My recent trip home gave me a chance to evaluate (again) the state of our cities. It's always interesting because cities provide a similar function across the country, yet develop extremely differently from place to place. I use to compare cities by countries because the realm of development seemed to be more influenced on a country by country standard. Historical ramifications and their thoughts about the free market seemed to have the most influence. Yet I've discovered that there is a cultural/social fabric entangled deeply within all USA cities.

Let me step back a bit.

I view all current city development as a renaissance than a new creation (even working in the suburbs). All new development patterns can be directly linked to historical patterns. In the United States, cities are defined by the capitalistic nature of the country. Uses were closely linked, if not mixed. Neighborhoods tie directly into the adjacent commercial areas. Roads right of ways were defined by automobiles, pedestrians, public spaces, semi-public spaces, and private spaces. In my mind, this created functional cities that formed in the industrial eras on the eastern coast and Midwest. While functional, a sense of place was created at the street level. Specific duties are assigned to the urban form, and those duties play out within day to day development of the cities.

Indianapolis is one of those cities. Sure, I grew up with the (extremely) urban Chicago at my backdoor; and watching industrial cities like Detroit, Cincinnati, and St. Louis go through extreme, post-industrial transitions. But in a sense, Indianapolis is the (may I say) reject of the Great Lakes. It's seen as secondary every city in the Great Lake area. The city itself doesn't have a profound industrial base, and never experienced a huge expansion (or collapse). The state itself is a foundation of good 'ol boys Democrats, but considered a red state. Our background is mainly humble protestant upbringing. We don't drink on Sunday's and holidays; and follow rules like you wouldn't believe.

The City of Indianapolis earned it's mid-1900's nickname of Naptown.

So imagine my surprise when downtown Indianapolis started showing up on the (ever more famous) list of great downtown's. Ranking above the notorious 'awesome' cities of Portland, Boulder, Austin, etc.

While 'we' (Hoosiers) may have our "boring" ideals of the past, we've learned lessons throughout and have created a steady rise in our sense of understanding - that translates directly to a sense of place. Things are done for a reason; rules are considered necessary; and  the general good is always evaluated. Thus creating an urban environment that not only benefits everyone, but gives a clear direction of where the culture is going.

This became evermore apparent during Christmas when I saw preparations for the Super Bowl. Many cities host the Super Bowl, yet Indianapolis sees it as a huge win for their downtown. Which is strange because Indianapolis hosts lots of major events; and they always throw a good party. However they use any event to leverage themselves as a city. Downtown Indianapolis has a defined vision shared by everyone, and this common understanding is usually upheld by everyone. It's not fake. It's not perfect. But it has an amazing sense of understanding that cannot be replicated.

Everything I described in the last paragraph is the complete opposite of Southern Louisiana, except the last sentence.

So how can two entirely different places come to the same conclusion? The State of Louisiana doesn't have a common centralized approach, and cities battle other cities; while regions battle other regions. The City of New Orleans itself has no historical consistency in it's development. There are no common understanding of base rules for development patterns, and that ideal can be seen across southern Louisiana. In fact, most cities in southern Louisiana lack that sense of place you can find in New York, Chicago, or numerous small towns.

Two completely different functional cities arrive at the same conclusion: which is the physical development reflects directly to the local culture. New Orleans has engraved their-selves in their social base. You want to know and interact with people. It's ingrained in their understanding of life. The development of the city directly relates to this notion. Buildings are compact, street right of ways are narrow, and there are few private spaces. Alleys are none existent, replaced with common areas in the rear. Buildings are set close to the street, with little to no transition to the front door. This is true in the French, English, and Spanish portion of the cities.

I could go more into the interconnections... but I'd rather leave it there. I think it best explains the way city development can vary region by region.

Houston: Renewal

I was in Houston this weekend and talked to a few Planners that worked for the City. Houston gets this rep (usually bad) because it doesn’t have zoning. That combined with the fact it gets wrapped up with the Texan stereotype, people are usually fairly negative concerning it’s stance in the American urban city. The city itself just barley missed becoming the third largest city in the USA (surpassing Chicago), yet the city’s landmass is three times as large as Chicago and density a third that of Chicago. So upon arrival in Houston I feel like I’m visiting Indianapolis; and that’s an understatement. Indianapolis feels more urban in many more ways than Houston . Yet at the same time, Houston has made some steady steps forward. Even given the fact that it has no zoning.

First, it’s emerged as a multi-cultural city. Forty percent of the residents identify themselves at Latino; and only half the population is white. Thus Spanish is widely spoken throughout the region. In addition their mayor is not only a female, but an openly gay female. Both statistics can catch a non Houstonian off guard if they want to slip Houston into the typical Texan stereotype. The City can be portrayed as conservative, especially with the influx of oil and gas. Yet the population is fairly young and mobile, and have some mindsets that can counter the typical conservative nature of our country. Thus, there are pushes to urbanize Houston.

Even in the last few years downtown is finally moving away from ‘just’ the Central Business District. Many of the adjacent urban neighborhoods have seen an influx of young professionals in the last few years, and the trend is finally working its way into downtown. This coincides with the Light Rail system as it expands from the one line to many.

