Bourbon Street: True Identity Hidden in Itself

Is Bourbon Street authentic? New Orleans scholar makes case in grand, new history

I have always found it interesting that people are quick to judge Bourbon Street at a "tourist" destination, or a poor reflection on the city. When in fact, it's just the opposite. The compromise of Bourbon is all New Orleans - random, interesting, a little dangerous, edgy, sometimes questionable, and yet fun. Every single person who speaks poorly of Bourbon Street, are the same people who find themselves there at 3:00 AM when all the other bars in the city have calmed down and they're still up for more fun. That's the point of the Bourbon, and that's the philosophy of New Orleans and South Louisiana in general. So my thoughts (as an outsider, that have now spent a good fair share "down the bayou"). 

Most people who label Bourbon Street as touristy are locals (city and DDB). Why is it funny, and even more, ironic? This is where almost every single person began their New Orleans nightlife experience. Going to New Orleans is a "trip", even though it's less than an hour away. It's an escape from reality. When people first go to New Orleans it's in the Quarter. They had fun. They broke loose and lived their young lives. However, as in all people, it becomes old and we become more "sophisticated". So we move our lives to more "mature" places. Thus, Bourbon Street (and the Quarter in general) is labeled by the locals as the "tourist area". Yet, it's the people who live there that made the place, then label it as "uncool". Then newcomers (myself) get the idea that it is actually a tourist area because South LA has labeled it as such. Yet it's completely New Orleans. Yes, it's where tourist go... but seriously, would any Tourist Commission - anywhere - look at Bourbon and say "this is how we want people to see or city". No. They create nice places (downtown redevelopment, museums, parks, etc), and then send visitors there. New Orleans on the other hand doesn't mind this representing the city, because the essence of the place is the essence of the city (random, interesting, dangerous, and fun). 

What makes Bourbon even more unique is the street is the country's only entertainment area (that I can think of) that happened organically and has thrived in it's current condition, even with it's, um, questionable activities. That combined with it's fascinating history makes it both underrated and overrated.

Now I just have to read it. 

Open Letter to CATS Concerning their Proposal

http://www.brcats.com/news-resources/Public-Notice-of-CATS-Route-Adjustments

Was a professional transportation planner involved creating these routes, ensuring the numbers jive? This would include projected population usage/density, linking with job centers, university/schools, and entertainment areas? Where can that be found?

CATS Terminal and EKL Hub

• What's the reasoning behind keeping the Earl K. Long hub when the hospital is now closed. Shifting it to the Scotlandville Commercial Area would make it similar to using downtown and the malls as hubs.
• The CATS terminal still has a lot of routes terminating. It just seems like those routes should hub downtown. Especially since LA Swift no longer operates and many routes already pass by the Greyhound Station headed to the downtown hub.

Downtown Shuttle

The DDD could be approached concerning Route 16. Combining a little extra funding from both the DDD and CATS could expand its time period past lunch, and ultimately it's footprint. Most downtowns use their shuttles for special events and not just lunch, since the service is already being funded. Things such as neighborhood integration for Live After Five. Or service for football game days. Other university towns don't use a glamorous $20 shuttle to get people downtown to the university. Instead, they use their shuttles to provide free parking downtown, and circulate all day. It's a win/win for the downtown because they already pay for the shuttle, and it encourages people to tailgate on campus then watch the game downtown. Or visa/versa. Right now the "shuttle" is used as an "attraction" and not a viable transportation source. Lastly, the shuttle could be used for night service into adjacent neighborhoods for a new ridership base. The funding for the shuttle is already subsidized by the DDD. Adding some extra would boost ridership tremendously (ie more federal funding).

Foster Drive and Acadian Thruway

Route 20 seems to be obsolete, yet runs frequently. All riders on this route will have to make a transfer one way or another, as it terminates at the CATS terminal. Combining it with Route 17 would give a citywide connection up and down Acadian. Same thing with Route 23. Combining it with Route 18 would lessen transfers. Right now it terminates at CitiPlace, which doesn't seem like a major destination (as compared to LSU). Thus most people will be transferring. 

