We have a lot of suburbs now. While some of them were the product of the boom - overbuilding into antiquated infrastructure - most of the building was done in an effort to keep Austin "safe," in the minds of many who believe that safety is only achieved with a yard and a car. These same people push against density partially, I believe, because they think that developers and new urbanites want to bulldoze their houses to the ground and build skyscrapers. With full disclosure in mind, I prefer condominiums and townhomes, and I look at my car - or as I think of it, my oversized purse that picks up all the extra garbage - with disdain.
However, one thing I remember from my childhood is the fact that I was three blocks away from my school, and my school was across the street from the after school day care center. When I came back to Austin, my new neighborhood and bus routes were full of businesses that people ran from their homes: day care centers, architectural firms, consultants, etc. Torchy's Tacos and Salvation Pizza are two small businesses that are always full of people. A couple of my friends have been involved in the Pampered Chef franchise, and more and more people I know are thinking about running their own businesses.
I propose that instead of continuing to let people reject our applications and tell us that we are not worth the investment, that we revitalize the suburbs. How much would the value of homes and the morale of the neighborhoods rise if more people started running daycare centers out of their homes, and how much would neighbors then get to know each other? Environmentally, how much less of a carbon footprint would we all have if more of the working population worked from home, and for those not environmentally motivated, how much more would people save in transportation costs? No, having a home office is not as "impressive" as having a high rise in downtown, and yes, we do need to rent out those spaces so that areas steer clear of dilapidation. Also, marketing is not free and does take time, although thanks to LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, and Craigslist, the time is less than one would think.
However, with so many people out of work, we have a unique opportunity to find out what people really need, people who work full time and need to relieve stress. We know that health care insurance and retirement benefits come with company and government jobs, but we also know that some of the future of business lies in the expansion of small businesses.
"What does this have to do with planning, and what do you think you know about business?" If we revitalize suburbs by supplementing those sleepy neighborhoods with few people home with consultants who walk their children over to their neighbors' daycare centers and take a break in the middle of the day to go to their other neighbors' yoga studios or cooking classes, suburbs can regain a sense of significance in the planning world. They will no longer be the realm of NIMBYs who know only the most "important" of their neighbors, and homeowner's associations will be more affective networking tools, as they will be aware of the true needs of communities, like an evening day care center for people like doctors and professors. One of the many aspects of a safe neighborhood is eyes on the street, and if there were more people working from home, those neighborhoods would be less prone to burglaries and guess what? This style of living is another example of density making those neighborhoods more aligned with the entire city, which is, after all, the goal.
What else? Thanks to transit centers, and all these nodes around Austin, there are many places that are close to where people come home or leave for work, if you decide to run a daycare. Also, thanks to all the networking tools mentioned earlier, you can always pool your resources with other home business owners and all of you could rent a space in the commercial area closest to you so that you can have those all important meetings and conferences and make a professional impression, while spending the rest of the week working from home. One day a week of commuting. Working from home is not for everyone or without risk, but those suburbs need some life and the jobless need some hope. To lead by example, I will take this opportunity to say that I myself will be available on Monday and Wednesday evenings as a writing tutor beginning next week. You can expect to see my ad on Craigslist, my Facebook page, and my LinkedIn page by Friday.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Monday, March 9, 2009
Digital Divide and Planning
It's that time again, time to take the census. Every 10 years, the country decides to attempt to keep track of all those millions of people and activities. While this is a good idea, the difficulty lies in its expense and the time it takes to collect the data. No one will be able to accurately argue that the data is bad, but I would suggest that our methods are a bit antiquated and could be expedited but for one thing: the digital divide.
Hopefully, many people are not under the illusion that the next census (or the census after that) will continue to use citizens moving door to door to collect information. That practice is good for building communities, but is better suited to a city rather than a nation or even a state. The best method will be to use a website to enter information, and allow citizens to fill said information out for themselves.
It is time for cities and states to start prioritizing computer centers so that data like this can be collected, and proper planning decisions can be made. After all, people who planned on having the luxury of a car are seriously scratching their heads and wondering if all the planning sacrifices and the expense of maintaining the roads of the nation for everyone was worth it.