But judging a book by the cover isn't exactly the best way to occupy yourself for hours. Starting with downtown. It’s well kept, has a strong business center, light rail, shopping, bars, restaurants, and entertainment venues. The key uses are there, but it is still falling short in streetlife and after hours activity. Take for instance the indoor/outdoor mall across the street from the hotel. The mall is obviously a new build, but I felt like I was walking through a downtown in the 1970’s after everything had closed up shop. The few stores in existence were typical urban stores. The rest was vacant - with a slight music track playing off in the distance. It was somewhat surreal. But it kind of fit in with the 1970 building style Macy’s across the street, which is probably the only downtown department store within a five hundred mile radius. While the essence of the downtown department store died in the 1990's, it's reemerging. Macy’s is (hopefully) holding on to Houston’s when it can sustain the downtown department store (hopefully soon). Further up the street (on the rail line) is a cluster of after hour restaurant and bars. It begins to establish an after hour vibe, and (somewhere) there has to be residential around. It has easy access to the sport venues, and students from Rice can easily come up from campus. Mind you, this not even close to what a city the size of Houston needs (or sustain a downtown residential population). But it’s there nonetheless. 

Then for the first time I ventured on the light rail's Rail Line down to the Medical District and Rice University. In addition to the Red Line, they are currently constructing several rail lines, but this rail line is the only link thus far. It goes from downtown to the baseball stadium, hospital district, university, and further south to housing. Seems to capture a good population. Plus it's functionally nice. We got off at Rice University and walked to their commercial area for lunch. Not bad for two bucks.

The inner-city neighborhoods themselves are the defining moment of Houston. Usually the neighborhoods are the first to revitalize - followed by the central business district. I of course spend my time to the west inside the Heights area and Montrose. Like a lot of cities, the gay neighborhood was the first to take hold; and the rest of the young professionals followed. The infrastructure itself isn't there (nothing compared to Dallas), but the stores, restaurants, and bars are all present. There is definitely a huge influx of young professional. Which is good for a city like Houston, because it is attracting high paying jobs (mostly related to gas).

Houston has a lot going for itself. But it needs to step up its game to attract the quality of life young people want now-a-days.

Baton Rouge Loop Project stays alive http://bit.ly/uQGamZ

"Building a bypass is so 1970's". - Someone from Urban Land Institute

I totally pulled that quote from the Indianapolis Star back in 2005 when the Governor put plans to build an outer loop around Indianapolis. That idea was yanked almost immediately when an outcry from the community forced it off the table.

Then I moved here (Baton Rouge) and the bypass idea was proposed. There was no outcry. In fact, the only outcry came years later from adjacent Parish's (as noted from the article). It was odd. Planners supported the loop; transit advocates supported the loop; and even the Downtown Development District made a proclamation supporting the loop. My naive little planner mind couldn't take it.

Baton Rouge obviously needs regional traffic solutions. There are only four ways to get in/out of the Parish. One blockage on the Interstate and the entire city becomes clogged. But (like the quote says) bypasses are a thing of the past. They are relatively unhelpful with traffic congestion (billions dollars, only to be used when there's an accident?). Yet, they encourage development outside city limits, and discourage downtown inner city development. Which is why bypasses haven't been built around the county in the last decade.

So being the crazy liberal I am, I opt for the more fiscally conservative option. Fix what we have. First, do what they do in Texas. Upgrade Airline Highway and Florida Boulevard to limited access. The expense will be much less than building a new highway. Some right-of-way will need to be acquired; and some creative site design will be needed. But still cheaper, and it will help existing businesses along those routes.

In addition, upgrading those highways would actually benefit Baton Rouge. A loop, by nature, hurts the existing city's infrastructure. We already have infrastructure we can't maintain. Once built, development will flock to the 'new' infrastructure, draining even more resources from the City. Why not funnel that money into existing roads that need upgrading? Like, for instance, Airline Highway and Florida Boulevard.

Or we could continue to support people living outside the city. But that doesn't seem like good fiscal policy. 

| News | The Advocate — Baton Rouge, LA

| Downtown BREC Park| The Advocate — Baton Rouge, LA:

I like the idea of beginning an urban greenway in Baton Rouge (a good case study on urban trails), but sometimes I wish priorities were higher for other projects.

The LSU Lakes and City Park. This area has the heaviest concentration of ped/bike recreation in the city. The use of this area is almost mind boggling. Yet nothing has been done to help this area. The "trail" is a mix of concrete, pavement, dirt, and road. Sometimes the path is three feet, six feet, or nothing at all. The signage dedicates the path to bikes sometimes, pedestrians sometimes, sometimes both, and sometimes neither. All while the pedestrian crossings are poorly marked, and never utilized correctly by motorist. Making this area incredibly dangerous.

The Mississippi River Levee Trail. This is the most modern and up kept "trail" in Baton Rouge. The trail itself isn't as heavily used as the "Lakes" trail, but it's a huge asset that is now being expanded to the Parish border. Yet it's hidden and has very little linkages throughout the city. (Heck, it only has two downtown).

So first of all, I'm very weary of the "interstate park". Very few successful examples can be found nationwide. Those few examples usually work because of density. There are far more examples of communities just getting rid of the freeway all together. Lafayette has been planning the urban portion of I-49 for years... and one can argue which is better: bypassing a city, or passing through. But at the end of the day, passing though gives a lot of complications. Creating a park underneath just doesn't 'fix' the overall problem.

Second, is the lack of vision the City of Baton Rouge possesses. In this case it isn't a lack of vision. BREC has identified a corridor plan for the trail system, which is Parish-wide. But with no overall funding plan, it is a piecemeal approach. For example, the parks department identifies the Wards Creek trail as a catalyst project. Yet it is short, has very little adjacent residential, and no short term plans to link the trail to the overall system (and hardly a realistic long term plan). Now they are proposing the downtown trail, which will have adjacent access to residential, but no serious linkages to the overall system (City Park and the river). It's not that I don't trust Baton Rouge... but I've seen projects get dropped time and time again (I've only been here five years). Thus we are left with a lot of 'pieces' to a lot of 'systems'. Given this history, the City needs to focus on important aspects. Right now they are just building links for stakeholders. That is fine for the near future... but if the successful links don't get built, people will view the trail plan as a fail. Again.

