« November 2009 »
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30
You are not logged in. Log in
Entries by Topic
All topics  «
Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
View Profile
a list of links from Iraq
Iraq Blogcount
Lewyn Addresses America
Tuesday, 10 November 2009
Got to see Michael Walzer speak (at U of Toronto)

Last night I saw Michael Walzer, an eminent political scientist, speak at U. of Toronto.  He addressed the relationship between the “wisdom books” of the Jewish Bible (Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Job) and the prophetic books (by which he means not just the prophetic books, but Deuteronomy since it addresses some of the same issues). 

 

Key points:

 

*Wisdom books have high ethical standards, but nevertheless have a different focus.  They are about how one person makes his way through life, not really on future generations.  Prophetic books are about an entire people.

 

*Wisdom books take the existing social order for granted, and tell you how to get along with (or rise in the service of) a king.  If the king is wrong, just obey him or stay out of his way.  Prophetic books criticize the misconduct of king and nation.  Wisdom books tell you to avoid evil; prophetic books tell you to root out evil.

 

*Because of its focus on prudence, wisdom literature was ultimately inadequate to deal with the challenges of the world, because it doesn’t tell you what to do when prudence and morality diverged, or when (as in times of political turmoil) worldly prosperity seems not to be an option.  Prophetic books do.

 

*The prophetic books differ among themselves, addressing different kinds of challenges.  Proverbs a bit complacent, more about success in normal times, more optimistic.  Ecclesiastes sees even success as futile.  Job about situations where wisdom inadequate to deal with life’s problems.


Posted by lewyn at 11:47 AM EST
Friday, 16 October 2009
Interesting things in Toronto

As some of you know, I am in Toronto for the next six months or so getting an LLM.

Over the past week, I carved out a little free time and saw a bunch of neighborhoods- Regent Park, Cabbagetown, St. James Town, Broadview- Gerrard (non-downtown Chinatown, less busy than the downtown one),  Little India, the beginnings of a Little Ethiopia, Rosedale (old money WASP) and Greektown.  (Photos not online yet).  Some very interesting things:

1.  Visited housing projects AND a neighborhood between two housing projects.  Three surprising facts:

a) housing projects didn't seem nearly as scary as American ones- can't quite explain why (maybe its knowing that Toronto's murder rate is about 1/10 that of Atlanta's and 1/6 that of Jacksonville's!)

b) that Cabbagetown (gentrified area between them) is nice despite the fact that it is between the housing projects, and

c) someone is apparently trying to develop a high-rise condo just south of one of the projects (I saw it from said project). 

2.   In Rosedale, saw small apartment buildings in a basically single-family area- proof that if the rents are high enough the multifamily lion can lie down with the single-family lamb. 


Posted by lewyn at 11:55 AM EDT
Sunday, 30 August 2009
Health care reform: an admittedly oversimplified explanation

Imagine that you have an appliance (say, a refrigerator) that you've had for awhile.  It works well most of the time.  But it costs more every year to maintain, and sometimes it doesn't work so well.   The appliance is our health insurance/care system- mostly effective, but hugely expensive for the results we get (and of course, some people fall in the cracks and don't get the benefits).

The Libertarian position: who needs a refrigerator anyhow?  (Read "insurance" for "refrigerator")

The Republican Establishment position: Our refrigerator is the best in the world.  And if you disagree you're a socialist or a Nazi or something.  (Or alternatively, see variations of Libertarian position above).

The Democratic position: We need a really expensive new refrigerator, we'll pay for it with a credit card that we don't plan to ever pay the balance on it, and we just hope that our grandchildren can afford to pay for it. 

Somehow none of these positions really seem ideal.  


Posted by lewyn at 12:01 PM EDT
Wednesday, 19 August 2009
Neat book

I just skimmed Gregg Easterbrook's "The Progress Paradox."  Some interesting facts-

 *Today, the world life expectancy is 66- while the US life expectancy was 41 in 1900 (77 now).

 *The age-adjusted, population-adjusted cancer rate has fallen since 1993. (I knew cancer deaths had declined, but didn't think cancer incidence had).

*Californians spend more time inside their cars than outdoors.

*In 1850, the typical American was twice as likely to be the target of a lawsuit as an American today.

*Global adult literacy was 47 percent in 1970 and 73 percent today.  

