tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-64558912650852176562024-02-20T13:38:55.802-08:00public spaceMarchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-25172087703885919322011-07-12T08:47:00.000-07:002011-07-12T09:16:18.680-07:00No Free Market for Street SpaceCheck out this article on <span style="font-weight: bold;">Parklets </span>in San Francisco<span style="font-weight: bold;"> </span>and how they are addressing a priorly unsatisfied demand for pedestrian seating and amenities in the city: <a href="http://sfgreatstreets.org/2011/06/parklets-begin-to-address-the-huge-unmet-demand-for-more-pedestrian-amenities-and-public-seating-around-the-city/">CLICK</a>. Parklets are former parallel parking spots which have been converted into outdoor seating areas, usually in front of businesses but open to the public. The first parklet in the city was built a little over a year ago in front of Mojo Bicycle Cafe on Divisadero, but several more have been sprouting up lately.<br /><br />The article implicitly raises important questions about the typical lack of a free market in street space. Cars get almost all the space (with some scraps left for sidewalks and maybe a bike lane on a few streets), yet all taxpayers chip in for the cost of the streets. If the streets were up for auction, or if street users had to pay the full cost for their use (e.g.: VMT tax), would our streets look the same?<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjBbvkEOHBQVBnKwQ930xsp7jngVlLdpfSTLKdyIyyCFi2iXtHMe1hUCwe86WTHrC2fN8Qpg2oKzX-Nxp5sq5qKlkTVgGHosEMy5vW5sH9TRFVpH_YKCpCe6JjHCqnpLeeRToYZS0BBSCo/s1600/mojo.jpg"><img style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; cursor: pointer; width: 274px; height: 190px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjBbvkEOHBQVBnKwQ930xsp7jngVlLdpfSTLKdyIyyCFi2iXtHMe1hUCwe86WTHrC2fN8Qpg2oKzX-Nxp5sq5qKlkTVgGHosEMy5vW5sH9TRFVpH_YKCpCe6JjHCqnpLeeRToYZS0BBSCo/s320/mojo.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5628498930317654658" border="0" /></a><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjeC_12JFFkcHo5dc8KLV6ULDxdpmRBkVZqyO1ngb7QLU7DpI2Dv5K7PZ2d7IrGWsET3ELZdVC4v_Vp-0riUnJ1GO68qKm243HtwcQOlKMhuwXGqUT11bopDY4aq9T2L_pbGQf5juYNNso/s1600/parklet+baby.jpg"><img style="float: left; margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; cursor: pointer; width: 271px; height: 188px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjeC_12JFFkcHo5dc8KLV6ULDxdpmRBkVZqyO1ngb7QLU7DpI2Dv5K7PZ2d7IrGWsET3ELZdVC4v_Vp-0riUnJ1GO68qKm243HtwcQOlKMhuwXGqUT11bopDY4aq9T2L_pbGQf5juYNNso/s320/parklet+baby.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5628498796171485522" border="0" /></a>Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-48672701729483144962011-05-30T18:15:00.001-07:002011-06-01T20:22:35.511-07:00How many calories in a gallon of gas?<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrsTQqGoIEk-3SbKAz73N56EBNzzpSqDLKX33SFq6oMXteCA5Up5ejAaxWO1-2ddjsq1lvXinldSFvOtfshiwTfIjqZs2xnYlf-pQQtE5gM4IFcPZXBIC8L3b9vdJu55i5cXnEgTH4_q8/s1600/Oil-Art.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 190px; height: 320px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrsTQqGoIEk-3SbKAz73N56EBNzzpSqDLKX33SFq6oMXteCA5Up5ejAaxWO1-2ddjsq1lvXinldSFvOtfshiwTfIjqZs2xnYlf-pQQtE5gM4IFcPZXBIC8L3b9vdJu55i5cXnEgTH4_q8/s320/Oil-Art.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5613116584998673954" border="0" /></a><br />Let's talk about <span style="font-weight: bold;">calories</span>. Calories are units of energy. One calorie is the approximate energy required to heat one gram of water by 1° Celcius. All of us are familiar with calorie counts on the back of food packages. Food calories are actually kilocalories, or one thousand "gram calories". We'll refer to food calories as "calories" for the sake of simplicity.<br /><br />The <a href="http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/calorie-calculator/NU00598">Mayo Clinic calorie calculator</a> recommends that an active 30 year old man at six-feet tall and 180 pounds consume about 2750 calories per day. An apple contains about 95 calories. Eight ounces of freshly squeezed orange juice contains 110 calories. A slice of wheat bread has about 90 calories, a loaf 1620 calories. A slice of Papa John's pepperoni pizza is 340 calories, a whole pie 2800 calories. A Big Mac is about 560 calories. A Chipotle burrito with carnitas, rice, pinto beans, cheese and sour cream comes out to around 950 calories. A whole roasted chicken is about 2350 calories.<span style="font-style: italic;"><span style="font-style: italic;"> </span></span>(<span style="font-style: italic;">See</span> <a href="http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/search/">the USDA Nutrient Data Laboratory</a> and food packages at your local grocery store for similar figures).<br /><br />Although we don't eat gasoline, we can measure its caloric content, since we learned above that a calorie is merely a unit of energy. According to the internet-at-large, a gallon of gasoline contains about 30,000 calories. This means that a car getting 30 miles per gallon is burning about 1,000 calories per mile. A car that is only averaging about 15 miles per gallon is burning closer to 2,000 calories per mile. In contrast, an average man burns about 100 calories when walking a mile, 125 calories when running a mile. That same man burns about 40 calories per mile while <a href="http://http//www.ece.umd.edu/%7Eemad/CC/calories.htm">biking</a> at 15 miles per hour.<br /><br />Driving a midsized car throughout the city at 15 miles per gallon is therefore 1/20th as energy efficient as walking through the same city. Stated conversely, walking is 20 times as energy-efficient as driving around a city. Bicycling around the city is <span style="font-style: italic;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">50 times</span></span> as energy-efficient as driving!<br /><br />It is a wonder then, that people tend not to scrutinize their driving decisions as scrupulously as their eating decisions. The reason probably has more to do with habit and blissful ignorance than anything else. We are comfortable with our cars. Gasoline is affordable. Driving a couple blocks to pick up a carton of milk is not a big deal. Who cares how many calories we're burning? It's not like we could feed hungry people with the unused gasoline.<br /><br />Many Americans don't even have the choice to bike or walk for quick errands. They live in <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/Features/FoodDeserts/">"food deserts"</a> -- places where whole foods aren't available within a reasonable walking/biking distance. Not a huge problem for those wealthy enough to own cars who choose to live in the quietude of suburbia, but what about poor folks who can't afford to own a car or move to a more liveable area?<br /><br />There are at least two morals to this story. First, as individuals we should think carefully about our actions and their place in the global order. Is it worth the five minutes saved to run a one-mile errand by car rather than by bicycle or foot? Could there be something inherently good and empowering about walking or biking as a means of transportation (rather than for leisure)? Does prioritizing "human" modes of transportation have other beneficial side effects, such as more equal access to whole foods, safer streets, and reduced obesity?<br /><br />Second, municipal governments should promote (or better yet, require) smart urban design: where uses of land are not so discrete and separate that one cannot comfortably walk to the store for a quart of milk or an apple or a loaf of bread; where roads are not so wide that they cannot be safely crossed by a slow child or an aging grandfather; where people, regular old people who aren't athletes or daredevils or seasoned urbanites, can ride a bicycle down the street without fear of serious bodily harm. The time is now for individuals and governments to concern themselves with calories consumed at the pump, just as they do with calories consumed on the plate.