Neighborhood Routes

The Plank, Scenic, Government, Perkins, and Highland Routes are great spur routes that not only serve neighborhood populations during the day, but also at night. Government Street and Perkins should be added. These routes would work great for expanded night hours and add younger, new ridership. The Highland Route is somewhat a duplication of the LSU service (I already see a CATS bus following an LSU bus frequently). 

Industry Routes

Given the hospital route connects the medical districts, the hospitals should be approached to assure staff will utilize the shuttle. Many medical districts in the country provide transportation and it's widely successful, thus an opportunity to bring about another source of possible funding assistance. Also, were other commercial, employment centers, and SU/BRCC engaged for possible funding? Many cities and transit agencies gain much of their funding for specific routes through these entities. I realize CATS lost LSU, but there is no reason to engage other large areas. 

Routes Outside the City

Route 50 is mostly outside of the city, is one of the few routes that runs frequently, and only brings the small neighborhood to the hub at the missing EKL. This is also true of Route 59, which seems more centric for people outside the city.

Lastly, while overhauling the system CATS should also be looking at expanding their base (ie younger people needing transportation after 2:00). 

Baton Rouge "Bypass" (aka Loop)

I'm never an advocate for huge infrastructure projects that will only cut travel time by minor increments. Which is the main reason to oppose the currently proposed "Baton Rouge Loop" that kinda sorta just came out of thin air. The actual path wouldn't helps "traffic problems" in the metro area. Instead it would allow people in the suburbs to avoid Baton Rouge at all costs. Actual "travel time" probably won't be reduced... and the millions invested have yet to show any sort of cost/benefit analysis along with reduced travel times. The only rational is avoiding an occasional accident; while in inconvenient, that's A LOT of money. Especially when it is very rare the interstate actually closes. Is it really worth spending a billion dollars to save thirty minutes every so often?

So lets look at the problem purely from an automobile side (pretending other methods of transportation doesn't exist). Baton Rouge already has amazing infrastructure in place to assist in connectivity, and with some upgrades the City can fix a majority of the problems, while keeping the economic ramifications inside the Parish.

I'm still an advocate of upgrading Airline Highway to limited access (and possibly Florida Boulevard). A combination of access roads and interchanges would fix congestion problems. Obviously this process would be expensive, but it would actually help businesses WITHIN the Parish, and not adjacent Parishes. As for the western portion of the "bypass" the infrastructure is already there. Most the right of way is already in place for a connection of I-10 to the Sunshine Bridge; and there have been plans to upgrade Louisiana Highway 1 to limited access (most of the road is close to standards as is). Done. The interchanges at I-10 and the Huey Long Bridge have already been built.

So the recent articles coming out from Ascension and Livingston describing a new highway that links I-10 with I-12 is somewhat interesting. While I would still support the upgrade of Airline Highway, at least this plan utilizes current infrastructure and connects the Sunshine Bridge to I-12.

It just makes sense. People get up in arms when we spend a few million on a bus system... but there is rarely outcry when we want to build millions/billions of new road infrastructure that is duplicating systems already in place.

Diversified Transportation: More then one benefits

http://www.realtor.org/articles/how-millennials-move-the-car-less-trends

"The question is whether, after a downtown fling, millennials will follow in their parents’ footsteps and purchase homes in the suburbs."

I think the article points to the already known fact that people want better access on all levels - cars, trains, bikes, foot. That's been a given trend in the last ten/twenty years. We've been dumping to much of our money into cars for years. (Which comes no where close to the gas tax we pay).

But the quote above is the best indication. I know from my experiences, people don't move from an urban area once they have kids. I know lots of people who say they will, but then they stay. Heck, I've always said if I have a kid we're moving to an urban environment. It diversify's your child... and they aren't left to play alone in that "huge back yard". I know I was not a fan of said backyard, and it was an ordeal to arrange play dates with any of my friends. I wasn't mobile until I had a car, which is very very sheltered. 