 


Posted by lewyn at 9:54 PM EDT
Globalization and inequality

It seems to be conventional wisdom in some quarters that globalization is a cause of increased income inequality and various other noxious results.

I'm not a real expert in these matters, but as I was browsing through the World Almanac it occurred to me that there might be some way of measuring which countries were the most "globalized".  It also occurred to me that imports as a percent of GNP might be a way of doing this- that countries with a lot of imports were the ones most tied into the global economy, and that it might prove something if those countries were especially rich, poor, egalitarian, inegalitarian, etc.

I spent an hour or so doing this, and I'm not sure if the results prove all that much.  But certianly they do suggest that countries isolated from the world economy don't do all that well.

Countries where imports are under 10 percent of GNP tend to be on the poor side, with the partial exceptions of Argentina (8%), India (8%) and Brazil (just under 7%, I think the lowest) three countries not noted for egalitarianism.  Our murderer's row of economic isolationism includes: Azerbijan, Benin, Bolivia, Burundi, Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Chad, Ethiopia, India (!), Iran, North Korea, Malawi, Pakistan, Nepal, Niger, Pakistan, Peru, Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania, Timor, Uganda, Uzbekistan. Notice the number of European social democracies on the list- somewhere between zero and zero.

The most globalized countries are a much more diverse list.  Two very poor countries clock in at over 100 percent- Zimbawe and Liberia (foreign aid perhaps?)

In the 50-100 range: Austria (51), Belgium (85), Denmark (51), Estonia (50), Holland (63), Iceland (51), Lesotho (51), United Arab Emirates (59), Slovakia (53), Slovenia (54), Switzerland (61).  With the exception of Lesotho, not a bad group.  Some other social democracies were within shouting distance of this group- Sweden 45, Finland 42, Germany 39. (Though some poorer countries in this group too- Jordan at 43, Malaysia and Burma at 40).

And what of North America?  All in the boring middle- USA 14%, Canada 30%, Mexico 22% (UK and France were about the same as Canada). 

Not sure what to make of it all.   Certainly, however, a highly internationalized economy is not a barrier to a relatively egalitarian economic structure.  But I'm not sure how any of this correlates with trends over time- maybe when I'm in a library I'll look up an old World Almanac and see if the patterns are similar. 


Posted by lewyn at 5:33 PM EDT
Friday, 14 August 2009
Normally, I don't comment about national politics on this blog..

But I couldn't help myself from writing the short play below.


SOCIAL SECURITY AND HEALTH CARE REFORM: A BRIEF EXPLANATION

NARRATION: Once upon a time, there was a land where old people got a lot of stuff from government, and young people got quite a bit less.  This is the story of how Republicans and Democrats tried to change that status quo.

REPUBLICANS: You can't have something for nothing, to let's cut Social Security, or privatize it, or something.

OLD PEOPLE: Right-wing fanatics are trying to take away our Social Security!

Boo, hiss, boo! 

REPUBLICANS: Never mind. 

DEMOCRATS: Not only can you have something for nothing, but the young people can have it too.  Health insurance for everyone!

OLD PEOPLE: The socialists are giving everything away to anybody, and maybe there won't be enough socialized medicine to go around!

Boo, hiss, boo!

DEMOCRATS: Never mind. 

 


Posted by lewyn at 11:02 AM EDT
My Toronto photo colllection
http://atlantaphotos.fotopic.net/c1739146.html

Posted by lewyn at 9:41 AM EDT
PEDS forum

Yesterday I went to a forum on walkable design sponsored by PEDS (www.peds.org).  A few of the more interesting points:

*The mayor of Decatur claimed that Decatur vehicle counts were lower now than in the 1990s.

*Lots of people pointed out the importance of street design.  Uses and transportation facilities change, but streets are forever; for example, Attilla the Hun sacked Rome, but the Roman street pattern survived him.  Unfortunately, this means bad streets are hard to change.

*Long blocks are unpleasant for pedestrians; for example, Manhattan's long avenues are unpleasant, its short north-south streets much more pleasant.  

*Too few streets means low connectivity (i.e. very few ways for pedestrians to get around): for example, one big-box Whole Foods takes up 11 Manhattan blocks.

*Sally Flocks showed a table with an alarming correlation between street width and pedestrian fatalities.  Once a street got more than about 24 feet wide, fatalities started to rise. 

*Grass can be bad (e.g. a lawn that sets back a building from the street); asphalt can be good (e.g. sidewalks).

