Category Archives: Places

On state roads in Chicago, IDOT wants to properly collect evidence about bike lanes

Posted on by

Chicago may be interested in building 100 miles of bike lanes but the state of Illinois wants to slow down the process on state roads in the city in order to collect more data:

But in many of the selected locations, sections of the roadways fall under state jurisdiction. The Illinois Department of Transportation won’t allow protected bicycle lanes to go on state-designated routes until it is satisfied they are safe, officials said.

IDOT will collect at least three years’ worth of traffic accident data and then make a determination based on the analysis, officials said, adding that the existing information is inadequate because protected bike lanes are new here…

Claffey said IDOT has safety concerns that include the visibility of cyclists at intersections and operational issues like maintenance and snow-removal around protected bike lanes. Approving protected bike lanes for Chicago would open the floodgates to allowing all other local governments in the state to do the same, he said.

“We are also concerned about losing traffic lanes,” Claffey said, noting that protected bike lanes require more space than traditional bike lanes.

In Illinois, it seems safe to ask if there is something else going on behind the scenes. But, if IDOT is claiming in part that they need more data about safety, isn’t this typically a persuasive argument when it comes to roads?

Cool images of underground subway construction in NYC

Posted on by

Building new subway lines is a massive undertaking and this gallery of photos gives some indication of the scale of the work. Here is what New York is undertaking:

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) has taken on three massive projects: East Side Access, the No. 7 subway line extension, and the new Second Avenue subway line. Construction for the projects is taking place deep underground, much of it simultaneously. The three projects span 14 miles and are expected to be finished in 2019 at an estimated cost of $15 billion.

This indicates a few things: New York has the kind of capital and ability to build such lines and the trouble it takes to construct such things suggests new lines must be needed in a city where a large percentage of residents use mass transit on a daily basis.

How much do McMansions contribute to traffic congestion?

Posted on by

After seeing the Washington D.C. region leads the country in traffic, one reader of the Washington Post suggests McMansions have contributed to the problem:

Regarding the Feb. 5 news article “Washington again rated worst for traffic congestion in annual study”:

I don’t understand. The entire metropolitan region builds, builds and builds, squeezing  condos onto every block and ruining old neighborhoods with ghastly McMansion and townhouse developments.

Do officials consider quality of life? Don’t they realize how these new homes have a tremendous effect on our local traffic? We have overbuilt this area to death.

It would be interesting to see a study on this. I suspect the real answer is not McMansions over other forms of housing and development but rather the issue of sprawl. McMansions may often be found as part of sprawl but not necessarily; McMansions don’t have to be built on large lots, which leads to more spread out development, and they can be built as teardowns in denser areas. But once sprawl has already happened, it is more difficult to provide effective mass transit (even as the Washington region sees an expansion of Metro service to suburban counties). In other words, McMansions are symptoms of sprawl which leads to a lot of driving and traffic.

Housing for the poor in Hong Kong

Posted on by

Like in many global cities, affordable housing is a big issue in Hong Kong:

Some 100,000 people in the former British colony live in what’s known as inadequate housing, according to the Society for Community Organization, a social welfare group. The category also includes apartments subdivided into tiny cubicles or filled with coffin-sized wood and metal sleeping compartments as well as rooftop shacks. They’re a grim counterpoint to the southern Chinese city’s renowned material affluence.

Forced by skyrocketing housing prices to live in cramped, dirty and unsafe conditions, their plight also highlights one of the biggest headaches facing Hong Kong’s unpopular Beijing-backed leader: growing public rage over the city’s housing crisis.

Leung Chun-ying took office as Hong Kong’s chief executive in July pledging to provide more affordable housing in a bid to cool the anger. Home prices rose 23 percent in the first 10 months of 2012 and have doubled since bottoming out in 2008 during the global financial crisis, the International Monetary Fund said in a report last month. Rents have followed a similar trajectory…

His comments mark a distinct shift from predecessor Donald Tsang, who ignored the problem. Legislators and activists, however, slammed Leung for a lack of measures to boost the supply in the short term. Some 210,000 people are on the waiting list for public housing, about double from 2006. About a third of Hong Kong’s 7.1 million population lives in public rental flats. When apartments bought with government subsidies are included, the figure rises to nearly half…

While cage homes, which sprang up in the 1950s to cater mostly to single men coming in from mainland China, are becoming rarer, other types of substandard housing such as cubicle apartments are growing as more families are pushed into poverty. Nearly 1.19 million people were living in poverty in the first half of last year, up from 1.15 million in 2011, according to the Hong Kong Council Of Social Services. There’s no official poverty line but it’s generally defined as half of the city’s median income of HK$12,000 ($1,550) a month.