<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiHncPuswP0ILLd660UvqXiVb6RhMvDaUFCsK3ardu4oVMZ_Su55h8n3hYlp6d42iGvCtpyzJVxVztz_g2z8kEYsx7yfLoA7Prt0J-b1s-F0e7GmAh8VoZ0WqDhtMSsUTSr2cX7aPjkYxg/s1600/Oil-Art.jpg"><br /></a>Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-18626590806438355602010-12-22T19:50:00.000-08:002010-12-22T21:10:53.228-08:00The City's Equation<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgV6q3fb5raDKJ_kJZ5JQXqpB2Og-c1kBJfpeoxFx3mNKHLkUXtABJ_WQxJNyEfzsld6HLycntRM9L4jyT4Av7Bp7vTxfsw1IAuHG-LEvO3gFqko35Zpx8BNysf1d66n6L5BU0L0bxUCVQ/s1600/cloudequa.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 304px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgV6q3fb5raDKJ_kJZ5JQXqpB2Og-c1kBJfpeoxFx3mNKHLkUXtABJ_WQxJNyEfzsld6HLycntRM9L4jyT4Av7Bp7vTxfsw1IAuHG-LEvO3gFqko35Zpx8BNysf1d66n6L5BU0L0bxUCVQ/s400/cloudequa.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5553740787128308978" border="0" /></a><br />Here is a fascinating article about the scientific study of cities from the New York Times:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/magazine/19Urban_West-t.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=physicist%20solves&st=cse">A Physicist Solves the City</a>.<br /><br />The pictures--photo illustrations--are intriguing as well.<br /><br />Geoffrey West believes that all cities operate according to certain mathematical equations, because he has measured it as so. Mr. West makes a false assumption, however, in assuming that recorded metrics are static. He only sees the past of cities, and not their future.<br /><br />The comparison between cities and corporations is insightful as well. Cities are <span style="font-weight: bold;">municipal corporations.</span>Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-79258262512887543562010-11-11T09:25:00.000-08:002010-12-02T11:52:51.408-08:00Nice Ride: Minneapolis' Bike Sharing Program<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1hbxS4FjP-ZVb-aYr6QTD2DXNrbUNsPz3VJhiSd8jLh_2Hj7Buplj7ohH_3JqoDDbVE0zTIL8y5nSfnPCj7ULvkbdCvIqWSAI65NnjtYJX6sG1gS1dZ4QrhvttLOXVDCWC9OSZJ16bvE/s1600/Photo0424.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 240px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1hbxS4FjP-ZVb-aYr6QTD2DXNrbUNsPz3VJhiSd8jLh_2Hj7Buplj7ohH_3JqoDDbVE0zTIL8y5nSfnPCj7ULvkbdCvIqWSAI65NnjtYJX6sG1gS1dZ4QrhvttLOXVDCWC9OSZJ16bvE/s320/Photo0424.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5538344975619539202" border="0" /></a> <p style="font-family: georgia;" class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;font-family:georgia;" align="center"><span style=""><!--[if gte vml 1]><v:shapetype id="_x0000_t75" coordsize="21600,21600" spt="75" preferrelative="t" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" filled="f" stroked="f"> <v:stroke joinstyle="miter"> <v:formulas> <v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"> <v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"> <v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"> <v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"> <v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"> <v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"> <v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"> <v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"> <v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"> <v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"> <v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"> <v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"> </v:formulas> <v:path extrusionok="f" gradientshapeok="t" connecttype="rect"> <o:lock ext="edit" aspectratio="t"> </v:shapetype><v:shape id="Picture_x0020_0" spid="_x0000_i1025" type="#_x0000_t75" alt="Photo0424.jpg" style="'width:286pt;height:206pt;visibility:visible;"> <v:imagedata src="file://localhost/Users/MC/Library/Caches/TemporaryItems/msoclip/0clip_image001.jpg" title="Photo0424.jpg"> <v:textbox style="'mso-rotate-with-shape:t'/"> </v:shape><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]--><!--[endif]--></span><span style=""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; font-family: georgia;" align="center"><o:p> </o:p></p><div style="text-align: left;">In September, I took a visit to the land of a thousand lakes, Minnesota, to visit family and take in a Twins game at the new Target Field. While walking around downtown I noticed several corrals of lime green bikes and later learned that these bikes were part of a new public bike sharing program. I took an hour one afternoon to check out the system in more detail and take some fresh wheels for a spin.<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOvTjporKFzDuZO99xnEqQe9w2DyyjEsYRQbvIn1nwewIa2wdn8Il8OijIdWUGJW2bpCMIIuKEqm9MNBFoA6Rg508aUaxJ47YATpc0A3oCKriuROMcRi7S0_jCTaJg1y3RbI8c4WqvXts/s1600/Photo0425.jpg"><img style="float: left; margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 240px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOvTjporKFzDuZO99xnEqQe9w2DyyjEsYRQbvIn1nwewIa2wdn8Il8OijIdWUGJW2bpCMIIuKEqm9MNBFoA6Rg508aUaxJ47YATpc0A3oCKriuROMcRi7S0_jCTaJg1y3RbI8c4WqvXts/s320/Photo0425.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5538346427134266882" border="0" /></a><br /><br />It all starts by choosing a subscription. My understanding is that locals can choose monthly or yearly subscriptions. As I was only in the Twin Cities for the weekend, I chose the 24 hour subscription for $5. It took less than 2 minutes to pay for the subscription with my credit card and get an unlocking code for the ride of my choice. (In addition to subscription fees, riders are charged trip fees for the time they have the bike checked out. The point seeming to be that these bikes are meant for short trips rather than longer-term rentals. Rides less than 30 min are free).<br /></div><p class="MsoNormal" face="georgia" style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: left;"><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCGftAAvc6Fa1gopNoCZv9uW63VpMCOn5pfrG_nkVM8DPB3onrUXloe-Ue2CWcO7qkg2XBNPsyPvL_jnPIQxA1qVon81Ny3HRd5A_t269ANRVw3Cj6_39knhpMaYSk67WpUNV_uHifeAk/s1600/Photo0428.jpg"><img style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 240px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCGftAAvc6Fa1gopNoCZv9uW63VpMCOn5pfrG_nkVM8DPB3onrUXloe-Ue2CWcO7qkg2XBNPsyPvL_jnPIQxA1qVon81Ny3HRd5A_t269ANRVw3Cj6_39knhpMaYSk67WpUNV_uHifeAk/s320/Photo0428.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5538352976377139314" border="0" /></a></p><p class="MsoNormal" face="georgia" style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: left;">After getting my code, I picked a bike, entered the code, and was free to ride. Although I had walked around downtown Minneapolis before, and been a passenger in cars there, the Nice Ride gave me a chance to explore a wider area, and without the interfering lens of a car window.</p><p class="MsoNormal" face="georgia" style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: left;">The bike itself was a bit clunky, but it did the job and even had a few different gears to choose from. Most of the weight was likely attributable to the tamper-proof design, which kept all of the workings of the bicycle (gears, chain, brake lines) concealed.</p><p class="MsoNormal" face="georgia" style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: left;">Overall it was a great experience. I crossed the Mississippi (four times), explored some cool Minneapolis neighborhoods that I've never seen before, and managed to get in some exercise without even trying to. My experience with Nice Ride is likely not the typical one. The program seems to be directed at citizens without bikes who just need a ride for short trips or errands. In the long run, most riders will probably want to get their own bike, but in the short run, this is a great way to get people on bicycles and to increase the visibility of biking as a viable option for urban transportation. I look forward to seeing how Nice Ride fares in Minneapolis and hope that similar programs sprout in other American cities soon.