At the end of the day, the City needs to seriously invest in entire pedestrian and bike infrastructure. Until then I find it hard to get excited about new projects.


UPDATE - 11/9/2011 (5:00 pm)
http://www.1012corridor.com/archives/1012-corridor-weekly/latest/
In other news, the Mississippi River Trail is slowly coming together.

Megabus to launch express bus service in Atlanta | ajc.com

Megabus to launch express bus service in Atlanta | ajc.com:

'via Blog this'

MegaBus is expanding. Awesome. I haven't ridden MegaBus (even in Europe), but friends on the East Coast and Chicago love the option.

One has to assume that there is a nationwide build-out plan. So either New Orleans itself will become a hub... or (like all other transportation carriers) they will base their hub in Houston (or Dallas). Which is sad.

The lack of a central hub creates a struggle for the whole state. New Orleans lost all of its flight hubs; New Orleans Amtrak trains aren't priority; and Louisiana has built so many interstates just to bypass New Orleans, that we can't keep maintenance.

Now the private sector is choosing Texas and Georgia over New Orleans. Airlines have left; MegaBus has put us on hold; and the Greyhound Express service will seemingly hub in Texas and Atlanta as well.

Our nations infrastructure has natural hubs, and New Orleans is one of those hubs. But unfortunately we live in a bubble and our own state policy doesn't support this hub. We have an internal fight between Baton Rouge and New Orleans. Baton Rouge tries to 'steal' this from New Orleans every chance it gets. We argue about relocating the New Orleans airport closer to Baton Rouge; we built Interstate 12 to completely bypass New Orleans; and we support regional rail through Baton Rouge (even though it involves several new basin crossings and has no realistic connection past Baton Rouge). All of these things makes infrastructure investment more expensive. Thus, nothing gets done.

I'm a Baton Rouge citizen. I support Baton Rouge. Which is exactly why I support New Orleans. Ever since 1718, water, air, and land transportation have centered in New Orleans. Trying to change that will only hurt Southern Louisiana. If we strengthen New Orleans as our regional city, we all benefit. Transportation hubs are one of the main factors this state needs to reevaluate.

Government Street Nightlife

When I moved to Baton Rouge (five years ago) the Government Street Overlay District was adopted. I didn't know much about Mid City, but the ordinance was obviously written to encourage street life. You know. Create some activity on a road that is relatively a highway.

Fast forward five years after I decided to buy a place along Government Street, and now a new bar (Radio Bar of course) opens a mile down the road. Even though I frequently walk to Calandos and Albertsons (a quarter mile), I now transverse the street even further. Cause, I mean, even in Baton Rouge people will consider walking if alcohol is involved. (Notice I said consider… there’s still a long way to go).

 

A year ago Government Street appeared dead on any given evening. While the street is home to several restaurant and bars, you can't really tell from the street. They function as destinations, and if you don’t know about nightlife, you weren't going to find out from the street. Phil Brady’s has a sign, but the entrance is in the back. Superior Grill’s patio gives no indication of life. Heck, La Caretta’s decided to move their entrance from the front, to the back. So now they have an awesome patio in the back… but from the street, the restaurant looks closed.

Now there has been a resurgence of nightlife! OK, that’s a little overstated, the street gives a much different feeling at night. Bohemia always has something going on. The tattoo shops actually bring life to the street. 

Bohemia, and even the tattoo shop, have done a great job keeping the street active at night.

Now a new bar – a year in the making – is opening. A turning point in Government Street nightlife? Finally a chic, trendy bar; slightly high drink prices; yet hipster enough to keep it low key. 

Radio Bar could be the turning point.

Last night I noticed... the fence surrounding the soon-to-be patio seems more permanent than it did before. Maybe I'm just freaking out. I just assumed they would have a patio… not a fortress. Is the ABC requiring an extremely obnoxious fence? Did the ABC board require the windows to be frosted? I don’t know. But it actually ruined my night. Finally changes taking place… street life reemergence along Government Street. One tiny shred of hope. All ripped away (with a glass of Jack and Diet in hand). Why are people hell bent on keeping the businesses shielded from the street. Why?

Well the obvious answer is Government Street is a major, high speed, state road. It’s noisy. Not the most desirable for walking, dining, and enjoying. But hiding a business from the street doesn’t seem to be the most ideal business plan. I realize a lot of Louisiana business relies on word of mouth. But at the same time, something has to attract people.  Even Walmart makes it self look presentable from the street. Heck, Government Street may be loud and unsafe on the sidewalk; but ten feet off the sidewalk is a totally different world. Several places have patios in front – Rotolos, Bistro Byronz, even Sonic, Raising Canes, and Popeye’s. But we need even more attractive (and very active) places to face the street. Something like Radio Bar could have provided.


I’ll put a lot of blame on the City. I mean, they have shown no desire (past FutureBR) to assist the businesses along the popular corridor. The only corridor in town that houses all the art galleries, and is heavily populated (about 22,000 people within a radius). Foster Street and Acadian Thruway got pedestrian push buttons. Which is awesome. But otherwise the road is crumbling; conditions are incredibly unsafe for pedestrians, bikes, and cars; and it’s just ugly. 

But just a little streetlife along Government would turn the place overnight. It might not be the best pedestrian atmosphere. But the businesses are there. The people are there. They just have to work together. Like I've said before. A 'place' isn't a place because of looks. A place is a place because of what it is, and who is there. 

Is LSU a commuter school?

I often accuse Baton Rouge of being a bad college town. My accusation comes down to  my consideration of LSU as a commuter campus, and people often scoff at this idea. My graduate thesis included the demographic study of college towns and their makeup. Specifically, I was looking at the commercial areas around the college campus, but commercial makeup is directly related to the demographics supporting the market. So much of my research pertained to the demographics of a campus area, as much as the commercial area itself. So I consider myself well read on the subject.