Hopefully, many people are not under the illusion that the next census (or the census after that) will continue to use citizens moving door to door to collect information. That practice is good for building communities, but is better suited to a city rather than a nation or even a state. The best method will be to use a website to enter information, and allow citizens to fill said information out for themselves.
It is time for cities and states to start prioritizing computer centers so that data like this can be collected, and proper planning decisions can be made. After all, people who planned on having the luxury of a car are seriously scratching their heads and wondering if all the planning sacrifices and the expense of maintaining the roads of the nation for everyone was worth it.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Light Rail
I remember reading that the City was going to complete the hike and bike trail around Town Lake* for $1.5 million, and that many citizens were perturbed by such actions. Well, folks, such actions cost money, and unless you think that creating more walkable trails is a bad thing, you should probably learn how to cope. One evening I was having dinner with friends and one mentioned disdain about the light rail being expensive and not going south of the river. "You know," I said, having attended a meeting full of people who gave their opinions of the light rail, "many people south of the river mentioned that they didn't want the noise, even though everyone knows that light rail increases property value." My friends were stunned, and the room was quiet. "The noise? There were car/rail accidents in Houston because the rail cars were too quiet, and the engineers had to add noise to the trains. The noise?" asked one of my other friends.
Bottom line: light rail serves as a public good, and rich and poor people will ride it. True, it will require a modicum of spending and regulation, but that is nothing new to a state full of highways, universities, and real estate development. All public goods cost money, but using price as excuse to keep cities antiquated continues to divide the rich from the poor. Rich people are happy to pay hundreds of dollars a month for the privilege of sitting in traffic, while poorer people remain in debt and sacrifice food and living space for said "privilege." Not building up light rail constitutes continuing to choose for people, instead of letting them choose for themselves.
Another question to posit to opponents of rail is this: how much money do roads make and how much do they cost? In other words, where is my check from IH-35? Roads in and of themselves are not businesses earning profit. If one logs in to the TxDOT website, the meetings are videotaped and broadcasted online, and all discussions are about how highways will be funded. What is evident throughout these meetings, which rarely have any mention of public transit, is that TxDOT is about highways, not about all types of transportation. Highways mean money for specific contractors, auto makers, and oil companies. They do very little for citizens except perpetuate bad planning practices, and they cost a staggering amount of money to build and maintain.
Light rail, and particularly commuter rail, offers an extraordinary opportunity for economic viability in smaller towns. Towns and neighborhoods that are normally bypassed by highways to maximize travel routes can become popular daytrips that encourage the gestation of local businesses. There are so many people who live in smaller towns and commute to larger towns that rail centers would provide business opportunities for restaurants, movie theatres, or even college satellite campuses. In Box Hill, a city in southeast Australia, the Asian-Australian community has solidified downtown into a cultural experience that one can get to easily and affordably, which has boosted real estate value and has expanded additional local businesses. Our own Fredericksburg has expanded tremendously, and what would be better than allowing people to avoid gas and parking, and just go to Fredericksburg - or New Braunfels, for that matter, which has invested greatly in its downtown area - and enjoy their community events and businesses, and then take a train right back to Austin? Or how about just hopping on a train from the Mueller Development to enjoy South by Southwest?
Finally, more people have taken on second jobs to pay bills and as good as the bus system is, getting across town at night is difficult and takes a long time. Many people end up using the money from their second jobs just to get to them, and the situation will continue to worsen as this economy sets itself for employers, not employees. Work is essential to keep our economy moving, and rail is a method of transportation that allows people to work and to get to work more easily. Discussing transportation for workers and not discussing rail is like two people trying to clear a field with a pair of scissors and a machete: the task can be done, but it will most likely take a long time.
Light rail moves people more easily around cities, and the cost of constructing it will only rise in the coming years. We need to invest now so that Austin remains one of the greatest cities in Texas, and to lower at least part of the cost of living here. $500 a month to keep a car running is no longer cutting edge technology.
Bottom line: light rail serves as a public good, and rich and poor people will ride it. True, it will require a modicum of spending and regulation, but that is nothing new to a state full of highways, universities, and real estate development. All public goods cost money, but using price as excuse to keep cities antiquated continues to divide the rich from the poor. Rich people are happy to pay hundreds of dollars a month for the privilege of sitting in traffic, while poorer people remain in debt and sacrifice food and living space for said "privilege." Not building up light rail constitutes continuing to choose for people, instead of letting them choose for themselves.