Unassuming Signs Ahead

As many of my previous posts have described, the LSU Lakes are a sad representation of our community... and there isn't a plan (to my knowledge, including FutureBR) to deal with the issues resolving access and overall quality. The assets of the lake span beyond the Parish boundaries, and the lakes are the first impression most people get entering LSU. Yet the paths barley resemble a reasonable resource to the people who utilize the lakes. This ranges from path conditions, path size, path marking etc.

Instead of dwelling on the overall picture, I wanted to just nachalatly point out the issues that arise when actually approaching one of these mysterious pedestrian/bike/vehicle crossings along the route.

First, lets review state law (which pretty much mimickes the Baton Rouge Code of Ordinances).

RS 32:212
§212. Pedestrians right-of-way in crosswalks
A. When traffic-control signals are not in place or not in operation, the driver of a vehicle shall stop and yield the right-of-way, to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a crosswalk when the pedestrian is upon the roadway upon which the vehicle is traveling or the roadway onto which the vehicle is turning.

RS 32:212
§197. Riding on roadways and bicycle paths
A. Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway shall ride as near to the right side of the roadway as practicable, exercising due care when passing a standing vehicle or one proceeding in the same direction, except under any of the following circumstances:

RS 32:232
(4) In the event an official traffic-control signal is erected and maintained at a place other than an intersection, the provisions of this Section shall be applicable except as to those provisions which by their nature can have no application. Any stop required shall be made at a sign or marking on the pavement indicating where the stop shall be made, but in the absence of any such sign or marking, the stop shall be made at the signal.

Now, take these into consideration, and study the photo below.

To me, this is the biggest cluster. Ever. What is a person to do.

If one is driving, it's almost impossible to figure out what's going on here. First, this is a regular, signalized intersection. Nothing out of the ordinary... except for all the yield right hand turn lanes. Cars coming from the south, turning east yield to cars coming from the north turning east. In practice, this usually never happens. Southbound turning cars will usually yield to northbound turning cars, completely against any road signage. Making for a huge distraction taking place. Does the northbound turning car proceed, even when the southbound turning car is stopping? Should it wait? Should it break the yield sign and go? It's a predicament, and all their attention is now focused on this "cluster"...

Then notice notice what is within just feet of this cluster yield? A clearly marked crosswalk. Thus cars are to yield (per state law) to pedestrians in the crosswalk. But notice what is signed along the pedestrian walkway - a stop sign. Also per state law, the pedestrian is now suppose to wait for the car and disregard the yield in the crosswalk. Yet, there is no indication to the vehicle that the pedestrian does not have the right-away in this situation. On the contrary, the car is suppose to yield to the left hand turner, and then yield to the pedestrian.

But wait, there is even more a more complex situation taking place. The sign also has a bicycle. No where in state or local law does a biker have right-of-way over a vehicle, especially in a made up "bicycle crosswalk". Yet the sign for the vehicle would make it seem as if this were the case. 

Thus a cluster.

Actually, I would be interested to know the amount of accidents that occur in this area. There are so many conflicting events that so much cautious needs to take place. Thus creating a situation that may be safer at the end of the day. 

This happens all over the place. A favorite portion of the lakes is a very, very small portion when the paths are divided between southbound ped/bike and north bound ped/bike on both sides of the road. 

As you can see, one side of the road has a glorified shoulder, while the other side of the road is a small path. Mind you, this division only happens for a short half mile (maybe). Meaning pedestrian and bikes are suppose to cross in the meaningless "crosswalks", which (as you can see above) has amazing signage and is positioned perfectly... if you want to die. So of course, no one actually abides by the below markings, and they just continue to use the paths as normal.

Portion of the LSU Lake Paths that only allow northbound and southbound pedestrian and bikes on each side of the roadway.

Of course, they divided the pedestrian and bikes because the path widths suck. Bikes and pedestrians are suppose to use this (maybe) five foot walking trial. Which is near already impossible  Don't let this picture fool you... this is the most heavily traveled pedestrian/bike way in the Parish (and an amazing asset to the region). Not only does it provide for a six mile ring, it also provides a connection to LSU from densly populated neighborhoods and the downtown. 

