read a book, don't make eye contact, keep to yourself. Also common are the complaints about unruly teenagers who seem to think that the bus is their personal playground, not to mention a variety of criminal activity.

Commenters have also pointed out that by and large riding the bus is pretty much safe (certainly during commuting hours). They point out that the questionable behavior is more a cultural problem than a criminal one. How, people ask, can we make riding the bus a more civilized affair?

I believe strongly that it is an issue of culture, best addressed not by legal regulation but by active condemnation by all the decent bus riders out there. On the most recent edition of MPR's In The Loop, the host posed the question: "Is it enough to take a stand simply by believing in a thing?" On audience member answered: "No--you have to take action." If we want our buses to be safe places to travel, we have to be willing to speak out en masse when we see people misbehaving.

Of course, that's mighty tough. Unless you know in advance that ten people will stand up with you to face down the situation, you're unlikely to get involved. Certainly I feel the same thing--why should I stick my neck out if I'm going to be out there all alone?

Although it is not terribly practical to stick transit officers on every bus, how about we take a cue from the Mall of America and encourage bus riders to join a volunteer enforcement group? Volunteers would ride the bus as normal, but be officially empowered to take action when a situation arises. They could wear some kind of identifying mark--buttons or hats or something--so people would know whom to approach if there was a problem.

I actually think this idea might work. Neighborhood watch groups, for instance, function in a similar fashion. They are not officers of the peace, per se, but have a functioning relationship with law enforcement and actively seek to play a role in improving the safety and security of their communities.

So who wants to sign up?

Coming on Monday: How Did the Chicken Cross the Road?

Urban Supply Chains

2007-04-22T21:03:00.000-05:00

Seward Coop hosted a promo day for all the area CSA's this past weekend. CSA, in case you didn't know, stands for Community Supported Agriculture. The basic idea is this: rather than get your produce for a regional (or national) grocer drawing from an (inter)national supply chain, you buy a share in a local farm. During the regular growing season (June to October), you get 8-12 lbs of mixed produce (whatever's in season at the moment). It adds up to about $2.50 per pound. Your money helps support the local economy, you eat better (and often organic) produce, and you help the environment by reducing transportation costs associated with bringing goods to market.

This got me thinking about supply chains, urban environments, and energy costs. One of the key arguments in favor of the urban concentration of human beings is that it theoretically reduces transportation costs. In a suburban region without a central nodal point, goods have to be shipped in smaller bundles to more locations (thus using more energy for that transportation). In an urban environment, the higher density translates into fewer nodal points for distribution. Hence, you can ship large parcels of goods to fewer geographic distribution nodes. Urban environments = less transportation costs.

It's a great idea, in theory anyway. Subscribing to (er, buying a share in) a CSA is a good step in that direction. By committing to buying your produce from a local supplier, you ensure that no additional energy is expended bringing in out-of-season goods.

There are, however, a few drawbacks:

(1) Seasonal eating - If you really want to eat out-of-season produce, the only way to do it is to ship it in from some part of the planet where it is in season. If I want strawberries in December, I won't be getting them from Minnesota farms!

(2) Distribution costs - I still need to go to a distribution node to pick up my weekly box of produce. It's not clear to me whether the energy expended by all the private transit automobiles going to and from these distribution nodes adds up significantly.

(3) Limited distribution nodes - Since some CSA's aren't that big, they don't necessarily have convenient distribution points in any given city. Subscribers may in fact drive farther to reach the CSA distribution point than they would driving to a conventional grocery store.

At any rate, I'm willing to give it a shot. Looking for to the asparagus...

Coming this Friday: Practical Ideas for Bus Safety

Is Dog is a City's Best Friend?

2007-04-19T22:40:00.000-05:00

In a previous post, I noted that at Lake Calhoun on a beautiful day the dogs almost outnumbered the people. Ok, so it's an exaggeration, but there are indeed a lot of dogs in this city. My apartment building allows dogs, and not just small ones (up to 70 lbs, in fact!). It's not yet clear to me if this is common practice in Minneapolis. I can tell you that it was very much not common in Cleveland. Back in NE Ohio, you were lucky to find a building that let you have a cat.

So I see a lot of dogs these days. It's quite impressive. I see people walking their dogs, running with their dogs, biking with their dogs, etc. I see small dogs, big dogs, fat dogs, young dogs (puppies! yay puppies!!), friendly dogs, barky dogs, tough dogs, and cute-little-put-it-in-your-pocket toy dogs.