*Disclaimer 1: This analysis is purely a personal project and not professional... so I don't have access to any sort of design software. Keep that in mind with the sketches.
*Disclaimer 2: This analysis by no way undermines the integrity of the LSU Football team.

Quick analysis of the campus area showing the surrounding residential and commercial areas, with access to  the city. The school itself is secluded within the transportation network, and has limited connectivity to the rest of the city. (We all know this because we go to football games).

Let’s step back, because my judgment of the LSU campus is purely observational at this point. Here's why. The campus itself is landlocked, with the lakes to the east and the river to the west. That leaves the North and South Gates for housing and commercial development, which is where the typical college town falls apart. The North Gates are the older urban neighborhoods, and should be extremely dense. Surrounding student housing should support a thriving, bohemia commercial district. Campuses across the country (both the same size or smaller) support an amazing array of services from bookstores, coffee shops, bars, artistic establishments, etc.  While the North Gates does indeed have some of these , the number isn’t anything near what would be expected. My alma mater of half the size had a more thriving district. Obviously my first assumption is lack of density. There’s a small neighborhood to the east, and several apartment complexes (er, condos) adjacent as well. But these neighborhoods lack any sort of pedestrian appeal, especially the apartment complexes, which are mostly gated and lack sidewalk access. That’s not saying this area does not support the North Gates, because it obviously does. But the area isn’t conducive to a walkable urban area.

Looking quickly on how the campus area relates to the transportation system, along with the cluster of housing and commercial areas.

A closer look at the North Gate area shows the defined edges of the campus, along with  the relationship between the commercial areas and housing. (Note that I tried to stick with APA's LBCS, but used used orange as high density housing, with yellow as single family).

So it has to boil down to demographics. Below is a map of the city showing 2010 census districts with a median ages below 32. (Again, a rough analysis for my purpose of the 'study').

I first looked at the entire city as it related to median age. The red census tracks have median ages under 26; the blue census tracts have a median age between 26 and 30; and the orange census tracks have a median age between 30 and 32.

Breaking down the Census Tracks north of LSU, the median age only stays at 32 or below in Census Tracks 24 and Census Tracks 25; and looking even more deep, ages are only at 30 below Roosevelt Street. The most peculiar thing about the area, is how student population transitions so quickly. Student housing practically disappears a block or two from the campus gates.Of which, this population is only 2,657.

Census Tracts 24 and 25. The dark green area have median ages 30 and above.

At the South Gates, the border itself is buffered by surface parking lots. So already the campus and the South Gates are physically separated, providing an almost quarter mile walk from the nearest academic building to the gates themselves. However, once outside campus there is an abundance of student housing, yet the area feels suburban in nature: sidewalks are more or less present, but the environment is brutal and all commercial areas are strip shopping centers with ample parking. The area just doesn't 'feel' walkable, thus making it more car oriented.

Looking quickly how the area south of campus interacts with the transportation system, along with commercial centers. 

A closer look at the south gates shows the areas of campus, and how it  separates itself  from the commercial centers and residential area. Take note that I used orange for high density housing, similar to the North Gate.

The odd thing is, this area is heavily populated with median ages of less than 30 well south of LSU. Nicholas Drive seems to be the center point of this lower median age, extending down five miles to Gardere Lane. The student housing quickly transition east of Burbank, and southwest of Brightside Lane/Ben Hur Road. To coincide, this area is full of student oriented businesses. But everything is spread out, and has no uniformity.

A break down of the South Gate area. The dark green has a median age of 30 and above. Everything else is below. One interesting thing to note are university adjacent neighborhoods that are obviously not student housing. Instead these area's probably cater to faculty and employees. A common thing found around all university campuses.

The area itself if fairly dense. Although it's hard to work up the density per square mile with the current census, a map showing each block's density tells a good story. The area with residents of a thirty of less median age is fairly dense. Yet, this area is grid-less with a brutal mile walk to the edge of campus. So even with the great bus system, most students probably own cars (these stats aren't available for the 2010 census yet). In total 17,192 people live in the census blocks that have a median age of 30 or below. 

Looking at pure population numbers.

Then there is on-campus housing. These numbers are much easier to come by given the university tracks these statistics. So last year 5,741 students lived on campus. The two census tracts covering this area include the campus, along with a few neighborhoods. For the most part, the entire area has a median age below 30, with the exception of three blocks. This total (median age below 30) comes to 7,505.

This area is mostly on campus housing. So the median age is well below thirty. Take note the two areas that have higher numbers, which are off campus neighborhoods that are more employee housing. In addition, part of the North Gates are included in these Census Tracts. 

I know this is all extremely rough. But the total number of people living in census blocks with a median age of 30 or less is 41,889. Which is well over the 26,000 lSU enrollement. So it can be easily assumed that a good majority of students live near the North Gates, South Gates, or on campus. The issue with LSU are the students that live south of campus, the car oriented portion of campus. These students are either commuting by car or bus to campus. The number of (presumed) students living in the North Gate area is about one-third of LSU's enrollment. This is a hard number to sustain services needed for a dense, college-oriented neighborhood. However, it's completely possible. Not only is it possible, it's important for LSU to strive for a more urban, walkable campus. Colleges across the country are discovering that this generation of students will select a university for Quality of Life purposes; and students want a walkable campus with choices (not just a good football team). So here are my suggestions for LSU.