<br /></p>Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-11566256084000575672010-08-02T22:04:00.000-07:002010-08-04T11:48:20.874-07:00Spatial Inefficiency Part I: Bicycles<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixR9T1agsBg9LP6yh4714B22BfzKo4MssHKNak2TQeZxZ7FETFy0-3kDOF8nIXorhYGi3PAiFWwYyly_MwYDrKI2yHw1yNAy8ptbXXdKvDrdHzh9lX6BnZCPr4gbgwJdVLyc09S60XJ6w/s1600/bikelane.jpg"><img style="float: left; margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 253px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixR9T1agsBg9LP6yh4714B22BfzKo4MssHKNak2TQeZxZ7FETFy0-3kDOF8nIXorhYGi3PAiFWwYyly_MwYDrKI2yHw1yNAy8ptbXXdKvDrdHzh9lX6BnZCPr4gbgwJdVLyc09S60XJ6w/s400/bikelane.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5501063014253502098" border="0" /></a><span style="font-size:100%;"><br />I was late to the ballpark on Saturday when the Dodgers were in town to face the surging Giants. Knowing that I needed to get down to the park as quickly as possible, I made the obvious decision -- grabbed my bicycle and headed out the door.<br /><br />It may seems strange to the average automobile driver, but the fastest way to get around the city is often by bicycle. Especially at a time like morning rush hour--or right before a big Saturday baseball game--almost any trip of five miles or less will take less time on a bike. Less time than walking. Less time than riding the bus or train. Less time than driving. Even less time than taking a taxi.<br /><br />The last two points are the most intriguing to consider. Time wasted parking anywhere in the city where one does not have a dedicated space obviously slows down the driver in his personal car. But how can a bicycle be faster than a taxi cab?<br /><br />It all comes down to spatial efficiency. Bicycles are not only extremely fuel efficient, but they are incredibly spatially efficient too. Just think about how many people could ride down a two-lane city street if all were on bicycles. I admit to not making any tape measurements, but the spatial ratio must be somewhere from 3 to 6 bicycles per 1 car. And seeing as most streets in San Francisco (and everywhere in this great nation) are dominated by cars, the skilled bicycle rider can use spatial efficiency to his advantage. When a line of cars waits at a red light, the cyclist moves to the front of the line -- both because it is safer at the front where the automobiles can see the cyclist, and because the cyclist <span style="font-weight: bold;">can</span>. There is enough space between and beside the automobiles for bicycles to weave through and past. In a dense urban area like San Francisco, with stop-and-go city traffic, the bicyclist's ability to take advantage of spatial efficiency renders his mode of transportation the fastest.<br /><br />At no time was the spatial efficiency of the bicycle more apparent to me than after the game (a thrilling 2 - 1 Giants victory after an eighth inning two-run dinger by Pat Burrell). While a line of cars close to a half-mile long waited in frustrated traffic along the Embarcadero, I cruised by in the bike lane, riding leisurely to enjoy the summer air and soak in the excitement of the win. Without exerting much energy at all, I left the line of cars in the proverbial rear-view and headed home one pedal at a time.<br /><br />Which brings us to the name of this post: spatial inefficiency. In contrast to the spatial efficiency of the bicycle is the spatial inefficiency of a typical city road. Take Divisadero for example. Two lanes of traffic and one lane of parking each way creates a road that takes too much space to move too few people. If just one of those lanes were converted to a bike lane, think of how many more people could travel quickly down the road. For an even greater example of spatial inefficiency, imagine the typical suburban strip mall, maybe one with a Super Target, Best Buy, Quiznos, you name it. How much of the space is actually dedicated to the stores and the walkways and how much is dedicated to storing the giant steel monstrosities that everyone is lugging around with them?<br /><br />So, you might ask, who cares? We've got plenty of space here in America, why not use it? I will attempt to address these questions in a further installment of Spatial Inefficiency. If anyone has ideas before then--or if you love your Suburban and think bicycles are impractical toys for overgrown children--just use the comment section and share your opinion.</span>Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-56984901928673495182010-07-29T11:32:00.000-07:002010-07-29T11:41:34.498-07:00Traffic as a Public Health ConcernCheck out this short piece from the Streetsblog network:<br /><br /><a href="http://streetsblog.net/2010/07/29/traffic-reduction-saves-lives-so-why-isnt-it-a-top-public-health-concern/">Why Isn't Traffic Reduction a Top Public Health Concern</a><br /><br />As anyone who has ever been in a car accident can attest to: driving is dangerous. In addition, cars spew all sorts of particulate matter into the air (y'know that stuff that we breathe to stay alive). It doesn't take a scientist to bike or walk down the street and realize that the exhaust coming out of most cars' tailpipes is not the healthiest mixture. If you get caught behind a big enough/poorly maintained vehicle, your gasping for breath will be all the evidence you need.<br /><br />So why do we take traffic for granted and just assume that it is a constant that we need to live with? Why is it so hard to imagine urban and suburban places with severely decreased automobile and truck traffic?Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-23247721728948612092010-07-20T21:07:00.000-07:002010-07-20T22:34:31.624-07:00Suburban Infill : the choice is Yours<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhymmLPOCvWlMCHUfqRY0AkqOQ5c8NF_2RTB9tQAHz4BSvgeky1wbrZAdGPySygne3PRkDTmNacRQS93YlKWQaRh1mNOkgLZBrlQzl4w2pIxinD_vS9tAQ5QQ0z3EtPxgg0YMvT12FfDns/s1600/family+dollar.jpg"><img style="float: left; margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 254px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhymmLPOCvWlMCHUfqRY0AkqOQ5c8NF_2RTB9tQAHz4BSvgeky1wbrZAdGPySygne3PRkDTmNacRQS93YlKWQaRh1mNOkgLZBrlQzl4w2pIxinD_vS9tAQ5QQ0z3EtPxgg0YMvT12FfDns/s400/family+dollar.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5496225956601139026" border="0" /></a><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgf9mlpVELL2ysD76j-vJnueUrCWN19YDhwmh1tIFwP2YwR21AZu6UAKs_fD0p0O0FFUNXsVKc3Sg4rN1hP7tSw8qHlZcbG1Yf1cH98PonaNM1vlqAS6kdtsA4GaitwbldNZkuP7z448wk/s1600/grocery.jpg"><img style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 266px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgf9mlpVELL2ysD76j-vJnueUrCWN19YDhwmh1tIFwP2YwR21AZu6UAKs_fD0p0O0FFUNXsVKc3Sg4rN1hP7tSw8qHlZcbG1Yf1cH98PonaNM1vlqAS6kdtsA4GaitwbldNZkuP7z448wk/s400/grocery.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5496225836826474306" border="0" /></a><br /><br /><br />Urban redevelopment is a great way to utilize the efforts of the past towards better futures. It is also a way to enliven often decrepit and quiet areas that were once centers of life. It is efficient and it does not waste land. It brings people closer together.<br /><br />But what about those stuck out in the suburbs of America? Some, maybe most, suburbanites actually enjoy the sprawling, car-laden world in which they live. They could do without the five o'clock traffic jam, but having a nice lawn and a garage and a place where the kids can shoot baskets outside until 10 pm and few strangers are roaming by--there is a sense of security that many find in the suburbs.