Also notice in the above picture all the conflicting signage and road markings. Two clearly defined pedestrian crosswalks. A flashing caution light. EVERYONE has a stop sign (pedestrians and vehicles). In fact, the pedestrian/bike path has a stop sign for southbound travelers, even though the pavement clearly marks that pedestrian and bikers should not be traveling southbound. Not to mention the fact cars are coming up one of Baton Rouge's only hills, on a turn, in a 40 mph zone. They will only see the pedestrian crosswalk a  few seconds beforehand... but not to worry, the pedestrians are suppose to stop (per state law signage), but the vehicles don't know that because it is clearly marked as a crosswalk (where they suppose to yield to pedestrians and not bikes).

Thus a cluster.

Urban Freeways v. Suburban Bypass

Building the final link along Louisiana's Coast

While I’m obviously a firm supporter of a diversified transportation system and feel like the interstate funding has far superseded anything beyond (what I thought) taxpayer reality; I don’t discount interstate development at all. It is an important backbone to our economy. That’s why I fully support the I-49 extension between Baton Rouge and New Orleans (currently I-90). I mean, this should have been the actual route of I-10 because it includes much of Louisiana’s coastal infrastructure. So I see I-49 as a fairly critical link in Louisiana infrastructure. Thus, Lafayette is dealing with the bypass/inner-city freeway predicament.  Which is better?

On one hand, no one has dealt with an inner city freeway very well. Some places try to make parks under or above, some places try to bury the entire length, and some places just don’t care. There isn’t one place in this country where people “enjoy” living near the interstate. All other transportation infrastructure doesn’t really bother residents. Boulevards, Riverways, rail tracks, elevated transit, bike paths, etc. But the constant hum of the freeway is almost imposable. In addition (when above ground) it creates a nasty divide no matter which neighborhood it’s located in (upper/middle/lower class). There are some examples of minor mitigation, but I don’t know of any citywide efforts.

This has started a national trend of highway removal in urban areas (starting with San Francisco then Boston, and now a slew of other cities). But in our day and age, limited access freeways have to go somewhere. There are some great case studies of surface streets handling mass amounts of traffic, but it would be almost impossible to rid of the “interstate” culture.

So where do you direct the traffic? To a bypass/loop/beltway? Time and time again, this has been proven hugely ineffective for urban development. Yes it moves traffic (just) OK, but it also relocates entire sections of the city. Zoning laws and limited access can prevent some of these things. But it still draws away from economic development because people will chose to bypass the city for their destination.

So Lafayette is kind of caught in the middle. Do you mitigate the inner-city freeway? Do you do they bypass the city? Do they try a boulevard pilot project that deviates from Federal Interstate standards? Honestly, Acadian Thruway functions really well. But a bypass might take too much away from economic development inside the city (while also being hugely expensive).

At least Lafayette is being creative; down the road, Baton Rouge has (not) decided to build a multi-hundred (maybe billion) dollar loop. At the end of the day, it’s completely infeasible, and not one study shows how this will assist in traffic, economic development, etc. (Yes, it will be nice that one time traffic sucks so a driver can take the bypass; but is that really worth a billion dollars?)

If it's not broken, lets try to break it

http://theadvocate.com/home/2195766-125/ex-councilman-fighting-for-club.html

This article has so many things wrong, it literally made me giddy. I really wish I would have been at the meeting to see if it really was portrayed this horribly.

First, I’m not one to call racism fast. But wow. It seems that no one at this meeting even tried to hide raciest undertones. The people are against the bar because of alcohol… but then go on to say it’s really about the low income neighborhood, and the guns, and gangs. Really? There are two bars in the area… but this one will be the breaking point? Yeah.

Then people are against the bar because it’s in a “low-income area”. I didn’t realize the public was the police on “low-incomes”. In a state where the social scene surrounds the neighborhood bar, we’re really going to start regulating bar location based on income stature? This is news to me.

Finally is the fact people are against the bar because it’s so close to the neighborhoods. Of course this is the logical place for bars to be located. I mean, in the 70’s and 80’s we started putting bars along highways and interstates… but discovered that was a bad idea; which is why all the most popular entertainment areas are adjacent to neighborhoods. In a state with a high drinking and driving problem, we’re still going to advocate bars being located away from residential areas?