• Work with the city to upkeep neighborhoods around campus. It's rediculous that most neighborhoods don't even have sidewalks around a university.
• The University should not expand their campus footprint. They already have a sprawling campus, mainly because of all the surface parking. Instead, they should strive for a fifteen minute walk anywhere on campus. Much larger universities have accomplished this, so LSU should also.
• Build up the North Gates. This area is right across the street from most the academic buildings. It should be thriving. 
• Work the South Gates so it's livable. It will never be an 'urban mecca'. But there has to be some mitigation because the majority of students live in this area. At the least, make the area feel cohesive.
• Finally. The lakes! The most popular pedestrian and bike place in the city... yet the area is horrible at best. Four foot sidewalks? Barley noticeable crosswalks? Common. It's, well, just horrible.

North Gates. Already has a good amount of retail, and location right off campus. Most the area has good streetside appeal, pedestrian safety, and good access. 

North Gates. Streetscapes don't have to be "pretty" to be successful. The activity level and location of the North Gates make the area functional.

North Gates. Buuuuut, the appeal doesn't last very long. While some of the parking lots of started to develop, there's a lot of parking left. Sadly the North Gates reflect LSU's dedication to parking and not people.

Main Campus. The main campus does not lack in design. Bell Tower. Parade Grounds. The Quad. Everything to make it accessible, yet collegiate.

Main Campus. The older academic buildings surround the Parade Grounds, with the remaining in the Quad.

Main Campus. The trees are what makes the campus. Especially the lining along Highland Road.

The best thing about confusion

On my way back from lunch I had to cross one the many Airline Highway intersections in Ascension Parish. These intersecting roads are only two lane. Meaning people turning right cannot do so on red because they have to wait for people going straight. People going straight have to wait for left hand turners to yield oncoming traffic. Thus a standstill.

I hail from the German-Midwest. I like rules. I was taught that society functions very efficiently when rule following takes place. This is why I hate traffic in Louisiana. No one likes the rules; they don’t follow the rules; and the rules are rarely enforced. This leaves traffic efficiency extremely poor. Well actually non-existent. Merging sucks. Passing lanes sucks. Left turns sucks. Heck, why does Louisiana even have the interstate highways. Rule following is a necessity. High speeds require trust in the other driver. Signalization, consistency, and awareness become a matter of death. Not a matter of rule following.

Honestly, the best traffic situation is the French Quarter. Every intersection functions in its own messed up confusion. Is a car running the stop sign? Are there pedestrians entering the crosswalk? Who has the right of way? Why can’t they replace the street name signs? Has anyone ever considered bending the stop sign back since the hurricane? All the sudden this mass of confusion makes sense. It forces you to pay attention. While you may have the right of way, you can never be too sure that everyone knows. It may take longer to go a mile or two, but everyone feels safer.

So this is also why I love the intersections at Airline Highway in Ascension Parish. If everyone followed the rules, no one would get across. But with strategic maneuvers, we can all transverse the intersection in the short signal duration.

These systems go in the face of my German roots.

But even Europe has begun to recognize why this pattern works. England began removing wayfinding and signage in their central cities, thinking that more confusion for the driver requires attention. A simple concept that no driver wants to face. Yet as a relocatee to Louisiana, I think this concept would function extremely well.  So my idea? Remove all interstate highway, signage, signalization, road lines, etc. I bet our insurance rates drop overnight. (Which, by the way, are coincidently three times higher than my Germany-Midwestern Indiana rates). 

CATS protests LSU competitor | Home | The Advocate — Baton Rouge, LA

CATS protests LSU competitor | Home | The Advocate — Baton Rouge, LA:

I've been one to support CATS... but this doesn't make any sense. CATS went through the bidding process with LSU and lost. So they are now competing with Tiger Trails. Maybe I don't understand how the Federal Transit Administration regulates transit. But still. This lawsuit doesn't seem right. CATS doesn't have enough funding to get through the year. How would they have provided a free route from LSU to downtown? Even if they could have added a route at regular fare, why haven't they done so? I figured it was because of funding limitations. This lawsuit makes me think they aren't providing these links because of a lack or foresight.

I think CATS should learn from this experience and decide to run more evening routs around entertainment (aka. until 3am). Maybe one from Mid City to downtown? Maybe Mid City to Campus? North BR to downtown? Southern routes? If funding is a problem, why can't they approach businesses in these areas (like they did downtown) and see what they can work out? Many smaller cities in which I have lived run routes similar because bars will subsidize the service.

Just sayin'.

Streetlife Quandary

 The predicament of that thing called streetlife. Having people on the street makes a place lively, safe, and overall fun. Yet in the automotive world we would rather enjoy the sustaining 68 degrees in our car; or the perceived short walk to the store, if the parking lot is in the front of the building. This, in turn, kills streetlife and makes a 'place' dead.

It reminds me of the commercial area near my college campus. While only two blocks long I had a place to get groceries, toiletries, alcohol, fiveish bars, two coffee shops, and four restaurants. This in turn brought people out, and I could sustain myself for the week. At the same time it felt safe. So safe in fact that during my Grad School there were five shooting deaths on campus. This was s tragedy for such a small city and university. So much so that the police stepped up patrols, undercut underage drinking, and began raiding all kinds of house parties. In fact, there were several reports of attempted armed robbery to pedestrians. It all sounds scary. But the student bodies response? Police Yourselves! Yes, a mockery to the law enforcement, but at the same time nightlife almost increased. With the eradication of frat houses and house parties, more people would come to the Village for the night. This included several attempts by the coffee shops to host all age events (because bars can’t allow entrance to under 21). So while crime was seemingly on the rise, the streetlife only got better.

Now the Munice “strip” isn’t attractive. It’s actually downright ugly. The buildings are plain and simple (if not falling apart). Absolutely no public investment to the streetscape, unless you count the banner that Ball State placed where the strip meets the campus. But two of the ugliest parking lots sat in this area. So, I don’t think it counted.