<br /><br />Those who truly love urban life for the pedestrian opportunities and the immense possibilities that open when life is put on the streets (rather than behind the wheel of a car or running on a treadmill) likely find the suburbs to be suffocating and dull. Where is the life on the streets? There are no shops, few people walking around, there are not even sidewalks on every street. Bikers beware too, for the streets are rarely wide enough for bikes and cars to both fit, and suburban drivers are in a rush. Everything is a drive away: work, school, grocery, gym, friends, restaurants, bars,^ shopping malls, hospitals. The suburban life is wasteful. There are too many parking lots and too much gasoline, too much land and too many mega-malls, too many damn highways. Even worse, the suburban life, lived to its most extreme, is a life spent inside in isolation (especially during the cold of winter or the heat of summer).<br /><br />If, however, the suburbs are here to stay, can they slowly become better urban areas without torching the zoning code and letting the poverty of the city creep in? Or: do we really need any more suburbs than we have now? The answer is yes and no. Yes suburban areas can become more amenable to pedestrians, bicyclists, children below driving age;* and no, we don't need any more than we have now.<br /><br />The bottom line is that most suburbanites aren't gonna pick up and move to the city, to join all the enlightened urbanites on streets of pigeon shit, hippies and dried coffee. Why not then, bring the city to them? At least the good parts of the city: streets with wide sidewalks, and public parks with benches and beautiful old trees, bike lanes and public transit hubs, corner stores and restaurants that aren't buried away in shopping malls and strip centers. Why not make the suburbs more urban?<br /><br />Density is an issue. Just how many people does it take to support a corner store and how many suburbanites live within walking or biking distance of the certain lot where said corner store will be? Won't this corner store need a parking lot so folks can drive up and fill their cars with groceries?<br /><br />The suburban desire to separate residence from commerce is another. Who wants to live next to a corner store (or a parking lot)?<br /><br />And of course, collective action. How are all the different suburban voices going to decide where the corner store shall go or who will shoulder the burden of increased density, increased urbanity? Surely there must be a few more people to support suburban commerce.<br /><br />I don't have the answers to these questions; if anyone does they can't fit in the virtual space of a blog post. They are life-sized and real, like going to work or picking up a loaf of bread and a gallon of milk. They require political will and capital and a desire to change the suburban lifestyle. Maybe most of all they require folks to look at their lives and their hulking exhaust-spewing cars and realize that maybe we're not walking down the right path. Hell, we're not walking much at all, unless of course we belong to a gym, or the dog needs to take a dump, or we dropped some extra flow on that new treadmill that was advertised on TV.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><br />^ Of course suburbanites do not drink and drive - they are generally law-abiding folk.<br /><br />* As a child of the suburbs I can heartily testify to the great powerlessness a thirteen year old boy feels when he is stranded at home carless in a world built for people with gasoline motors.</span>Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-75145219757604511312009-07-27T22:01:00.000-07:002009-07-29T09:16:23.551-07:00What do fruits and vegetables have to do with urban planning?<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgeuCvTgrqY2U2HdfujtkQRSxLelnapNcnoYYH4H3NDsGsnD31fBC7ApZbkq16x2yM1w8B9e_zVtVRWUBVxI99Fyc21egO95NO1FpHAFM1nij1SB_nN3JE3-tFQprrmqweHzSX09S0iiaM/s1600-h/women+planting"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 321px; height: 213px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgeuCvTgrqY2U2HdfujtkQRSxLelnapNcnoYYH4H3NDsGsnD31fBC7ApZbkq16x2yM1w8B9e_zVtVRWUBVxI99Fyc21egO95NO1FpHAFM1nij1SB_nN3JE3-tFQprrmqweHzSX09S0iiaM/s320/women+planting" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5363384490901074482" border="0" /></a>Today I tried to imagine the perfect city. There were plenty of bikes and pedestrians everywhere and a marked absence of private vehicles. There were shorter blocks and more mixed uses of land. And there were farms: block-sized farms full of apple trees, kale, beans and carrots.<br /><br />Then it got me a-thinkin': just how much space does it take to feed a person/family/city?<br /><br />The answer is that it depends on what those people/families/cities are eating. Turns out that the production of meat is <a href="http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-30610-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html">wildly more inefficient</a> than the production of vegetables. Not only that, but animal excrement (i.e.: shit) pollutes that other stuff that is necessary for life: water.<br /><br />So what does this all mean? Well, I guess it depends on the purpose of the city. If cities are to be places for efficient living, then perhaps what the citizens eat is as important as what transportation decisions they make. And as no city exists in a vacuum, it is also important how the choices of the city affect the surrounding suburbs and farmland.<br /><br />Cities should promote life. They are centers of life, where people concentrate to work, play, sleep, eat, reproduce and <span style="font-weight: bold;">live</span>. Should they not then, also be places where life-affirming activity is concentrated? Where space is maximized for farmland and physical activity? Or are they just amusement parks for those with enough wealth to afford the high rents and tourists looking for the perfect picture (and the perfect steak)?<br /><br />In order to build and maintain the perfect cities of the future, we need to make the right decisions: for ourselves, for those around us, and for those to come. In this broader sense, cutting back on meat intake is as important as riding a bike or taking public transportation. In another more specific and tangible sense, growing and eating food from the land that we live on gives us a greater connection to the land and reminds us that we inhabit a real space that is capable of generating and sustaining life.<br /><br />UPDATE: turns out some hotshot from the Washington Post is one of the 5 people that read this page. Check out his article on <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/28/AR2009072800390.html">meat consumption and its effect on global warming</a>. Not the same point I was trying to make above, but its all related.Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-11347212468235174762009-07-13T22:47:00.001-07:002009-07-14T15:19:35.489-07:00Public HealthWe often think of the public health in mechanical terms. What is the average life span? Which diseases are most prevalent? How can money be made by selling health to people? How much does it cost to provide "health care"?<br /><br />I suspect this train of thought is simplistic.<br /><br />It is driven in part by big insurance and its dollars and cents approach to health (and life); driven also by the legal system, using the adversarial system as a means toward rewarding those made ill by other's negligence, but also succumbing to the ideal that money can heal and punish; driven by the business of medicine and the view that health may be bought and sold.<br /><br />But of course it may, you might think. Those with money can afford to live in safe areas and purchase healthy food, live in well-built homes, buy the latest drugs and health-fads, and pay for insurance and hospital visits. This consumptive view of medicine and health, however, ultimately has a deleterious effect. It reduces public health to a budget line and obscures our understanding of what the public health is.