So I’m going to pretend I’m a Planning Commissioner, and instead of assuming people go to bars solely to “put their AK 47’s in the front seat", I’m going to look at the context. There are several bars in the area, including one of the biggest dance bars in Baton Rouge. Another bar wants to move in next door. This actually seems like a good idea. A cluster of bars near an established neighborhood. However, there are problems: noise, traffic, and other nuisances that come from late night entertainment. This area (oddly) wasn’t identified originally as an entertainment district. But maybe we should study the idea of it becoming a district. Make it comprehensive. Increase security, provide parking, make neighborhood connections, allow for better street crossings, etc.

I mean, if the study says points to different conclusions then you have a basis for the denial. But the thing about this particular zoning request is not use. It's purely alcohol.The use is allowed; Baton Rouge just requires an extra step in the zoning law to serve alcohol. 

Again, I’m irked by the train of thought in Baton Rouge. There’s an automatic mindset to reject things instead to improve situations that already exist. 

A plan you say? Preposterous!

I'm incredibly syndical about the Baton Rouge "loop" project which emerged a few years ago. No American city builds loops anymore (bypasses, beltways, etc); and when they are discussed they get rejected by the community fast. Most are shot down because of NIMY’ism. Heck, one could say that Jane Jacobs was a NIMBY at the time.

But the difference between Jane Jacobs and NIMBY's are solution based. Just opposing something gets a city nowhere. Obviously Baton Rouge has a traffic problem. We lack citywide connectivity with little to no interstate alternatives through town. Solutions are needed (plural "solutions"). We need interstate improvements; we need surface street improvements; we need transit improvements. We need an overall plan.

(Caution: sarcasm ahead.)

Baton Rouge insist on paying more than less, and mostly because of an “us” vs. “them”. Transit users are either poor, can’t drive, or get some kind of high using “free services from the government”. Obviously these are the only reasons anyone would use transit. Thus "transportation planners" (um, engineers) argue for a one solution (a loop), instead of a comprehensive fix to the Baton Rouge traffic.

The funny thing is, transit is cheaper, fee based, and can transport more people. So I cringe when newspaper comment sections blow up when the transit system wants $18 million dollars, yet no one opposes an additional three mile lane on the interstate for the same amount (see the above articles). Because of course, one solution is the best. We continue to throw millions and millions of dollars at one solution without any results being produced. A city the size of Baton Rouge needs a plan with options. When I fly home I have several options (my parents live in the middle of nowhere, btw). I could take the commuter rail, Amtrak, MegaBus, or Greyhound… or my family could come pick me up and take interstates, toll roads, highways, etc. I’m not stuck. When I fly into New Orleans I have two options to get home. I park, or someone picks me up. Both options are not ideal. The sad thing is, New Orleans was once on a tier of Chicago or New York... and their infrastructure still reflects that tier to an extent.

So the Baton Rouge's transit system sucks. But our traffic infrastructure is almost worse. Heck, I-10 goes to one lane after exiting the Mississippi River Bridge. Then the interstate expands to three lanes, and finally five lanes in the suburbs. Since Baton Rouge already has a dysfunctional urban interstate, I don't even know why we are arguing a new bypass. We need to improve existing conditions. So when the state proposes an upgrade, we shouldn't just shoot down the idea. This is the time to fix and improve what's wrong. Millions of dollars will be thrown at an interstate project (because a highway will never be rejected by the 'fiscally responsible'), so take a bad situation and make it better for the surrounding communities. I find it funny when people say a wider interstate will “ruin” an area that initially gained its character because it’s under an interstate (Perkins Road underpass). 

Of course, other arguments need to be made. Many cities are tearing down urban highway. Baton Rouge's "plan" should have this scenario. Rerouting I-10 around Airline Highway might be feasible; or around Baton Rouge all together. Even if a complete reroute of I-10 wasn't feasible, upgrading Airline Highway and Florida Boulevard would be much smarter than building an entirely new loop. Airline Highway was "the loop". Why can't it still be the loop? I would assume the cost of upgrading the Airline Highway would be far less than a loop. (But I have to assume because not one study was done).