But curiously enough, there is something I don't see around town. You would think that with all these dogs, you would see a lot of this thing. But the mystery object is rarely sighted.

What is this mystery item? You guessed it: dog poop. Minneapolis is doing a damn good job enforcing its litter laws. I have seen almost no dog poop in the city, which is really quite astounding given how many dogs are running around.

Cleanliness is an interesting aspect of city life. It often receives little attention from urban planners, who know full well that humans are perfectly capable of living in squalor and filth for generations without noticing it. Maybe of this planet's great metropolises are indeed dirty places (think New York, Paris, London). I say this without judgment--the aforementioned cities are fantastic places to live. But they are indeed messy places, and dog poop is among their blights.

Somehow, Minneapolis has managed to get the problem under control. Consequently, the city is much more attractive to visitors. Responsible dog ownership and well-enforced litter laws have ensured that dog-citizens have a secure place in the city's life.

Coming this Wednesday: Urban Supply Chains

Condo Watch: All Luxury, All the Time

2007-04-17T23:08:00.000-05:00

I love condo ads. Especially "luxury" condo ads. A real estate developer smells blood (er, money) in the water, hires a marketing firm to put together a demographic survey showing huge latent demand for $300k+ downtown homes, convinces a bank (along with a few select investors) to pony up $50 million, sweet-talks the drooling city into granting 15 year tax abatements, hires lawyers to fight the neighborhood protests, and three to five years later the first bulldozers show up at the construction site. Of course, during this whole process the developer has to convince buyers (er, Rich People) that this latest and greatest condo complex offers the kind of conspicuous (consumptive) consumption, luxurious amenities, and Prime Location that it would be insane not to sign on the dotted pre-construction line.

I love the language of these condo ads. The website for East Bank Mills, across from downtown Minneapolis, tells us the dramatic story of its vision:

The emphasis is on the community. The setting is the river. The place is where the City Began.

We started with the existing community, Marcy Holmes, and used its Master Plan as our guide. Then we traveled the world to add to the design in an attempt to make it the most livable urban community possible.

And the vision of East Bank Mills was born.
A neighborhood along the water that will be a new landmark in the city of Minneapolis.

East Bank Mills will be a walkable, eclectic, urban neighborhood. It will cover almost eight acres with housing for people of all ages and interests. Historic renovations and modern new condominiums. Public spaces. Private retreats. Narrow pedestrian streets with local vendors you know by name.
A public plaza and bridge that draws you to the river and the regional park in your front yard.

History runs through it. The Pillsbury "A" Mill is a National Historic Landmark. The South Mill's water tower, the Pil

I'll admit it: it's a damn good pitch. I do indeed find myself drooling in response to the appeal. Just think of it: local vendors! downtown location! "Eclectic" neighborhood! (What does eclectic even mean in this context? Chinese and Japanese restaurants?) What's not to like? Surely this building will suit my loftstyle lifestyle perfectly!

But wait.... there's a new building coming.... more luxury.... more trendy.... more... urban!

Coming this Monday: Is Dog a City's Best Friend?

Dedicated Lanes for Everyone

2007-04-16T00:01:00.000-05:00

Since the weather was unbelievably beautiful this past Sunday, I spent some quality time at Lake Calhoun. It's a beautiful park in southwest Minneapolis, a little over 3 miles in circumference. In good weather, people flock to this park! Today, I saw hundreds and hundreds of park visitors: walkers, joggers, runners, roller-bladers, bikers, teenagers, old (er, senior) folks, couples, families, people pushing strollers, and of course, people walking dogs. The dogs are particularly happy to be there, hunting squirrels and barking "Hello!" at every other dog.

With all these people (and animals) frequenting the park, you might wonder how all this pedestrian and non-motorized (bikes and rollerblades, that is) traffic is managed. The answer is: dedicated lanes! There is one four foot wide lane for bidirectional pedestrian traffic; outside that lane is another single-direction lane for bikers, rollerbladers, and seriously fast runners. Beyond that, there is a bidirectional road for vehicular traffic. It's a pretty impressive operation--with separate lanes for specific kinds of traffic, there is plenty of space for everyone to move at his/her appropriate pace.