Why was the streetlife so great? While people are so fixated on looks, that’s not what eventually puts people on the street. It’s substance. That’s why all the Asian markets are full; and Time Square functions. I agree that the public needs to invest in the infrastructure. But people on the road amplifies more people to the road. It’s not the look. It’s not crime. It’s the people.

Take Government Street in Baton Rouge. Residence says they love the area and want it to survive. Yet complain that crime is too high and the City hasn’t invested in sidewalks, roads, signals, etc. While I agree with all of that, those are the minor problems. The biggest problem is that people refuse to partake. Within a half mile of me are numerous supermarkets, drugstores, restaurants, bars, schools, a gym, and coffee shop. My walk score is an urban Mecca. What’s it missing? The people!

Streetsblog Capitol Hill » Report: Get Out of the Highway-Obsessed Eisenhower Era

Streetsblog Capitol Hill » Report: Get Out of the Highway-Obsessed Eisenhower Era

The Federal tax to spend ratio for highways has always been disproportional. So there needs to be a solutions, especially since discretionary funding is being cut. However, if the Federal government gets out of highway spending, politicians on both sides of the isle will cry foul. Federal funding has always been critical for our nation's highway infrastructure.

The solutions suggested in the report are fair. Yet will never fly in the political atmosphere. It's amazing how many people don't realize their gas tax comes no where near to paying for the road infrastructure (as noted in the report). The highways system is way more costly than most people realize.

The sad thing is even if the highway problem got solved, other forms of transportation aren't anywhere near to a solution. The populous wouldn't support any tax raise for highways, let alone transit.

And our infrastructure crumbles, traffic becomes worse, and we become more and more dependent on one form of transportation. 

Letter: We pay for our suburban lifestyle | Opinion | The Advocate — Baton Rouge, LA

Letter: We pay for our suburban lifestyle | Opinion | The Advocate — Baton Rouge, LA

Love the comments pertaining to the dangers of urban Baton Rouge. While I don't live within the exact areas being discussed (Baton Rouge does have some of the higher murder rates within this country)... I do live within a mile of these areas, and my street isn't short of street solicitors and the occasional gun shot. Yet, I walk daily. In fact, the only time I use my car is for my commute to work. Imagine. Five years later, I'm still alive.

I also love the fact that it is totally incomprehensible for people of all ages to walk for groceries, etc.... when it was the only form of transportation less than 75 years ago. Imagine what they did thousands of years before the car?!? Imagine the 8 million people in New York today; and the countless other urban cities (including our very own New Orleans). How are we not loosing millions of people a day to shootings, heat stroke, and overall depression because of people's urban lifestyle.

I'm OK with people saying that they would rather live in the suburbs. But it's a lifestyle choice. It has nothing to do with safety. So don't rationalize my tax dollars being used to keep yourself safe.

Why America’s Young And Restless Will Abandon Cities For Suburbs | Newgeography.com

Why America’s Young And Restless Will Abandon Cities For Suburbs | Newgeography.com

Generational movements are interesting to observe, mainly because it shows trend progressions. While statistics back the trend of young people (20's and 30's) choosing inner-cities, the article shows a movement back to the the suburbs. As an urban dweller and suburban worker, I like this trend. The site specific boom and bust periods of housing markets might be over. Instead of developing one area and leaving the other to decay, maybe the market can finally utilize both. It would finally take the strain off city infrastructure - both urban and rural. This housing crisis somewhat proved this theory. It wasn't an industrial revolution that left the rural areas in poverty; and it wasn't a white flight period that left the urban areas in shambles. This crisis was (more or less) felt across the market.

While I may personally not like the suburban life, many of my millennial friends have opted for this transition. But here's the kicker. They opt for the suburbs under certain conditions. Most are buying into communities that hold the urban qualities of convenience and choice, while making sure it fits in the the suburban gimmicks of 'new', spread out, and car oriented. I contend this development is more expensive. Given they are less dense and need more infrastructure (thus should pay more). But that's another topic for another day.

What I don't get is Louisiana. The national trend of buying in both the suburbs and cities seem to hold statistically true. Yet for none of the same reasons. Most urban areas are still dilapidated with little public improvements; while developers in the suburbs aren't blending housing with convenience.

The reason? Maybe status quo? Or are their still underlying factors? Houses are newer in the suburbs here, but traffic is still horrible, environmental conditions are troublesome, jobs aren't following (companies normally follow the populous), and the suburbs aren't incorporating convenience/choice into developments. Which is not the present day national trend for the suburbs. So one can only conclude our movement is still directly related to crime, poverty, and lack of education. Which Louisiana (Baton Rouge and New Orleans especially) rank at the bottom tier of all those. But since the bedroom communities are OK with the status quo, infrastructure investment isn't happening. Neither are developers taking more concern in future trends. That's OK now... but ten years we will be stuck with development that people don't want (let alone are sustainable with our current infrastructure).

Streetsblog.net » Dallas Demonstrates How Not to Build a Modern Streetcar

Streetsblog.net » Dallas Demonstrates How Not to Build a Modern Streetcar

I like Dallas. But there are many things I don't get about Dallas. One of those things in their transit system. They have a very extensive system, and with exception to this new line, it seems well thought out. The suburban park and rides are cheap and easy; the rail in the inner city services many of the old business districts; and they have developed many TOD's around new stations. Yet on visits to Dallas (including my most recent), no one uses the system. I mean, Generation X and Y'ers will use transit purely on principal. I mean common, Portland built an entire city overnight based on that principal. Now the city is dependent on their system.