While many cities face this issue (including long waiting lists for public housing in Chicago), the contrasts are stark in Hong Kong which boasts a world-class business district. Add this to lack of open space, leading to higher housing prices, and this is an issue that likely requires an ambitious plan over many years to even address part of this housing shortage.

Repeat argument: Washington D.C. is the real second city in the United States

Posted on by

Aaron Renn argues that Washington D.C., and not Los Angeles or Chicago, is the real “second city” in the United States:

During the first decade of the twenty-first century, the Washington metropolitan area overachieved on a variety of measurements versus its peer metro areas—that is, the rest of the ten largest metros in the country, plus the San Francisco Bay Area (which federal classifications divide into two, neither of which would make the Top Ten on its own). Among these regions, Washington ranked fourth in population growth from 2000 to 2010, trailing only the three Sunbelt boomtowns of Atlanta, Dallas, and Houston (see “The Texas Growth Machine”). Washington is currently the seventh most populous metropolitan area in America.The region has performed even more impressively on the jobs front. Since 2001, Washington has enjoyed the lowest unemployment rate of its peer group. Over the course of the entire decade, it ranked second in job growth, trailing only Houston. That wasn’t just because of the federal agencies and gigantic contractors of Washington stereotype. The region has also been a hotbed of entrepreneurship—much of it, to be sure, dependent on federal dollars. During the 2000s, it had 385 firms named to the Inc. 500 lists of fastest-growing companies in America, according to Kauffman Foundation research—by far the most of any metro area. From 2000 through 2011, according to rankings developed by Praxis Strategy Group, Washington’s low-profile but powerful tech sector had the country’s second-highest job growth, after Seattle’s. The region is also one of America’s top life-sciences centers.

Then there’s economic output. During the 2000s, per-capita GDP grew faster in Washington than in any of its peer regions except the Bay Area. Today, Washington’s per-capita GDP is the country’s second-highest—again, after the Bay Area. Unlike Washington, however, the Bay Area hemorrhaged jobs over the course of the decade. Related to Washington’s impressive output is its astonishing median household income, the highest of any metro area with more than 1 million people. A remarkable seven of the ten highest-income counties in America are in metro Washington. And during the 2000s, per-capita income rose in Washington faster than in any of its peer metros.

Finally, Washington’s population is the best-educated in America. Almost half of all adults in the Washington region have college degrees, the highest proportion of any metro area with more than 1 million people. The same is true of graduate degrees: almost 23 percent of Washingtonians hold them…

But what solidifies Washington’s emerging status as America’s new Second City isn’t its economic performance or its emerging global-city profile. Both of those are secondary effects of the real change in Washington: the increasingly intrusive control of the federal government over American life.

Washington has changed in recent decades and Renn highlights some of these shifts. Three things strike me about his analysis:

1. Washington still lags compared to Los Angeles and Chicago in being a world city. According to the 2012 A.T. Kearney Global Cities Index, New York is #1, Los Angeles #6, Chicago #7, Washington #10, and Boston is the next American city at #15.

GlobalCitiesIndex2012ATKearney

This may not be a huge gap but L.A. and Chicago particularly have edges in business activity, human capital, and cultural experience while Washington has the clear edge in political engagement.

2. The choice to build a new capital in the United States back in the late 1700s is still having far-reaching implications today. Imagine New York City as both #1 global city and center of US government. While Renn argues the federal government in Washington is helping propel it up the rankings of cities, I wonder how government centers will fare in the future versus business and trade centers like New York, L.A., and Chicago (which aren’t even the state capitals). We might then benefit from a cross-national comparison with other countries that have similar set-ups.

3. Renn has made this argument before. I wrote a post titled “Washington D.C., not Chicago or LA, the real “second city” of the United States?” back on April 7, 2012 based on Renn’s piece on newgeography.com titled “The Great Reordering of the Urban Hierarchy.” So Renn is making this argument…is anyone else?

h/t Instapundit

Data suggests cities, suburbs, and rural areas divided about Obama

Posted on by

Recent data continues to suggest President Obama has quite different levels of support across cities, suburbs, and exurbs:

But the most important Obama divide to keep your eye on this year is the one between urban, suburban and rural places.