When someone wakes up one day and decides a loop will fix all the traffic problems, it doesn't make sense. I don't consider myself a genius, but I can come up with all sorts of scenarios that should be studied before dumping hundreds of millions of dollars into just one project. But I guess that's the "planner" coming out in me.

The core to education is the community

While not directly related to urban development, the recent plans for education in Louisiana have many ramifications to development both local and statewide. I guess I didn't truly understand the importance between education and community development until I moved to Louisiana. I may have grown up in a rural, poverty setting. But public education was very important. I now live in the inner part of Baton Rouge, and would hesitate sending my children to private schools (or risking a lottery for a charter school). Thus my suburban job makes me realize why people still move to the suburbs with children.

My overall thoughts about the governor's proposal would create a huge education gap between haves and have nots; all while getting rid of public education in general. But that’s more my political view coming from a family of public school teachers. From an urban development view, education needs to be tackled at the core. Louisiana has a huge income, poverty, and racial divide. These factors run deep in Louisiana and create unstable communities, and thus unstable families. The failing points in our schools aren’t generally teachers, it’s the overall situation. A child's environment is directly related to their performance. The blame can be thrown back on the parents that they “aren’t working hard enough”, or “just want hand outs”, etc, etc, etc… but even in the rare case this is true, why is that the child’s fault. 

Nor is the problem embedded in the school buildings and teachers performance. Blaming teachers is the last thing we want to do.  That will just encourage the good ones to leave the state. All while allowing private schools to pick and choose which students they can accept; leaving behind a massive group. In the last fifty years Louisiana went from a strong state social system, to a very weak social system. State run colleges are so underfunded that we have no prestigious state school. Our healthcare system is dumping the uninsured. Our infrastructure is failing badly. Yet we have this new culture of “no government is good government”. Thus the state government has underfunded all these programs which is the foundation to our state’s economy. Education already has a history of non-importance in the state. All while the school’s are still recovering from segregation of less than fifty years ago. That problem in itself doesn't go away overnight (although a good portion of society seems to think it did).

Thus there is a huge list of problems that need to be tackled. It’s complicated. If it was easy, previous governors would have done it a long time ago. Heck, the solutions in the plan aren’t even revolutionary. The action steps are the same ones conservatives have been touting for years (where are the results?).  Our governor is just getting on board? In his second term? The plan needs to be revolutionary, not the same. There needs to be community based plans in place like Detroit. Plans at the community and family level within the school areas. Instead, the government is just saying “we failed”, and now if your special enough we will try and fix the problem. Assuming all the pieces fall into place – like, is there room at the school you want to attend? Can you provide transportation to that school? Are your parents willing to partake in your life? There are so many unknowns. Yet the governor says that his solution is “easy” and “cheaper”?

Meanwhile, our inner cities continue to drain like it's the 1980's. Leaving behind neighborhoods segregated-era created neighborhoods. Our past history requires the state to focus on the many social aspects of education. Not just the infrastructure within the school.

Coordinated Efforts

I’m not a huge sports fan, so I never really follow the process of the host city for the Super Bowl. So when Indianapolis was selected, it was my first opportunity to watch the events unfold. I haven’t lived in Indiana for over five years. But during my last year at home I worked in our university’s planning office in downtown Indianapolis, which is when we began working on things related to the stadium. Now that the Super Bowl has passed, I’m beginning to read articles about the public investment of a stadium; basically boiling down the pros and cons to spending a lot of money for little return. Typically I agree on these sort of things. But the way Indianapolis handled the event was completely different. While the city may have used the Super Bowl to sell the idea to the public, they were thinking long term when implementing all the projects.