<br /><br />At its foundation, better public health is both easier and harder to achieve than universal health care and cheaper prescription drugs. It is easier in the sense that it may be reduced to simple concepts: we should create living environments that promote life and wellness, where ample shelter, fresh food, and clean water is available and people have the opportunity to engage in physical activity and nurture positive relationships. It is harder in that it requires a holistic and multi-modal understanding of health that reaches far beyond the hospital and the insurance companies' balance sheets.<br /><br />Public health has as much to do with things like walkability, bike lanes, farmers markets, crime reduction and open spaces as it does with access to hospitals and advances in pharmaceutical technology or surgical procedures. We limit our understanding of public health if we conceive of it in purely medical terms. Instead, it will benefit urban areas to think about the public health impacts of every decision, particularly decisions regarding transportation and public space.<br /><br />Several years ago, I spent a few months undertaking research for a paper on the importance of walkability towards creating and fostering urban relationships. My thesis was not revolutionary. I merely argued that walking brings people in closer contact with their cities, that it is more democratic than driving, and that a pedestrian friendly city will ultimately be a better place to live than an auto-centric city.<br /><br />An idea that I tossed around in my head but never committed to paper was the life:death ratio. When making public decisions, I thought, we should think simply about whether our plans nurture life or risk harm, disease, and death. It seems obvious that walking environments promote life and don't increase death or disease, but that auto-centric environments lead to more carbon dioxide, more obesity, more unnecessary fatalities. Of course it is also true that automobile technology and open roads allow emergency personnel to react quickly to fires and heart attacks, but that is why we have the ratio. The ability to give and sustain life must be balanced with the susceptibility for disease and death.<br /><br />Walking up Scott street the other day, from Lower Haight towards Alamo Square, I noticed a freshly planted tree and for a second envisioned the potential of the road before me and before us all. I saw trees in strange places, scattered down the middle of the road, and imagined the flow of bikers multiplying as the parked cars vanished to their place in history books. I saw a space that was public and open, one that promoted life and activity, a street where children could pick fruit from trees and people could walk to their neighbor's house without the threat of anything more imposing than a stream of bicycles and pedestrians.<br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-style: italic;"></span></span>Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-91715688038639027162009-06-20T18:09:00.000-07:002009-07-02T23:47:41.586-07:00Biking Around<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg38F2_mZ4T_K6fsTHtq9FDRf7n2xsA0QSWBUClhMSTtA466GzRms2Y2e50qVOzFDsm-FeCmqqx5xcT_lxrgqlEEn1Lm_yHnOZpzaE8GqLSV5Qax4p9ZDI9Zvu551shI8pK7Hnyo_3yU94/s1600-h/Photo0144.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg38F2_mZ4T_K6fsTHtq9FDRf7n2xsA0QSWBUClhMSTtA466GzRms2Y2e50qVOzFDsm-FeCmqqx5xcT_lxrgqlEEn1Lm_yHnOZpzaE8GqLSV5Qax4p9ZDI9Zvu551shI8pK7Hnyo_3yU94/s400/Photo0144.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5349584484876844658" border="0" /></a><br />This is Rocinante: an old steel road bike, made in France somewhere in the 70s or early 80s. I picked it up at a bike repair shop down in South Beach for a modest sum and have been trekking around the city these last few weeks. Even rode into work for the first time on Friday, sharing the road with the buses and taxis, delivery trucks and private cars, watching the people walk down the broad sidewalks of Market Street and feeling the cool morning air, a natural air conditioner to balance the effort of the ride. There are not many better ways to spend the morning commute (not to mention the fact that my ride was at least ten minutes faster than the typical bus commute on the 21-Hayes).<br /><br />Along with walking, bicycling is a great activity for both transportation and community development. I know that may seem like a bold statement for something as simple as pedaling a piece of metal down city streets, but bikers do more than travel from point a to b. They survey their surroundings and bring a human element to the streets. They also empower themselves with the ability to transverse the city with their own two legs and an exhaust-free machine. Maybe most importantly, they bring themselves (or the bicycle brings them) into direct contact with the physical space of the city.<br /><br />Bikes also allow people to travel with a minimal use of energy (maximum efficiency). The bike is much more efficient than an auto, even more efficient than walking. So why aren't more Americans riding bikes? Why aren't more San Franciscans riding?<br /><br />The average suburban American lives somewhere that is only accessible by highways and neighborhood roads. Highways have no dedicated bike lanes, neighborhood roads lead nowhere (but to neighborhood houses). Mega cities are built on the scope of the automobile, rely on its oversized frame to bear the citizens from one to the next. People ride bikes in these areas, but often only for joy or exercise, not as a practical method of transport.<br /><br />But even if the above is a satisfactory explanation for the lack of bike-riding in America as a whole, what explains the relative lack of riding in a place like San Francisco. Although there are many cyclists in the city, the city and citizens would benefit and could handle an exponential increase in ridership. I suspect the biggest obstacle to most would-be riders is the perceived dangerousness of urban riding. Cars are big and careless and bikers are relatively unprotected (although many wear <a href="http://www.copenhagenize.com/2009/06/get-yer-torches-its-bike-helmet.html">helmets</a>). Ultimately, a city that is sincerely dedicated to accessible transportation, public health, and the improvement of the streetscape must do its best to promote cycling and walking. Cyclists must also do a good job of sharing their excitement with their friends and neighbors. The more bikes on the street, the safer it will become for riders.*<br /><br />My proposal: San Francisco should pick a weekend day and shut down 10 to 20% of the streets to all through-traffic except buses, a mega-<a href="http://sundaystreetssf.com/">Sunday Streets</a> of sorts. Preferably the carless streets would be commercial corridors: Divisadero, Union, Mission, Fillmore, Polk, Chestnut, Valencia, Columbus, 16th Street, 24th Street. The possibilities are endless. I guess we'd have to allow cars some way to cross the streets at defined intersections, but we could probably employ intersections with traffic lights, or even get a few policeman out there to interact with the folk and direct traffic. Perhaps I'm overlooking the logistical complexities of such an event, but there ain't nothing wrong with dreaming big. Improving the transportation corridors of the cities of the future will take vision and tenacity. The city is an experiment that is never complete.<br /><br /><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">* The pack offers protection. Or maybe it just seems to. All I know is that it feels safer to be riding with other bikers on the road. I would be interested if anyone has statistics to share.