All common sense when you think about it. 


Posted by lewyn at 9:39 AM EDT
Tuesday, 4 August 2009
Toronto

Since I am spending the next academic year on leave at the University of Toronto, I spent last week there looking for apartments.  A few observations:

 *Women are better dressed, men not as well.

*Some things are more expensive, some things less.  Beer costs two or times as much as in the states, kleenex no more so, restaurants more but only slightly.   Museums outrageously expensive.

*Much more focus on recycling.  Virtually every public trash can has three boxes, one for nonrecyclable litter, one for paper, one for other recyclables.

 *More powerful unions.  When I was there Toronto was in middle of garbage strike.

*By well dressed I mean standard synagogue/church/job interview attire: skirts that are not real short for women, ties for men. 

*More ethnically diverse, lots more Asians.  In a typical southern American, almost everyone is either WASP or black. 


Posted by lewyn at 10:25 AM EDT
Updated: Tuesday, 4 August 2009 10:26 AM EDT
Wednesday, 15 July 2009
another trip

Had a layover in Memphis between a bus from Little Rock and a plane to Atlanta, and visited Harbor Town (one of the first New Urbanist developments, mentioned in one of Jim Kunstler's books).

Positives: beautiful houses, lots of mixed use (not just shopping, but both apartments and single-family houses, unlike some NU developments that appear targeted to just families or singles).  Great park space - a major park bordering the Mississippi plus lots of small parks throughout the development.

Con: Entry to development is through six-lane street, no visible employment centers (though since I only took a 30 minute walk I could be missing something), no visible public transit- looks like most people would have to drive to work. 

Incidentally, Memphis has a nice looking downtown: lots of historic structures left, plus some nice looking apartment houses, a Walgreen's open till 8 (an indicator of residential development) and a Family Dollar- not much by the standards of Northern big cities, but pretty good compared to Little Rock. 


Posted by lewyn at 12:31 AM EDT
Updated: Wednesday, 15 July 2009 12:35 AM EDT
Monday, 13 July 2009
Jewish urbanism: grading cities

A few weeks ago in a Planetizen blog post (http://www.planetizen.com/node/39364 ) I proposed a way of grading cities by the quality of their urban Jewish life.  Basically, an "A" city has lots of urban Jewish life, a "B" city usually has a minimal downtown or near-downtown presence and some nearby urban Jewish life, a "C" city has synagogues which are suburban but accessible via public transit, and a "D" city has almost nothing that is even on a bus line.

So here's my read on the cities I am most familiar with:

New York City: A+.  Everything you could possibly want is in Manhattan.

Philadelphia: A- .  Lots of congregations downtown; only thing missing is a Jewish day school.

Washington: B+.  At least three (small) synagogues (counting Chabad, but not counting the mini-congregations meeting at the old 6th and I shul) in what I think of as downtown.    But definitely not the level of Jewish life you would find in Center City Philadelphia. 

Atlanta: C+.  Chabad Intown is a couple of miles from downtown, a very long walk but still sort of doable.   Lots of other congregations on bus lines, not much real close to the subway.

St. Louis: C.  A Reform congregation and a traditional minyan are in the Central West End, a few miles from downtown (but to a much greater extent than in Atlanta I would not feel safe making the walk).

Buffalo: C.  Pretty comparable to St. Louis. 

Cleveland: C.  Very suburban Jewish community, though significant transit accessibility in Cleveland/Shaker Hts.   Only one (Reform) synagogue within city limits. 

Little Rock: C-.  One suburban synagogue is pretty close to a bus line, two others are less so. 

 


Posted by lewyn at 10:08 AM EDT
The case for cookie-cutter

Sometimes I read references to "cookie-cutter" housing - the implication being that if houses (or apartments or whatever) look too similar this is a bad thing.  But after visiting Little Rock and Dallas, I wonder if this is the case.

Where (as in Dallas' M Streets) there is a kind of unifying design, a neighborhood really stands out in my memory- I think about the M Streets and say to myself "Yes, this is what that place looks like! And I actually kind of like it!" (or don't).

By contrast, every house and block and street are very different in Little Rock's otherwise comparable intown areas- as a result, they all seem kind of vague and undefined and yes, kind of boring. 