When the City first announced the new Colts stadium it wasn’t all about “the stadium”. Sure they used the Super Bowl for the publicity side of getting the actual stadium approved. But several things were unfolding at the time. Most notably the site of the stadium would initially expand the urban area of downtown south of the railroad tracks (which made a physical barrier). The downtown Indianapolis plan breaks the city into the four quadrants originally planned back in the 1800’s. The new Colts stadium is located within the southwest quadrant, and has a focus for the tourist portion of downtown. This quadrant includes four sports stadiums, the convention center, the museum district, and the transportation hub; with a residential population being supported by the adjacent university. Thus the new stadium would only strengthen the areas intent, and the new design guidelines being implemented during this time would ensure everything else would fall into place.

In addition to building the stadium, the city created some robust infrastructure plans both citywide and downtown. This included a brand new terminal at the Indianapolis airport, expansion of interstate capacity, and the Indy Connect transit plan. Unfortunately, the Indy Connect was the only plan not pushed through. But, as a side note, it is still being worked and will probably succeed.

Downtown, the city expanded their bike and pedestrian lanes, and interconnected them with the vast system citywide system. Anchoring pedestrian activity downtown, and coinciding with the recent expansion to MegaBus, Greyhound, and Amtrak services to Chicago/Cincinnati/Louisville/Nashville.

So when the Super Bowl was announced, the city went into full swing to continue the urbanization of downtown. One has to remember that ten years ago downtown Indianapolis was considered a small mid-western town, with the notorious nickname of Naptown. Once the Super Bowl was announced, the city had three years to ensure the nickname would not reemergence.  And it did't. 

So the article that relates the stadium building to just one event is way off (in my very humble opinion), because so much more happened; and those investments will continue past the Super Bowl. I’m sure if Indianapolis “made money” from the Super Bowl. However, they made great strides as a city, and were able to showcase it to the world.

Then. I read this article. Oh New Orleans, why… I realize they have upgraded stadium, and have added Champion Square nearby, but otherwise there seems to never be a coordinated effort for major events. Are they planning on having the street cars installed prior to the event? What about projects from the Master Plan which can be expedited – infrastructure, art, programs?  Instead of taking the city’s status of a tourist city for granted, the city needs to start elevating themselves when they get the chance.

After watching the coordinated approach in Indianapolis, it’s disheartening to watch New Orleans keep taking things for granted.

The Parking Situation

Taking Parking Lots Seriously as Public Spaces - New York Times, January 6, 212

I know I've blogged about how parking lot layout is ridiculous. Given the fact current development puts so much importance to the parking (by providing an abundance); yet design is always the least of the concern. Retailers are focusing more and more attention on the "user experience". Well, user experience inside the store. Other than some minor tweaks to their outside appearance, the development community is not focused on street side appearance. At least in suburban Louisiana (development nation wide is trending away from this mindset).

In our auto-oriented state, everyone will be using a car. This means everyone will be parking in the parking lot and walking to the "front door". The parking lot itself is the first impression of a business. The car approaches the site, maneuvers the parking lot, then leaves the car to walk to the front door. This entire experience is usually horrific (to say the least). The bulky store, ugly sign, and poorly signed parking lot makes the experience unsafe to say the least. Then the motorist exits the car and transports themselves through the exact climate they drove through. Usually confusing, unsafe, and overall boring. Why do retailers make this a practice? I mean, once in the store huge amounts of details are incorporated into the design. From product placement, to advertising, to store layout, to design. There is more research done on your shopping experience then you will ever know. Yet, they don't really care about you until you enter the actual store. (Even though your experience is halfway over at that point.

That brings me to Towne Center in Baton Rouge. The shopping center was built in the middle of the older city, with a very strong client base. Mostly upscale stores, with lots of attention paid to attractiveness. Yet the parking lot is beyond ridiculous. Given the shopping center is set up to appear pedestrian friendly (i.e. lifestyle center), the pedestrian is give the last thought in all aspects. As a first time visitor I assumed it was pedestrian oriented. Yet it is impossible to store hope without crossing the parking lot. A parking lot that has few pedestrian paths (and absolutely no painted crosswalks). In fact, normal traffic flow is encouraged along the storefronts. By normal traffic flow, I mean the clueless driver trying to find a parking spot in a sea of a confusing layouts. The massive amount of parking makes it that much more confusing for the car - and encourages people to store hop with their car. All of this just makes me wonder why? A massive shopping center located in urban Baton Rouge should be extremely pedestrian oriented. Instead, all visitors are drivers who store hop in their car. It makes me extremely sad that a huge opportunity was wasted.