</span>Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-33519821476540369092009-05-29T09:04:00.001-07:002009-05-30T15:14:07.325-07:00The Age of Participation<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMSAiuI0HZeg3_xXDTfQEiO_9Dh3ugPP471mqK1u8Lj77qp0l2nThZSiQ6ODV9QvwGzpN1eFKVSSE89YRhkkkeb7b8copS2mEwr8zLFTmWxM2TFKsQuN3wAxRdnzdZq_xG4fuhHKn_yeU/s1600-h/senior+dudes"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 200px; height: 133px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMSAiuI0HZeg3_xXDTfQEiO_9Dh3ugPP471mqK1u8Lj77qp0l2nThZSiQ6ODV9QvwGzpN1eFKVSSE89YRhkkkeb7b8copS2mEwr8zLFTmWxM2TFKsQuN3wAxRdnzdZq_xG4fuhHKn_yeU/s200/senior+dudes" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5341294558859421106" border="0" /></a><br />The <a href="http://www.spur.org/">San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association</a> held a Grand Opening party last night for its new Urban Center at 654 Mission Street. The event was a great success, with the party taking over the new building, a bar next door and the Annie Street alley. The jazz band outside was incredible, dropping some jazz standards mixed in with some interpretations of classic 80s tunes. They even came into the Urban Center at one point during the night, playing the entire time as they were relocating.<br /><br />Anyhow, at one point during the night, I ended up speaking with a San Francisco urban designer. Although this designer has been in the city for a while, she told me that she began her career in Europe. This led me to ask her how the urban design process is different here than in Europe.<br /><br />She gave two examples in response. First, she said that there is much less leeway to stray from the "master plan" in European cities (although many American cities have master plans, they are usually policy documents and not legally binding on city councils and planning commissions). Second, she said that the participation process is much more robust here.<br /><br />I was excited to hear this second point. It reminded me of Alexis de Tocqueville's <span style="font-style: italic;">Democracy in America</span>, and his first impressions of new world democracy, where citizens were constantly participating in the formation of their own societies. Unfortunately, de Tocqueville's America seems largely brushed under the rug these days, or at least seated on a giant nation-sized couch watching the latest episode of Grey's Anatomy. Although many of us keep at least half an eye toward the government, much of that attention is directed towards Washington, D.C. and the latest goings-on with the Obama Administration. In contrast, how often do people devote their attention to the beneficial growth of their own city/town/suburb?<br /><br />Coincidentally, I spent a couple hours on Wednesday night at a <a href="http://www.sfgov.org/site/planning_index.asp?id=102708">community workshop </a>meant to kick off the Northeast Embarcadero Study (Embarcadero from Washington to North Point streets). What struck me most about the workshop was just how <span>old</span> everyone was at the meeting. The average age had to be well past 50, with only a handful of people below 40 (not counting the representatives from the Planning Department). I understand that these things start fairly early (this one kicked off around 5:45 p.m.), that it is hard for people to get out of work, and that people under 50 may have "better things to do" than go to a community workshop, but it was disheartening to think that my generation (and those slightly older and younger) was so improperly represented at what seemed to me a very important discussion.<br /><br />We (as Americans, as San Francisco residents) have a great opportunity to be part of the urban development process and to steer the future of this city (and our country), yet it seems like local government (well, all government) is often overrun by special interests and those with too much time on their hands. Are we to blame? Or is the system rigged from the start and we are better off not wasting our time?<br /><br />The answer is likely to lie somewhere in between. Most San Franciscans probably have no idea that these meetings even exist. Only after the fact, when the development has begun or finished, will they applaud the new space or decry the poor planning. The opportunity to participate in the process will be lost by that point and they will attribute the results to some higher planning/development power that makes all the decisions in this fair city.<br /><br />But what if the common man and woman <span style="font-style: italic;">did</span> care about local government and planning decisions? What if the front page of the paper discussed city development rather than the latest inane thing that Rush Limbaugh said?<br /><br />As discussed before, we may have a problem with our focus and our perception of which issues matter and on what level. The development of our cities and towns has a profound effect on our lives and the lives of those to follow us, yet we spend little time giving these issues any attention.Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-67002581433343394932009-05-20T09:16:00.000-07:002009-05-20T09:28:21.333-07:00Urban Mathematics = Cities are AliveA rap scholar once said, "You wanna know how to rhyme you better learn how to add." Steven Strogatz, professor of applied mathematics, makes the persuasive argument that if you want to understand cities, it might help to learn some math too.<br /><br />Strogatz illustrates, among other things, that larger (more populous) cities need less infrastructure than small ones. He attributes this to <a href="http://publicspacesf.blogspot.com/2009/04/economies-of-scale-oranges.html"><span style="font-weight: bold;">economies of scale</span></a>:<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">For instance, if one city is 10 times as populous as another one, does it need 10 times as many gas stations? No. Bigger cities have more gas stations than smaller ones (of course), but not nearly in direct proportion to their size. The number of gas stations grows only in proportion to the 0.77 power of population. The crucial thing is that 0.77 is less than 1. This implies that the bigger a city is, the fewer gas stations it has per person. Put simply, bigger cities enjoy economies of scale. In this sense, bigger is greener.</span><br /><br />Strogatz ultimately argues that this same ratio is applicable to other living organisms: proof that cities are living, breathing things. Makes sense to me.<br /><br />For the full NY Times column click <a href="http://judson.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/math-and-the-city/">here</a>.Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-65834170514215847732009-05-15T11:36:00.000-07:002009-05-30T15:41:57.148-07:00Street Study: Divisadero<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-wPntXGEexxO0fKxOkYY4mNKOTztYI-7Ywbvwm8e8B_rKeY_YmCJoJzAU7TgvHOQ9zWObcP34h-hctccpitBKdONNifaU_JVGhRik0aZEs1tWhUx7ZIxBOqiUKgSr0cMBHs9Ze59iJc4/s1600-h/DSC02588.JPG"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 388px; height: 123px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-wPntXGEexxO0fKxOkYY4mNKOTztYI-7Ywbvwm8e8B_rKeY_YmCJoJzAU7TgvHOQ9zWObcP34h-hctccpitBKdONNifaU_JVGhRik0aZEs1tWhUx7ZIxBOqiUKgSr0cMBHs9Ze59iJc4/s320/DSC02588.JPG" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5341750568329264914" border="0" /></a><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">2.5 miles</span></span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">38 blocks</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Runs from Marina Blvd to Castro St</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Bus lines:</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"> </span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/20/BAC717MRCO.DTL">24</a> (north/south) </span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">6, 7, 71, 21, 31, 38, 2, 4, 1, 3, 41, 45, 28, 43, 76, 30 (east/west)</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Zoning Patterns:</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Castro to Haight (2 1/2 blocks): RH-3 [Residential Housing, 3 units per lot]</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Haight to Sacramento (19 blocks): Neighborhood Commercial-2 [Small-Scale] with a 4 block patch of NC-3 [Moderate Scale] around Geary St. and a patch of RM-3 [Medium Density Residential, Mixed]</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Sacramento to Lombard (11 blocks): Residential [RH-3, RH-2, RH-1, RH-1(D), RM-1, patches of RH-3, RM-2]</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Lombard to Chestnut (2 blocks): Neighborhood Commercial [NC-2, NC-3]</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Francisco to Marina (6 blocks): Residential [RH-3 with RM-3 at the corners, a block of P(ublic) between North Point and Beach, and a row of RH-1 facing the Bay]</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">[note: this will be the first of several "street studies." please comment with requests for the study of a particular street or further information that you would like to see included in each study.]