Then enter Dallas. The system has been in place almost as long as Portland's and Washington, DC's. yet it obviously hasn't taken hold like those two cities. Mind you, I haven't been there during the work week and I can only hope it's utilized by commuters. But the fact people my age never consider the alternative, I don't have high hopes. Maybe the system is still too new. Maybe the car is just too prevalent. Maybe it's just the south. But even people in New Orleans use the highly inefficient Streetcar just, well, because.

But the only thing that I can think of is the CATS tax initiative and how the Dallas outcome would kill anything transit in Baton Rouge forever. And as always, I fear the worse. People say they would definitely ride a train over a bus. Yet at the end of the day, the underlying concepts are the same. And those underlying cocepts need to be at the forefront from the planning stages, all the way through to execution. Somewhere it was lost in Dallas. And Baton Rouge doesn't have the convenience of a nice highway infrastructure to fall back on like Dallas.

Although I find it a little hypocritical, if not just wrong, I drive two miles to the LSU/City Park Lakes to do my four our five mile jog on the weekends. I mean, partaking in outdoor recreation should not start with a trip in your car. But I find it difficult to run in Mid City. Where there are sidewalk, there are so many curb cuts that a leisurely run into a stressful activity of checking countless curb cuts. In fact, the Capital Heights "project" just rubs salt in the wounds of the pedestrian IMO. It took a two lane road, re-stripped the road to kinda sorta make an attempt to accommodate bikes and pedestrians. Now Mid City has a "walkway" that doubles as illegal street parking, that runs alongside a one-way, high speed road that is one constant curb cut.

Thus I'd rather drive two miles to City Park. This is, in fact, the only place within the neighborhoods that provide a safe environment (because of course, the river trail is a great resource). Yet every time I run the lakes I am sickened. It's a great place. Integrated within in the heart of Baton Rouge, linking the the neighborhoods and downtown (or could) with the University. At any given day, the path is filled with countless people. Well, where there is a path. Because of course the entire east side of the lakes has no path. Instead it is a dangerous winding narrow walkway/road. But then again, I wouldn't call the five foot wide path on the western portion "safe" either. Not only is it narrow, but bikes and pedestrian's are suppose to share the path. Which does not coexist very well at all.

So you think the city AND university would have this entire area in view for a major renovation. (I mean, there are so many grants, both private and public that could accomplish this project). Most major cities in the past five or ten years have established a lengthy bike and pedestrian trail through their city. Usually they have come about through vacated rail lines; but they can also be established along waterways, and even existing sidewalk right of ways. New Orleans is finally getting the LaFitte Grenway (2) stated; Minneapolis has had a long history of a citywide system; Atlanta's PATH system; Buffalo Bayou in Houston; and an interesting urban trail in Indiana called the Cultural Trail, which connects to the 10 mile Monon Trail. 

Instead Baton Rouge has a rough, five foot wide, asphalt trail that links City Park to the University. ALong the trail, mixed signage makes an allusive suggestions that pedestrians aren't even suppose to be there. However, because of the abundance of pedestrians, bikes have basically vacated their trail to use Dalrymple Drive instead. Some of my favorites portions of the trail are the crosswalks. They are marked as "bicycle crossings". Which (by no law I know of) gives the legal right for a car to yield to bicycles. However, does the car have to yield to pedestrians (as the law states). Or are pedestrians not allowed in the bicycle crossings?

How can the City and University have such a jewel, and not even have an update plan on the books?

Inner-City Bus

I was going through my news feed (like I always do) and I saw a posting on MegaBus and how it undermines High Speed Rail. Of course, this statement hits so out of the ballpark for me (as a Louisianian), that the claim is isolated in my head to a far off world. Yet I can relate. When I left the Midwest, MegaBus had just created a hub in Chicago; and my friends on the East Coast have definitely been using MegaBus for a while... not to mention everyone in Europe.

So what's the problem? MegaBus is still a regional transportation option, and if you live on the East Coast with limited financial means, MegaBus is a great alternative to high speed rail if you have the extra time. Maybe from an East Coast perspective, it does take away ridership numbers on the Acela line... But coming from the Midwest MegaBus was just the next step to strengthen regional transportation. We (my generation ) is pulling teeth to get any kind of regional transit because the 40/50/60-somethings don't think efficient (i.e. attracts low income people). MegaBus is changing the perspective... and might I say fast. I left Indiana five years ago with no MegaBus. Now Chicago hubs lines to all the major cities. The more regional transportation options, the more people will diversify their transportation. Not only is the Midwest expanding MegaBus, they are also upgrading their Amtrak lines, including the nation's second high speed rail line to St. Louis. More options beget more options.

Heck, after seeing the article I didn't look for more articles supporting this theory... I did a Google search to see if MegaBus was looking to expand outside the East and Midwest. A Houston/Dallas/New Orleans hub? Please? While I appreciate Greyhound. I'm a 20-somethings (almost thirty) and totally fall for the more mainstream version of MegaBus. I mean, common. They look cool. They have wireless and TV. AND it's so European (company gone American). Brings me back to my backpacking days.

Urban Highways

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0302/Downtown-need-a-makeover-More-cities-are-razing-urban-highways

Just an interesting article concerning urban highways. A lot of cities in the past decade have been rethinking urban highways. Boston with the Big Dig and San Francisco with the Embarcadero Expressway (way back in the 80s I think). Now New Orleans wants to remove I-10 through downtown.

Interstate Highways are not the best way to provoke urban development. People can claim it's for traffic efficiency, but my personal anecdotal experience cries foul on that theory. I've seen many urban boulevards that carry a high traffic volume at high speeds. Yet they still provide road frontage for development that don't divide neighborhoods. Take Spanish Town: one side of  I-110 is one of the most desirable neighborhoods in the city, while on the other side is vacant land, hugely separated by the remaining of the Spanish Town subdivision. The highway concept stopped development abruptly from crossing the interstate.