This got me thinking: what if we had dedicated lanes for all kinds of traffic everywhere? Imagine I-35W, with concrete medians separating car, bike, stroller, moped, scooter, running, walking, and old-people-with-walkers lanes! To be complete, we should add more lanes for faster-than-car travel, including traditional rail and high-speed rail. I guess if you really wanted to make it complete, you would dedicate the air above the lane in question for air traffic, and run subway lines underneath it. Why should a given road be restricted to a specific mode of travel?

Coming this Friday: All Luxury, All the Time!

They're Going the Distance.

2007-04-12T22:10:00.000-05:00

What's the longest commute you can put up with? According to the last census, the average one-way commute time in America is 24 minutes. In my experience that seems to greatly underestimate how much time Americans really spend commuting. While I've always made it a high priority to keep my commute under 20 minutes, I've been surrounded by people who think nothing of a driving 45 minutes one-way to work. That's an hour-and-a-half in a car every day--yikes!

Moreover, my suspicion that the US Census underestimates the real average commute time is based on the fact that in most metropolitan areas it is totally impossible for a suburbanite to commute into the city in such a short time frame. Since a majority of workers in a metropolitan area usually come from outside the center city, and since suburb-to-center-city commutes are often more than a half-hour, it stands to reason that the average commute time should be higher.

Time is my most precious commodity (except for my jewel-encrusted dagger snagged on EBay!). Spending hours every day cooped up in a car, disconnected from other humans, losing valuable time that could be spent actually doing something fun, strikes me as a crummy way to live. Given how many other people are content with their long commutes, however, I've often wondered if I'm the one taking crazy pills.

The New Yorker has a brief article on the subject (I would post a link, but sadly I couldn't find the article online). It makes a few general points: The main point was that long commutes suck, and lots of people have long commutes. I don't know how they do it.

How long is your commute? If it's really long, how do you keep from going crazy?

Coming this Wednesday: Dedicated Lanes for Everyone!

Loftstyle Lifestyle

2007-04-10T00:45:00.001-05:00

I'm getting more and more baffled by the lingo used to apartment buildings. My apartment building advertises itself as "Contemporary Loftstyle Living" (also mentioned on its website: 'A bridge... a river... a historic location"). What does "loftstyle" even mean? Does it mean my apartment is a loft, or only loft-like? Is it evocative of a loft, but not actually a loft? On that note, I'm also bewildered by a few other phrases used in apartment ads:

Apartment home. What is the difference between an apartment and an apartment home?

Luxury. What counts as luxury? Every new apartment building is apparently a luxury building.

Flat. Is this just a Briticism, or does it imply a luxury (see above) apartment?

Contemporary. Unless the building has a time warp built-in that transports you into the past upon entry, I think an apartment is implicitly contemporary.

Coming this Monday: They're Going the Distance!

Mass Transit Contributes to Sprawl???

2007-04-08T12:50:00.000-05:00

Anti-sprawl advocates often hail affordable mass transit as a great way to cut down on the ever-expanding exurbs and revitalize a center city. If light rail is easily available, the thinking goes, planners won't need to include as much space for parking in their plans. Residents can live without cars, closer to the city, and thus reversal the trend of urban sprawl.

At least, that's the conventional thinking on mass transit and urban sprawl. Consider this, however: if you work for the federal government in Washington DC, you get paid a generous ($100) stipend to cover your mass transit-related costs. Perversely, this compensation actually makes it easier to live outside the center city! Without the public transit perk, a Federal employee might decide it's cheaper to live closer to work (in the city, that is). With the public transit perk, however, a Federal employee is not penalized financially for locating outside the city.

Although the subsidy does indeed encourage use of mass transit (as opposed to auto), it does not necessarily reduce the problem of urban sprawl. Certainly, I'll grant the using rail instead of a personal car helps the environment and allows denser development to take place, but in this instance I'm not convinced that the direct MTA subsidy helps as much as it is intended.

Coming this Friday: My Loftstyle Lifestyle!

Transit and the Pocketbook

2007-03-30T17:29:00.000-05:00

As a loyal public transit advocate, I'm always excited to hear about cities that encourage residents to use their mass transportation networks. Even in cities with high quality mass transit systems (New York, Chicago, and DC, for example), private automobile transportation poses a long-term challenge. (To clarify: I'm speaking of non-automobile-based transit systems, such as rail). The reason is primarily economic: automobile transportation systems (including cars themselves and the road networks on which they travel) can be expanded incrementally and, as a result of that incremental improvement, see an immediate benefit. Build a new suburban housing development, lay out a mile or two of road connecting it all together, and whiz-bang! you've got a car-friendly residential neighborhood ready for realtors to pour in.