Another question to posit to opponents of rail is this: how much money do roads make and how much do they cost? In other words, where is my check from IH-35? Roads in and of themselves are not businesses earning profit. If one logs in to the TxDOT website, the meetings are videotaped and broadcasted online, and all discussions are about how highways will be funded. What is evident throughout these meetings, which rarely have any mention of public transit, is that TxDOT is about highways, not about all types of transportation. Highways mean money for specific contractors, auto makers, and oil companies. They do very little for citizens except perpetuate bad planning practices, and they cost a staggering amount of money to build and maintain.
Light rail, and particularly commuter rail, offers an extraordinary opportunity for economic viability in smaller towns. Towns and neighborhoods that are normally bypassed by highways to maximize travel routes can become popular daytrips that encourage the gestation of local businesses. There are so many people who live in smaller towns and commute to larger towns that rail centers would provide business opportunities for restaurants, movie theatres, or even college satellite campuses. In Box Hill, a city in southeast Australia, the Asian-Australian community has solidified downtown into a cultural experience that one can get to easily and affordably, which has boosted real estate value and has expanded additional local businesses. Our own Fredericksburg has expanded tremendously, and what would be better than allowing people to avoid gas and parking, and just go to Fredericksburg - or New Braunfels, for that matter, which has invested greatly in its downtown area - and enjoy their community events and businesses, and then take a train right back to Austin? Or how about just hopping on a train from the Mueller Development to enjoy South by Southwest?
Finally, more people have taken on second jobs to pay bills and as good as the bus system is, getting across town at night is difficult and takes a long time. Many people end up using the money from their second jobs just to get to them, and the situation will continue to worsen as this economy sets itself for employers, not employees. Work is essential to keep our economy moving, and rail is a method of transportation that allows people to work and to get to work more easily. Discussing transportation for workers and not discussing rail is like two people trying to clear a field with a pair of scissors and a machete: the task can be done, but it will most likely take a long time.
Light rail moves people more easily around cities, and the cost of constructing it will only rise in the coming years. We need to invest now so that Austin remains one of the greatest cities in Texas, and to lower at least part of the cost of living here. $500 a month to keep a car running is no longer cutting edge technology.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Don't Whine About Big Box Stores
In the 50s, everyone decided that it was a really good idea for every American household to have a car, families to have houses with yards and garages, and for all people to buy as much as they could to be "happy." Before that, America had the General Store, so named because customers could buy everything "in general" that they needed. Later, there were department stores that had several stores in one location, making it more easy for American families to get what they "needed."
All of these consumer centers evolved into strip malls, with malls that were just inside out, where the walking took place in parking lots. We liked it. We encouraged architects and developers to keep building these sorts of establishments. Just like the Hummer 3, we decided that instead of supporting multiple independent businesses that were walking distance from our homes (like they were in the "good ol' days"), we wanted one-stop shopping centers, bigger grocery stores, and football fields worth of parking.
I think it would be remiss to blame developers for giving Austinites what they want in the form of dozens of shopping centers. We had the opportunity to prevent this from happening simply by speaking with our wallets. Instead of paying for cars, we could have paid for an advanced transit system. Many Austin businesses could have remained if we had decided that instead of driving, we wanted a more pedestrian city. I find it difficult to completely take the moral high ground when we were pushing millions of dollars into these stores for decades.
We are responsible for all the traffic, and we are responsible for all the "Big Box atrocities", even those of us who living "traditional" Austin neighborhoods. There has been a new call for taking responsibility, and I think that Austinites are long overdue. After decades of supporting nothing but sprawl, we have done as much damage as we have done good, and the last minute is too late to cry foul.
All of these consumer centers evolved into strip malls, with malls that were just inside out, where the walking took place in parking lots. We liked it. We encouraged architects and developers to keep building these sorts of establishments. Just like the Hummer 3, we decided that instead of supporting multiple independent businesses that were walking distance from our homes (like they were in the "good ol' days"), we wanted one-stop shopping centers, bigger grocery stores, and football fields worth of parking.
I think it would be remiss to blame developers for giving Austinites what they want in the form of dozens of shopping centers. We had the opportunity to prevent this from happening simply by speaking with our wallets. Instead of paying for cars, we could have paid for an advanced transit system. Many Austin businesses could have remained if we had decided that instead of driving, we wanted a more pedestrian city. I find it difficult to completely take the moral high ground when we were pushing millions of dollars into these stores for decades.