Urban America is still strongly in Mr. Obama’s corner, 66% say they are optimistic or satisfied. That’s down from 2009’s 74%, but not sharply. The suburbs have grown more skeptical with only 48% saying they are in the optimistic/satisfied camp. In 2009, 63% of the people in suburbs were feeling positive about Mr. Obama’s first term. And rural America is particularly gloomy about the next four years, with only 35% saying they are optimistic or satisfied. In 2009, 58% in rural America thought Mr. Obama would do a good job in the White House.

This is not a new split; Joel Kotkin, for example, has argued for years that the suburbs are the current battleground for voters as city dwellers tend to lean Democratic and people in rural areas tend to lean Republican. But the persistence of this divide goes beyond a red state, blue state divide that has been at the center of American political discourse for over a decade. It is not just about states, which matter particularly for Congress and electoral votes. Rather there are large divides even within states that lead to all sorts of more local issues about how resources should be allocated and who should be able to make decisions. President Obama is known for calling for a purple America bringing together red and blue states but perhaps he needs to call for an America that bridges the big divides between cities, suburbs, and rural areas.

Choose teardown “mansionization” over sprawl in suburbs

Posted on by

Anthony Flint argues that communities should see the positive aspects of teardown McMansions:

Yes, some embodied energy is wasted in a teardown. But the new homes are universally more energy-efficient, and can be made with recycled materials and other green construction methods. What families want is a little bit more room. A recent survey by the National Association of Homebuilders found that most homeowners want something in the area of 2,500 square feet – close to the average size for single-family homes, which has been creeping up steadily over the decades.Sometimes the extra space is for multigenerational housing, a certain trend in the years ahead. The homebuilder Lennar recently touted homes with granny flats and in-law apartments – the kind of flexible housing New urbanism has been advocating for 20 years or so.

There is surely another trend of “right-sizing” and smaller homes and even micro apartments, for empty nesters and singles. But that’s the thing about the housing markets – one size doesn’t fit all. If some homeowners want more size, they’ll find a way to get it. They key factor in the teardown phenomenon is location.

The same NAHB survey found that while a bigger house was desirable, families didn’t want that house to be isolated out in the far-flung exurbs, miles from anywhere. They want to be able to walk to school or to a park, maybe even to a store to get a half-gallon of milk, or at least not spend quite so much time driving all around to disparate destinations.

And so we come back to teardowns and mansionization. Another way to describe the phenomenon is “infill redevelopment.” Builders are essentially re-using an established parcel in an already developed neighborhood. That’s a far greener step than building a true McMansion out in the cornfields. It’s the essence of smart growth – build in the places already built up, and leave the greenfields of the periphery alone.

One argument for teardowns is the rights of individual property owners to take advantage of a market that will pay them more money. However, this argument tends to pit the interests of the neighborhood or community versus those of the individual. In contrast, this argument is much more community oriented. Flint argues that the alternative is not between an individual and their neighbors but rather between suburban sprawl or infill development. These new large homes may not be ideal and communities could provide guidelines for how big they should be and/or how they should match existing homes and styles yet they are better than new subdivisions.

Flint is hinting at another issue that many suburban communities will face in the coming decades: just how dense should desirable suburban areas become? While teardown arguments seem to mostly be about neighborhoods and retaining a certain kind of character, the bigger issue is whether suburbs should be packing in more houses or even building up. This will be a problem for two kinds of suburbs: those who have little or no open land remaining (and this ranges from inner-ring suburbs to ones 20-30 miles out from big cities who have run out of space in more recent years) and those that could attract lots of new residents. Naperville is a good example as it has a downtown and amenities that would likely attract people and it has reached its limits on the south and west after several decades of rapid growth. Indeed, Naperville has received proposals in the past for high-rise condominiums (and turned them down) and the latest Water Street development proposal suggests expanding the denser downtown.

In the end, these suburbs will have to decide if they want denser development. If they hope to grow in population or develop more mixed-use areas (for example, through transit oriented development around transportation nodes), this might require teardowns and denser development.

Celebrating “a cathedral for commuters”

Posted on by

Grand Central Terminal is 100 years old and NPR provides part of its story:

Seven is one of the 750,000 people who walk through Grand Central every day. To put it into perspective, that’s more people than the entire population of the state of Alaska — a handy fact you can learn from Daniel Brucker, an enthusiastic New Yorker who’s managed Grand Central Tours for the past 25 years…

Fortunately, the Vanderbilt family, who owned the New York Central Railroad, had the money. And what they built was a 49-acre rail complex with more tracks and platforms than any other in the world. The buildings on Park Avenue, to the north, are built over it. And it’s an almost unfathomably busy place — during the morning rush hour, a Metro-North commuter train arrives every 58 seconds.