Mass transit systems, however, require massive economic investment to expand in significant chunks before they become useful. Rail systems, as opposed to bus systems, have fewer stops and significant distance between those stops. Practically speaking, a huge amount of track must be laid before the new construction pays off. Furthermore, since this huge investment is almost entirely paid for by the public, any expansion in the transit system requires a majority public consensus on new expenditures.

The practical result of this economic reality is that it is enormously difficult to expand publically-funded mass transit systems, and markedly easier to expand automobile-based transit infrastructure.

Is there any way to counter this fact? Could mass transit capital improvement budgets be increased? Could we dsincentivize automobile transportation somehow?

Coming this Wednesday: Does mass transit contribute to urban sprawl?

No Paper Cups For Me, Please!

2007-03-26T22:40:00.000-05:00

A recent NYTimes article profiled the uber-environmentalist No Impact Couple, a husband and wife living in Manhattan who are trying to live as green-friendly a life as is possible in the Big Apple. This includes not driving, not taking the elevator, only eating food grown in a 250-mile radius of New York, and for that matter only using consumer products produced within that range.

Also, it means telling baristas they prefer to use mugs instead of paper (or Styrofoam) cups. This issue resonates particularly with me, as I've found a number of coffee shops that are very displeased when asked to provide mugs. It is particularly galling to be told that mugs are not available, especially when there are rows and rows of mugs lining the walls. I know at least one person who carries around a travel mug everywhere she goes, politely requesting that drinks be made in it, rather than in a disposable cup.

How common is this experience? Do other people want mugs instead of paper cups, only to be told they're unavailable? Are there any coffee shops committed to serving drinks in mugs?

Signs about Town

2007-03-25T15:53:00.000-05:00

I found this sign (pictured above) in Uptown. What the heck is "safety improvement project"? Is it related to "No Bike Riding On Sidewalk"? Or do they just appear on the same metal pole?

Ok, I realize this may seem like a pointless post, but I'm a big stickler for clarity in signage. That's why I like airports so much. In airports, they go sign-crazy. Airport designers are serious about making sure you know where everything is.

In the case cited above, I'm a bit at a loss. There were no other signs nearby to indicate what the safety improvement project is. Certainly, it's possible that the sign implies that by forbidding bike access to the sidewalk improves safety overall. But why, in that case, are there two separate signs? Why not one "No Biking on Sidewalk" sign, and below it (but on the same sign in a smaller font) something like: "Part of Minneapolis' Safety Improvement Project!" ?

I'll have to write to my selectman!

Calhoun Square: Just Another Mall?

2007-03-25T15:07:00.000-05:00

Calhoun Square has been in the news a lot recently. The erstwhile trendy urban mall has fallen on hard times: occupancy rates have fallen, and the collapsing market for luxury condos (and rentals) has halted plans for expanding the mall's residential component. Now Calhoun Square is up for sale (big surprise, huh?).

Take a look at the photo above. I snapped that picture yesterday. It was a beautiful Saturday afternoon, temperate in the mid-60's, and moderately sunny. Uptown, while not packed, was fairly busy with pedestrian traffic. Inside the mall, however, things were quiet. Sure, there were a few people milling about the shops, but overall there was a morgue atmosphere about the place.

Let's face it: experientially speaking, Calhoun Square feels like just another suburban mall. The skylights don't really let in all that much natural light, and the entryways effectively close off outside-the-mall from inside-the-mall. The acoustics are poor: there's a constant dull background rumble of echoed conversations and industrial equipment.

Obviously there are a lot of factors contributing to the decline of Calhoun Square: the tanking condo market, the eventual de-trendification of all neighborhoods, the upscaling of Uptown itself. But I don't think it would be that hard to make this mall a nicer place to spend time: improve the acoustics by replacing highly echo-reflective tiles with some other material. Let in more natural light. Rebuild the main entrance to encourage pedestrian flow in and out of the space. These improvements are easy enough to implement and would vastly improve the look-and-feel of the space.