What $1 billion can buy in New York

Stadiums are pretty damn cool.  I'm somewhat obsessed with finding out as much as I can about a new stadium whenever I hear one is being built.  There's the whole timeless human experience thing as well as a simple fascination with the architectural structures themselves.

My focus today is on the new Gehry-designed Barclays Center in Brooklyn, NY (construction photo gallery here).  Underneath it is a brand new subway station that serves 9 lines, and although a huge mixed-use development surrounding the stadium may not pan out exactly as planned, it did come with NYC's first Community Benefits Agreement, making provisions for housing and employment opportunities for low-income area residents as well as several other components.

OK, that's all well and good, but mainly I just think the stadium itself is awesome.  Because I like sports and I don't care who knows.

And yes I know that the ever-present debate with stadiums is whether public funds are a worthwhile investment.  I don't want to get into it right now though because I feel like we've been fighting a lot lately.  Do you feel the same way?  Besides, this specific project was funded privately, with the exception of infrastructure improvements around the site (which the city paid for).  So yeah.

The happiest bus on earth

Next week I'll be heading down to the Land of Freeways, where the only thing thicker than the smog is the pretentiousness.  My wife and I will be spending half the time in Anaheim and the other half in L.A.  Naturally I'm excited to explore the LA Metro and bus rapid transit lines there.  

But I was surprised to find out that the Anaheim Resort Transportation system (interactive map here) provides an alternative to driving to the various tourist attractions in the area.  OK, that's an awfully innocuous way of putting it; the system is there for Disneyland.  Yes, it serves other destinations, but all 16 of the 18 routes routes (18 routes!) go directly to Disneyland, and the other 2 simply stop across the street.  

When I heard about ART, I assumed it had to be A. Free, and B. Funded cooperatively by those resorts/destinations it served (primarily Disneyland).  

Oh, such naivety.  

Upon actually researching it, I found that when it opened ten years ago, it was intended to be fully supported by rider fares.  At the time, a day pass cost $2 and kids rode free.  Three years later ART received a $292,000 earmark.  And since then fares have doubled, landing at a current rate of $4 for adults and $1 for kids.  

In other words, a "public" transportation system created in response to Disneyland's enormous transportation impact (and in effect saving Disney a ton of money by limiting the amount of parking it needs to provide) operates free of ANY contributions from Disney.  Instead it has raised fares and turned to federal funding for support.  

The news isn't all bad, however.  Ridership is good (21,900 people/day, or 7.5 million/year according to this report) and many of the vehicles are electric or powered by natural gas.  

So while it's nice to see an alternative to driving for access to Disneyland (and a few other places), I will retain my ill feelings towards Disney as one of the most irresponsible mega-corporations out there.  

Soap box out.  

No trolley jolly here

I might as well add my voice to the chorus of "streetcar skeptics" in the transportation world.  As the opening of Portland's eastside streetcar gets closer, the real costs and complications are getting a decent amount of press.  Particularly, Willamette Week highlighted the cutbacks in frequency compared to what was initially planned.  For the most part I think the article did a good job explaining the major issues for those who don't necessarily have transit hard-ons like myself.  However, check out this quote from Peter Finley Fry, a planner (not sure where or in what capacity) on the citizen advisory committee:


“I think frequency is an overrated thing,” Fry says. “Let’s say there’s a 20-minute [wait]. You can look on your phone, wait inside and have a beer.”

Portland Streetcar map (www.portlandstreetcar.org)

I couldn't help but laugh (and beat my head against the table) when I read that.  Now, I don't know who this guy is; he's probably a smart person and I hope this quote was misprinted or taken out of context.  If not though, I really hope his view doesn't represent those held by the rest of the advisory committee.  What an absurd notion to believe that those riding the streetcar have time (and the desire) to relax for 20 minutes before being on their way to wherever they're going, to do whatever they're doing.  This would imply that the streetcar is meant primarily for tourists and other people with ample leisure time--not those who rely on it for their practical transportation needs.

For what it's worth, here's my prediction: once enough cities join this "streetcar revival" movement, the novelty thereof will wear off and we'll be stuck with an impractical mode of transportation that will no longer succeed at spurring development.  It seems short-sighted to invest so heavily in a system that only fulfills its complete purpose as long as it's new and sexy.  So unless current lines are improved and future lines planned to be efficiently practical, I will remain a child who realizes the box can provide just as much entertainment (and sometimes more) as the shiny toy inside it.