</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><br /></div>Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-44273779574116205092009-05-12T13:43:00.000-07:002009-05-13T12:04:26.124-07:00MTA drama + German Carless SuburbThe controversy over the SFMTA budget continues. The Board of Supervisors, led by David Chiu, are threatening to reject the budget against MTA's (and the Mayor's) wishes. A Board of Supervisors' meeting is set for 2pm today and the budget is the 8th item on the agenda. SF Streetsblog promises to provide a <a href="http://twitter.com/StreetsblogSF">twitter-feed</a> of the highlights.<div><br /></div><div>UPDATE (Wednesday at 11:47 AM PST): It appears a <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/13/BAIP17JERE.DTL">compromise</a> has been reached -- just barely. Apparently Chiu's motion to <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">table</span> the budget rejection only passed by <a href="http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/44855252.html">a vote of 6-5</a>. Unfortunately, the "compromise" doesn't seem to have much effect on the average San Franciscan. Fares are still rising and service is still being cut. It appears that my old hood got hit especially hard, with the 10 being discontinued above broadway and the 20 being cut altogether. I rode the 10 for more than a year-and-a-half and it was always full of worker bees in the morning and night rush hours. Guess those middle-class San Franciscans better save up some money for bicycles! The anti-climactic ending to this struggle offers a perfect microcosm of San Francisco politics circa 2009: shelter the rich, save the needy, and screw everyone in between. So much for a transit-first city.<br /><div><br /></div><div>Also: check out this <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/science/earth/12suburb.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&em">NYTimes article</a> about a German suburb (formerly a Nazi army base) that has rendered autos verboten. It is encouraging to know that such a revolutionary idea has taken hold in a place with such sordid historical ties. Could car-free streets be on the way to a suburb or city near you?</div></div>Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-37993825356882790332009-04-28T11:58:00.000-07:002009-05-21T17:42:20.284-07:00Where is the Pie?<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZTdKGzvpp0Zv30QHHl-Nw_Fb_kkAJTWOuiCdCNzbSeVYsazoN2BESeLke12t-tdHWpMtwlTAwhhQrfLq44FpNo-ZeLMuv8uYgbaXKTWrQABGZDuHAb-F1rc6xqtB_1hDGwNJISo-3gmE/s1600-h/cherry+pie"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 293px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZTdKGzvpp0Zv30QHHl-Nw_Fb_kkAJTWOuiCdCNzbSeVYsazoN2BESeLke12t-tdHWpMtwlTAwhhQrfLq44FpNo-ZeLMuv8uYgbaXKTWrQABGZDuHAb-F1rc6xqtB_1hDGwNJISo-3gmE/s320/cherry+pie" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5338442151295260322" border="0" /></a><br /><div>Before asking <em>where</em> it is, we may first need to ask, "<em>what</em> is the pie?" Turns out both questions are a bit slippery. The pie may signify the total resources available in a specified area (the Earth, the United States, California, San Francisco, the Western Addition, Divisadero Street, the 500 block of Divisadero, etc.) or perhaps the pie merely signifies the <em><span style="font-style: italic;">monetary </span>value</em> attributed to a certain economy (ie. the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product">GDP</a>) or market (ever hear someone lament the Dow's shrinkage?). The pie is not easily definable, but how we think about the pie (<em>see below</em> Economies of Scale: oranges) affects what it is.</div><br /><div>There is a feeling among many that we must <span style="font-weight: bold;">increase </span>the pie. To some people this means increasing consumer spending. Consumers spend more thereby fueling production, increasing the value of the stock market, etc. All is good.* We must wonder though: as the pie increases, as GDP rises, and the Dow reaches new heights, are people actually becoming more resourceful? Are we finding new ways to maximize the value of our limited natural and human resources or are we merely imagining fictitious values? And just where is the pie anyway?</div><br /><div>Does the pie live somewhere on Wall Street or in Washington, D.C.? If all of the major banks are healthy and AIG survives its self-fulfilling scare and the mega-corporations of the world begin to give and receive money again, will the pie suddenly regrow before our eyes? Or is the pie more personal than that: does the pie represent our individual opportunities for success or our access to food and jobs, credit and health care?</div><br /><div>It is all sort of dizzying to think about, especially for the good old common man, waking in the morning to head to the factory/store/office and picking up a slice of pie on the 1st and 15th. If the Dow is up, says he, my employer is happy and I keep my job, so I am happy. If the Dow is down, woe is me. And he is right! His prospects for financial survival are so heavily intertwined with world markets and macro-financing trends that some remote pie-measurement system (the Dow) does seem important. The pie is centralized. It matters little what <span style="font-weight: bold;">potential</span> the good old common man (or the common family/the common community/the common city) actually has, if he is always waiting on the holders of the pie to make a move. </div><br /><div></div>Although the resources of the world (people, land, oil, minerals) are decentralized, our conception of the pie--and the monetary units that represent its worth--are quite centralized. When we think about the pie, we are more likely to think about the stock market than the physical places that we inhabit and the natural resources surrounding us.<br /><br />Does this matter? you may ask. I would argue yes: mos' definitely. If we invest the bulk of our resources in centralized "markets" with only indirect connections to the particular places in which we live, then we are in effect choosing not to invest in the real, tangible places in which we live, work and play (remember the pseudo-footnote re: opportunity costs). Although many people invest a great deal of money in their home, how many invest locally aside from that? We may "invest" as consumers, but the mindset of the consumer is a passive one. If urban areas are to thrive, investment must come back home.<div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:x-small;">*Unless of course, consumers could be more resourceful in another role. Each decision involves a shadow of the decision unmade, often referred to as </span><a href="http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/OpportunityCost.html"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:x-small;">opportunity cost</span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:x-small;">. Thanks to Kendall Dix (http://kendix.blogspot.com) for this ingenious footnoting method.