We are responsible for all the traffic, and we are responsible for all the "Big Box atrocities", even those of us who living "traditional" Austin neighborhoods. There has been a new call for taking responsibility, and I think that Austinites are long overdue. After decades of supporting nothing but sprawl, we have done as much damage as we have done good, and the last minute is too late to cry foul.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Insult of the Comprehensive Plan
Hello Austin, did you know that we are putting together a comprehensive plan for our city, to update the one 30 years ago? Yes, we are, and according to the city, it will take 2 years and $1.8 million, with $1.5 million going to the independent consultant. You heard me: $1.8 million in total with $1.5 million going to the independent consultant. Seriously.
This is the point where everyone should have his or her eyebrows raised and said, "Really?" Not only is the ratio a complete fallacy in terms of including Austinites and building goodwill towards the city, but the whole price is a complete insult. There are many, many houses in Austin worth more than $1.8 million, let alone an entire comprehensive plan. That amount is a paltry sum, a mere token, and the process for completing the plan is most likely going to offend more people than be effective.
Anyone who reads this knows that I care a great deal about community involvement in the comprehensive plan (see the October 5, 2008 entry). If anyone is aware, there is a UNIVERSITY that has a COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT located fairly close to downtown. Its name is the UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN. If one gave $1.5 million to that department to help complete the comprehensive plan, not only would there be more models to base actual results on, but the STATE university would have free access to the information gathered by the state. Comprehensive planning is what these students AND PROFESSORS study, morning, noon and night, and to pay an outside consultant a ridiculous sum of money when we have resources at our own disposal is going for the two birds in the bush.
Yes, UT has seemed a bit like Rapunzel, standing in her tower and only allowing the sacred few to enter. On the contrary, how on earth are we going to initiate the process of removing the maiden from the tower if we are unwilling to climb her hair? Universities know how to live on $1.5 million sums, and they know more about allocation than anything, not to mention that they are non-profits. It simply makes no sense to spend $1.8 million on a comprehensive plan and give that money to someone outside of the direct effects, while ignoring perfectly good resources at our immediate disposal. And $1.8 million dollars is nothing, for the record.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Stranded Downtown
On December 23, I had to work late because the end of the year was busy. Like a good urbanite, I took the bus and expected to take the bus home again. Normally, there were two buses which traveled to my neighborhood, but I saw roughly 11 Trail of Lights buses before I finally caught a bus. I was basically stranded downtown with no way home for about an hour and I was at 11th and Lavaca, which has no businesses to patronize and no regular foot traffic.
Many people argue that because there is no "effective" public transit system, people are forced to drive. My counter is this: if no one takes the bus after hours, then there will be inefficient and ineffective buses after hours. There are students, but these days, more workers come early and stay late, and people need to feel that they can get home safely and quickly without having to factor an extra hour of waiting.
Being stranded downtown should never happen in one of the fastest growing cities in America. Please talk to Capitol Metro (yes, I do the same) and tell them if you ever ride the bus after 6pm. There are many activities that happen in the later hours, and not having to park would be a boon on the city. We need to work with our transit system to make it more effective so that the buses and trains do not give us a curfew.
Safety around the parking lots
One of my co-workers was coming in early to do overtime, since the end of the year tends to be a busy season for a number of state departments. While she was getting out of her car, two men appeared and tried to demand money. Despite a number of firm statements, the men did not leave, so it was fortunate that she made her way to work and that her car remained unharmed.
To have a long stream of parking lots with no businesses or people is unsafe, and that is exactly the case from 15th Street to 11th Street on San Jacinto and Trinity. There is no constant fluctuation of foot traffic because there are no restaurants or stores for people to go to, and there are no residents who watch out for themselves and others. Even the Texas Residential Construction Commission is swallowed by its isolation next to those parking lots, as there are no businesses to support the safety of the area.
Downtown does not have to be unsafe at any part. While it is important to have parking lots because so many people insist upon driving (although that could potentially change), there should not be blocks and blocks of parking garages that have little to no foot traffic. Those areas create unsafe environments for the very workers who park their cars there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