And yet, this mind set trickles down into the mindset of the older businesses in Mid City. Government Street, of course, is the prime example. Every single city in the United States have created amazing urban centers in their older neighborhoods. They are pedestrian oriented, while still allowing the car. This creates an amazing street life, and does nothing but escalates the sense of place. Yet Government Street businesses seem more concerned with parking then their actual business plan. Why do businesses sacrifice their appearance for the suburban parking influences? Gaining two or three parking spots in front of their store, while completely ruining the appearance of the area.

All of this is drenched in the suburban ideals (well, the twentieth century ideal). Mid-City drivers expect a parking spot in front of the store, even if it's easier to park on the street or adjacent to the store. In fact, it's more difficult to park in front of businesses along Government Street because of the foreseen "convenience"; which isn't anymore "convenient".

Because of this, Government Street still holds to the ideal of suburban parking lot standards, as stated in the article. Even though the density is well beyond an urban place.

By comparing the urban and suburban parking situation in Baton Rouge, two things need to be done. Mid City (and even downtown) need to move beyond the perception of parking convenience. It may seem like a petty issue, but the parking lot (as the article states) has become a huge public space in the last five years. While yes we do need to pay a lot more detail to the design because of the importance, we also need to evaluate how the need for each and every space that is provided. Government Street is extremely unattractive; and only because of the parking situation. By eliminating some of those space, redesigning the storefronts, and putting more thought in circulation; the street can put more focus on street life. Which would create a more desirable space that could be utilize day and night. Increasing the viability of the district.

And the suburbs will have their business from the car, the parking lot is crucial to their survival. If a stores parking lot is empty, it give a perceived appearance that no one is there. Creating a better designed parking lot will achieve a greater dynamic to the business climate. It just makes sense in today's market place.

Midwest Rail Lives! Work Underway in Four States
http://dc.streetsblog.org/2012/01/05/midwest-rail-lives-work-underway-in-four-states/

I've fallen off the blog since the holidays. Then this article forced me back because it coincided with my trip back home. I mean, a Chicago transit hub is growing fast. Which is - by the way - awesome.

When I go home, I like to fly into Chicago; especially right before Christmas. The one thing I hate living in the south is car dependency. Don't get me wrong, other than a semester in London, I've never been completely car-less. But at least in the Chicago area (and Great Lakes in general) there are options. I had a daily Amtrak train to Chicago that, be-it, never ran on time, and took forever; but for $20 I was downtown.

Thus my flight into Chicago commenced an entire week of car-free-ness. Ironically, I read an article on the plan announcing funds for the Detroit-Chicago and Davenport-Chicago rail line. Adding to the all-ready-under-construction, St. Louis line. Thus creating a pretty substantial hub in the midwest, especially with the combination of existing low-speed lines.

Yet... they aren't high speed. Maximum speeds at 110mph are no where near fast. It's literally 20th century 'stuff'. It's not horrible. When I was on the train from Milwaukee to Chicago, I clocked our pace at a steady  80mph. Which its still faster and more convenient than a plane of car.

What's even more awesome is that a Chicago hub will actually work. Florida gave up their funding; California is struggling with their funding; and the South received no funding... but I can't say I'm sad. Other than the east coast, Chicago is the only major cities where a good portion of the population doesn't have a car. Thus people need an option to leave the city... not just getting around the city.

Heck this already shows. Megabus entered the market (and was heavily used on my trip from Chicago to Indianapolis). Greyhound Express has also taken on an extensive hub in Chicago. The amount and frequency of these services identifies the need. A train line that would travel twice as fast would create even better access.

It makes me excited. Especially since the ease of access will trickle down into smaller markets (ah-hmm) Indianapolis, which grows better and better each time I visit. But I'll blog about that later.

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.