The Red Line

I have a new goal: I want to ride the Pyongyang Metro - mostly because I had no idea such a thing existed until about a week ago.  It has two lines, supposedly runs every 5 minutes or better, and trains have pictures of Kim Il Sung and Kim Jung Il on the sides (fun fact: those two built the entire system with their bare hands in one week).  I can't imagine it being anything but the most efficient, cleanest, and most mind-blowing subway ride ever.  Also the station names are amazing: Comrade, Triumph Return, Unification, Paradise, etc.  There are a few pictures out there, mostly of the station shown above.

So if it does in fact exist, I'll be making an excursion to North Korea, hopefully before they blow themselves up.

Less parking, more possibilities

This space at SE 12th Ave and Hawthorne in Portland confused me for the longest time:

For one thing, the diner there had no sign on the outside, so I didn't even know its name until figuring out online that it was called Johnny B's, and at one point did in fact say so across the top of the building.  (Presumably I also could have actually eaten there and figured this out, but I didn't want to, ok?)

Location of Lardo (formerly Johnny B's)

Even more perplexing was the fact that it sits in a prime location at the northwest edge of Ladd's Addition, right near a major intersection...and yet the lot was being used as a parking lot with a small, content-to-be-anonymous diner that hardly anyone seemed to patronize, at least these days.

That all changed recently.  Lardo (formerly a food cart) remodeled the place and decided to use the asphalt for outdoor seating and bike racks instead of car parking.  It drew crowds instantly, and looks like this pretty much every evening:

My shadow is clearly in this for artistic effect

Quite the transformation, but my main point is not about the space's redevelopment per se.  An all-too-common belief is that without providing ample (car) parking - usually for free - businesses will fail.  Although Lardo has a lot more things going for it that contribute to its success, this example provides some evidence to the contrary of this thinking.

So it seems to me that it's possible for customers to adapt to the businesses they want to support, and not always the other way around - which is encouraging for business owners who want to limit the transportation impact of their shop/store/restaurant.  And if doing so brings the added benefit of revitalizing a previously dead space, then it adds value to the surrounding area.  Everybody wins!  Yay.


Update (Aug 13, 2012): This article in The Atlantic Cities talks about Zurich's new parking policy of capping the number of spaces, and turning existing parking into public space any time parking is added elsewhere (in a one-to-one match).  Any guess as to what my opinion is?  

Of maps and London, and maps of London

Do yourself a favor and spend some time checking out The Mapping London Blog. I sure did today.  Among my favorites:

- Transport for London's Why Not Walk It? map (which they produced to divert people from the Tube to limit overcrowding during the Olympics)

- Both the map and the video of every bus trip in London over the course of a day

As I'd assume is the case with many transportation geeks, my experience riding London's transit system contributed significantly to my fascination with the subject.  It's truly incredible - unlike Great Britain's performance thus far in this year's Games.  BOOM!

Update (Aug 13, 2012): Being a fan of both basketball and public transit, the New Yorker's picture of the U.S. men's basketball team on the Tube was cool to see.  Then I had to step back and say, "Seriously?  This is a big deal?"  Perhaps it shouldn't be, but it is.  

Simple solution for bus-bike conflicts

Something they figured out long ago in the Netherlands is that the safest way to design roads is to physically separate the various types of users. Hence the ubiquity of cycle-tracks. This not only reduces conflict between vehicles, bikes, and pedestrians, but it actually improves traffic flows in many cases.

Upon returning to Portland, there have been several instances where I've been riding the bus and the driver has had to wait for several cyclists to pass on the right in the bike lane in order to get over to the stop, then wait again to merge back into traffic. This is especially bad on streets like Hawthorne between SE Grand and SE 12th Ave, where traffic in all forms is high.

More than an inconvenience, it's a safety issue for cyclists. Having buses constantly going in and out of your lane isn't exactly ideal for things like "not getting hit" and "living" and such. Cycle-tracks would indeed be ideal to address the issue, but Portland has been somewhat slow to invest in them, as these are the only two of any significance in the city:

Raised cycle track on SW Moody (Image from swmoodyproject.com)

First cycle track in Portland, on SW Broadway (Image from bikeportland.org)

A full blown cycle-track is not the only option, however.  While the current configuration might look like this (and please forgive my lack of graphic design skills):

It would be a huge yet relatively simple improvement to do something like this:

It would require installation of a concrete island with curb cuts for wheelchair access, but in my mind the increased safety and reduced delays for both bus riders and bikers justify the expense.  Drivers, of course, might experience more delays due to being stuck behind buses loading and unloading passengers, but I don't claim to want to make things better for drivers (even when I'm one of them).  Besides, it really wouldn't be that much worse than the current situation for them since drivers are impacted by the constant weaving of buses and cyclists.  

Update (Aug 15, 2012): My good friend (and Dear Leader) Derek Abe enlightened me to the fact that there is actually a legitimate cycle track on NE Cully in addition to the two I mentioned here.