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.

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.