Yet, the fast moving traffic only cuts a few minutes off a trip because most people aren't traveling a great distance. But when there is an accident, traffic is stuck on the interstate with a lack of connectivity. No alternative choices, except at the interchanges that are a mess because hundreds of cars are exiting in one place.

Sometimes you can get interesting spaces like the Perkins Overpass, or down by the Mississippi River Bridge. But those are far and few between. Even so, they are not good public spaces to say the least. It is only interesting because, well, it's kinda shady. No matter how hard cities have tried, you can't make these places "attractive". It's too loud, harsh, and just creepy. But it does provide wonderful parking areas.

So, in my opinion, the urban highway is a traffic efficiency myth.

Transit... again. Last time. Promise

With all the talk about CATS, the “situation” will either begat a positive outcome or bring a dismal downfall of the transportation situation in East Baton Rouge. I say dismal because the Parish has a poverty rate of 30%, and includes two major universities. Both of these populations find it difficult to own a car (especially in a state with the highest insurance premiums).

You have the negative view of transit, especially in the baby boomer generation. This was the generation of the automobile: the suburbs, drive thru, etc. All while urbanization was seen as a bad thing, as crime was an urban thing. and the suburbs a dream land (with a little white flight thrown in). At least this is what sitcoms and car commercials portrayed in the 70s and 80s

Then the baby-boomer had kids, they bore Seinfeld and Friends. So while transit was (and still is) a necessity to the lower income, the new generations isn't linking transit to crime and poverty like our parents. Because not only are major urban areas reemerging, but their theories of functionality are trickling down to small and midsized cities. I won't bring up Portland, Charlotte, Austin, and Denver, because we obviously aren’t these places (as people will point out). However, there’s a reason why these places prospered over the last decade. Even in the economic downfall. Specific principals were incorporated into the functionality of life… one of which was the amount of choices that people had. This didn’t include just transportation choices, it included shopping, housing, and entertainment choices. So most places are realizing that all these choices are important when it comes to the prosperity of their place (regardless of city, suburban, or rural). If places don’t start providing consumer choices now, they will lose the next generation of people.

Of course we can all cry foul on the “socialistic” side of transit. It’s the only form of transportation that seems to have a huge amount of attention spent on the tax payers’ subsidy. Of course every form of transportation is subsidized in this country. And while studies show that each is form of transportation is incredibly subsided by local, state, and federal taxes, I can’t find a simplistic study which ranks these subsides. Obviously because this isn’t a simplistic study. So at the end of the day, when people cry socialism on transit, I discard the claim  because our entire transportation system is socialized. And until I see comprehensive numbers backing up the fact that the transit system is more socialized than automobile and air travel, the socialist cry isn't warranted.

But at the end of the day we view the road system as “our right”, and the transit industry as “subsidized”, and air flight as an “economic generator”. So when the recent Baton Rouge Comprehensive Land Use Plan emphasizes transit, it’s hard for the masses to buy into.

What’s the solution? Stop focusing on transit only, auto only, rail only, flight only, bike only, walking only plans. Put them all together into one transportation plan. The Capital Region Planning Commission produces these plans. The problem with these plans is they are separate from one-another, and follow the status quo by stating how many people currently use each system, and use historical patterns to project growth. The plans aren't comprehensive, and do not try to change the status quo to avoid the ultimate outcome of over building. In their defense, they are currently keeping up. I mean when it takes five years to add a lane to a three mile interstate stretch (when it would take most place two years top), it’s gonna take a while just to keep to pace with just the interstate system. So how can we ever catch up with the entire system?

So those are the flaws to our transportation system. Our commercial and residential market has been solid compared to the rest of the country. Thus, a lot of Baton Rouge’s development inefficiencies come down to their transportation infrastructure (well after crime, but that’s another post). That’s what makes me envious to my hometown’s IndyConnects plan. The city has spent the last decade upgrading their interstate system. The system was gravely inefficient, and for the most part every stretch of interstate has been upgraded. So the next step is to reduce trips (which is the only other way to improve traffic congestion issues). However, the plan is suggesting that a tax package be brought to the local municipality as an all or nothing deal – sidewalks, roads, busses, and rail. (I do view it as a little hypocritical because they just spent hundreds of millions of federal dollars adding eight and ten lanes to their interstates, but apparently the local municipalities have to fund alternative methods, but whatever).

So if Baton Rouge really wants a transportation system, make it all inclusive. The Green Light Project sales tax passed. So why not include a more comprehensive look so everyone’s interest is included. At first the Green Light Plan angered me because it only included signalization and widening intersections. But now they are using the funding for all transportation projects. The only problem is the plans run on a yearly schedule. Why not broaden the vision, instead of doing it project by project based on numbers?

Transit Socialist?

Not to dwell on a pet peeve of mine, but the roadway system does not pay itself. Believe it or not, but the forty-some cents per gallon we pay in "gas tax" does not pay for our road way system. I only bring this up because of recent comments on newspaper user boards. I mean, people really think they pay for the multi-billion dollar infrastructure they drive on everyday through their gas tax. The system runs on a growing $600 billion dollar deficit. While I'm not well read on the actual cost per trip for transit, I am not going to sit around and classify the automobile infrastructure as "sustainable". At least I'm paying a user fee to use a transit system.

So I really wish people would stop rationalizing an auto-centric transportation system. Because not only is the infrastructure being subsidized extremely, so is the gas harvest. And yet, with all those subsidies, I still have $300/month set aside for gas, maintenance, and insurance. Fortunately that is $200 less in the recent months because I paid my note.

The short story, I don't understand why the government is subsidizing the least efficient form of transportation... well, next to the airline industry. But I'm willing to pay a luxury to be shoved in a small, camped, tube, that may or may not be on time.