</span></div>Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-49918590295741112912009-04-14T23:16:00.000-07:002009-04-15T00:34:34.298-07:00Economies of Scale (oranges)We use the term "economies of scale" to extol the benefits of large corporations. If I want to be an orange salesman, it is theoretically better for me to be able to buy and sell many oranges, especially if selling oranges requires special knowledge or equipment. If it costs $10,000 dollars to buy one orange picking machine, then only people that grow and sell lots of oranges will be able to afford it. If you can buy two machines for $18,000 or three for $25,000, etc., then it makes economic sense that the work of orange selling should remain with those who can afford many groves and many machines. Ditto if you pay labor to pick your oranges. If you only have one picker, you've got to treat him well. After all, this guy knows a little something about the orange business and you develop a close relationship with him since he's you're only picker. Throw a few of his friends in there and the costs per picker drop. After all, these pickers may not know as much about the art of orange picking and as their numbers increase they become more expendable. You can pay them less and devote less attention to each. If one drops by the wayside, it is no matter. 1 of 100 is only 1%, 1 of a 1000 only 0.1%.<br /><br />If the economic logic is followed, then oranges should be picked by those with the money for large monotonous groves and expensive machines and access to cheap, <a href="http://www.onelook.com/?w=fungible&ls=a">fungible</a> labor. This helps us all. The pie is bigger. We have specialized orange production, so now oranges are cheaper for everyone and everyone who is not growing oranges can spend their time specializing in some other task. In short, the term "economies of scale" indicates that economies improve when the scale is greater.<br /><br />We must ask ourselves, however, which economies are we measuring? What scale matters?<br /><br />If the foremost goal of humanity is indeed to increase the mythical pie of economy, then by all means, we should scale until we can scale no more. Bigger government, bigger business, bigger banks. The more we take advantage of economies of scale, the better off all will be.<br /><br />But is that true? If the mythical pie is increased does this necessarily mean all are better off? And how do we measure this anyway? By mean income? Median income? Access to health care? Average life span? Happiness surveys?<br /><br />Realities are dependent on the scale in which we conceive them. If we are constantly focused on the so-called greater good of growth growth growth and economies of scale, we lose sight of the economies on the ground level--the economic relationships between and among people. That is what we are after all: people.<br /><br />Try looking at the world from a bird's-eye view. Or a nation or a state, even a city. Can you see much about the way people really live? The waking and the sleeping, the eating and the relieving, the enthusiastic desire to improve life or the apathy of hopelessness. The human being must be our greatest untapped resource. We have spent so long with our heads in the sky or comparing numbers on a spreadsheet that we have lost sight of this. Perhaps it is time to readjust our scale and decide just what it is we mean to measure. Time to break the soil and plant our own orange trees.Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-17963201999405712282009-04-08T09:11:00.000-07:002009-04-08T10:34:19.131-07:00Transit Woes by the BayAlthough the San Francisco City Charter boasts a voter-approved "<a href="http://www.municode.com/Resources/gateway.asp?pid=14130&sid=5">Transit-First Policy</a>" (see Section 8A.115), the future of Muni service is uncertain thanks to a reported $128.9 million deficit. The SFMTA budget for FY09-10 is set to be submitted to the Mayor's Office and the Board of Supervisors on May 1, yet the first public hearing to air the proposed deficit-solutions occurred yesterday at City Hall. The proposed solutions include lay-offs of Muni workers, increased fares, parking meter increases, and (you guessed it) service reductions. For more detailed descriptions of the proposals, go <a href="http://www.sfmta.com/cms/rbudget2010/budgindx2010.htm">here</a>.<br /><br />Finding a solution to Muni's problems is no easy task. Some believe the <a href="http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=6787">Mayor is to blame</a>. Others point to an increase in <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/18/BA4H16IE1C.DTL">work orders</a> from other city agencies. Commenters at yesterday's hearing railed against Muni's "bloated management" and "overpaid staff" (to much applause from the crowd), called for stricter fare enforcement, and generally protested the proposed service cuts. Although the MTA appears to be viewing this problem as a pure numbers game, the effect of reduced public transportation services will have an impact on the lives of San Franciscans that is hard to quantify.<br /><br />As one who is relatively new to the SFMTA's budget problems, I cannot speak to the allegations of mismanagement or overpayment of Muni workers. I do believe, however, that SFMTA's budget problems cannot be fixed with the current myopic proposals to reduce service while simultaneously increasing fares. If the City of San Francisco is serious about its dedication to public transit, then it's time the City took action. The biggest threat to Muni is not the money that is lost by not charging 50c for transfers, but the hordes of drivers in private automobiles that crowd the city streets (especially during rush hour) and don't use Muni. At this point though, it's hard to place all the blame on the drivers. The streets are congested, the buses move slowly, and many crosstown trips require at least one transfer in addition to a good hour of travel time. Rather than just looking for ways to make the budget in 2010, Muni needs someone with the guts to look to 2020 or 2030, to seriously consider the mechanisms for increasing Muni ridership and discouraging automobile usage. Parking meter increases may be a step in the right direction, but a more focused tax on vehicle miles traveled in the City would be better. Ultimately, the SFMTA should focus on making Muni more attractive to potential riders. They could start with proposals to speed up service and make Muni a more realistic option for trips that do not neatly fit along a north/south or east/west route. More than money, the SFMTA needs strong leaders and a steady vision for the future that is not disrupted each time there is a momentary budget crisis.Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-10054479937364320632009-03-29T22:07:00.000-07:002009-03-29T22:19:07.754-07:00Better Streets Planthe <strong><a href="http://www.sfbetterstreets.org/"><span style="color:#009900;">draft plan</span></a></strong> for San Francisco's pedestrian environment.Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6455891265085217656.post-74432720435991631122009-03-29T19:21:00.000-07:002009-03-29T22:23:26.638-07:00Skyscraper + affordable housing at First and Folsom: the problem with opacity?<p><span style="font-family:georgia;">The </span><a href="http://www.sfgov.org/site/sfra_index.asp"><span style="font-family:georgia;color:#009900;"><strong>San Francisco Redevelopment Agency</strong></span></a><span style="font-family:georgia;"> requested proposals for the rights to "design and develop a high-density residental project with ground-floor retail" at First and Folsom, but the three bids on the table are being considered confidentially. (<a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/29/BAHC16NIED.DTL"><span style="color:#009900;">SFGate</span></a>). Should a decision with this much impact on the South of Market landscape be made behind closed doors?</span></p><span style="font-family:georgia;">(( a copy of the</span> Redevelopment Agency's 10.22.2008 Request for Proposals to develop the site may be found <a href="http://sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/sfra/B8_Document_081015_4web.pdf"><span style="color:#009900;"><strong>here</strong></span></a><strong> </strong>))Marchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12886501548906530602noreply@blogger.com0