“It’s like a cathedral that’s built for the people,” Brucker says. “We’re not going through somebody else’s mansion, through somebody else’s monument. It’s ours. It’s meant for the everyday commuter, and it’s a celebration of it.”…

“It is the largest interior … public space in New York,” Monasterio says. The windows on the east and the west side, those windows used to open, they used to draw air from the east side, through the terminal, over and out the west side.”

Having been there a few times myself, it is a remarkable building. Public spaces that are so crowded, functional, and well-designed are rare.

It would be interesting to hear more about how Grand Central fits into the fabric of New York City. On one hand, it seems like quintessential New York: classical exterior, busy space, busy yet functional. At the same time, it doesn’t exactly fit with Midtown Manhattan and the modern skyline. It is a relic of the past, a building that had to be saved through the first federal conservancy act from the 1960s.

Hispanics will be largest group in California by 2020

Posted on by

New demographic projections for California suggest Hispanics will pass whites to be the largest group by 2020:

Population projections released Thursday by the state Department of Finance show that Hispanics will become the dominant ethnic group in California for the first time.

By 2020, demographers say Hispanics will be about 41 percent of California’s population, with whites less than 37 percent.

The white population will fall to about 30 percent by 2060 from the current 39 percent, affecting politics and public policy in the nation’s most populous state. Whites currently lack a majority in only Hawaii and New Mexico.

It will be worth watching to see what changes this brings to California’s society, economy, and politics. Another issue to consider is whether the trend in California will extend to other states or whether California is uniquely positioned to experience this sort of demographic change. While we have been reading about these projected demographic changes in California for years, I don’t recall seeing similar projections for states like Texas. This, of course, could suggest demographic change is taking place more slowly in other states.

San Francisco leads US cities in terms of official tourism Twitter accounts

Posted on by

While New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago may lead in terms of population and prestige, San Francisco is the leader in a more modern category: official tourism Twitter account followers.

What’s your favorite city to follow on Twitter? If you chose San Francisco (@onlyinsf), you’re one of the 99,000-plus followers that made it No. 1 among the 10 most popular U.S. cities on Twitter.

New York City (@nycgo) and Las Vegas (@vegas) come in second and third while Los Angeles (@discoverLA) takes eighth place. Cities were ranked by the number of people following their official tourism Twitter accounts, not city government or other Twitter feeds.

The rest of the top 10 cities:

4. Miami (@miamiandbeaches)
5. Philadelphia (@visitphilly)
6. Chicago (@choosechicago)
7. Portland, Ore. (@travelportland)
9. Columbia, S.C. (@columbiasc)
10. Louisville, Ky. (@justaddbourbon)

The report from Skift, a newish New York company that produces travel information and news, looked at how tourism agencies use social media. During a two-week period, it found that Portland and Philadelphia were most responsive to answering questions via Twitter, and that New York City, Las Vegas and Portland had the quickest average response times to their tweets.

Does Louisville get a prize for having the most clever Twitter handle of the top 10? I want to know several things about these Twitter accounts:

1. How does the number of Twitter followers translate into tourism dollars? Tourism is big business for all of these cities so they have an interest in having engaging Twitter accounts.

2. Are most of these followers looking for special deals? Do they tend to follow the city when they already have a trip planned?

3. This doesn’t necessarily line up with one recent measure of the leading American cities for tourists. According to 2009 data listed by Forbes, here are the top tourist cities:

Orlando, Fla.: 48 million visitors
New York City: 47 million visitors
Chicago, Ill.: 45,580,000 visitors
Anaheim/Orange County, Calif.: 42,700,000 visitors
Miami, Fla: 38,100,000 visitors
Las Vegas, Nev.: 36,351,469 visitors
Atlanta, Ga.: 35,400,000 visitors
Houston, Texas: 31,060,000 visitors
Philadelphia, Pa.: 30,320,000 visitors
San Diego, California: 29,600,000 visitors

This data plus the Twitter data could be interpreted in a few ways. One way to view it is that some cities don’t need much of a Twitter following. For example, I assume Orlando and Anaheim get so many visitors due to the Disney presence. Thus, these visitors care a lot less about the cities (are there many people looking to get to downtown Orlando or Anaheim?).

4. Any chance these Twitter accounts take advantage of fake followers to improve their image? Boosterism may know few bounds…