Posted by lewyn at 10:06 AM EDT
Sunday, 12 July 2009
my Dallas photo collection
http://atlantaphotos.fotopic.net/c1722935.html

Posted by lewyn at 5:01 PM EDT
Little Rock tour

This Friday I saw a great deal of affluent Little Rock (though not the most affluent areas at the city's northern and western edges).  I stayed at a hotel in West Little Rock (boring sprawl) but took a bus to an area closer in, and walked through parts of three intown neighborhoods: Capitol View, Hillcrest and the Heights.

Capitol View is a socially mixed, slightly gentrified area about a mile and a half west of downtown, mostly built in the early 20th century. The housing fabric is mostly small, unadorned single-family homes as you might expect from such a neighborhood: not as adorned as the Quapaw Quarter's Victorians.  Though lots of things are within a long walk of Capitol View, it seems to be basically a single-use area.  The worst thing about the neighborhood (and about all the neighborhoods I visited): you can't count on sidewalks.  One street will have them, the next street won't, and so on down the line.  By contrast, in Atlanta the overall number of sidewalks may well be fewer than in Little Rock, but there is more of a clear pattern: pre WW-2 intown areas (Morningside, Virginia-Highlands, Midtown) tend to have sidewalks on every block, and areas built between 1940 and 1980 tend to have sidewalks only on commercial streets.  (Newer sprawl is more likely to have sidewalks).

The Heights (about 5 miles from downtown) and Hillcrest (about 3-4 miles from downtown) are similar to Capitol View in many ways, but are far more affluent, have bigger houses (though not always much bigger) and a more clearly identifiable commercial strip (Kavanaugh).  The residential areas struck me as notably prewar but not that distinctive: no dominant architectural pattern (unlike Dallas's M Streets), and sidewalks were normal but not consistently present.

What I liked the most about these areas: a walkable, small-shop-oriented commercial street (around the 3000 block of Kavanaugh for Hillcrest, around the 5000 block for the Heights).  In this area, the main street is only two or three lanes wide, and parking (especially in Hillcrest, less consistently in the Heights) usually fronts the street rather than being set back behind yards of parking.

Also, an abomination separates the two Kavanaugh commercial districts: about a half mile where there is no sidewalk nor even grass to walk on, so pedestrians must walk in the shoulder of the road. (See https://www.youtube.com/user/mlewyn#play/all/uploads-all/0/SsjHK-3AAwI for details).  


Posted by lewyn at 5:01 PM EDT
Monday, 6 July 2009
Dallas-blogging, the end (Sat. and Sun.)

SUNDAY 

Sunday morning I checked out of my hotel and took a bus, then a train downtown - and there my long walk through intown Dallas began (according to Mapquest I walked about 9 miles).

I began (and ended at night) by walking through downtown Dallas.  17 years ago I had a job interview in downtown Dallas and thought it was the worst place on Earth: I remember that at 7 PM there was no place to eat but a Wendy's that was about to close.  But today things are greatly improved in the commercial core: there are apartments and condos here and there (mostly on Main Street), there are a few bars and convenience stores, and there's a downtown CVS that's open all the way till 9 PM!  Compared to Chicago or Philadelphia, not much to brag about.  But compared to Dallas in 1992 or Little Rock today, a big improvement.  I would say that downtown Dallas is even a little better than downtown Jacksonville or Atlanta (though only marginally so).  I didn't walk around after dark so I can't vouch for that experience; however, at sunset it did not seem totally lifeless- there were some bars/restaurants open, and there were a few people about as long as you stayed in the core of the core and didn't wander too far off in the wrong direction.

Then (after a stop at Dealey Plaza and a snack on the infamous grassy knoll) I started walking around the new neighborhoods at the fringes of downtown Dallas, going northwest to West End, which I thought would be a thriving historic/entertainment district like Larimer Square in Denver.   I was partially right: the physical look was a bit like Larimer Square (old red brick buildings, mostly restaurants etc but a little residential) but it was definitely smaller, more tourist-oriented and less prosperous- a shopping mall there, West End Marketplace, had just closed.  Maybe the revitalization of the downtown core (and of some other areas) has removed West End's reason for existence.

Then I walked a bit north to Victory Park, a very different kind of new development: new high- and mid-rises, both residential and commercial.  Nothing quaint about it, but very utilitarian if you work at one of the commercial high-rises and can afford to live in one of the residential ones.  It reminded me a bit of Midtown Atlanta around 14th Street, sterile but convenient.

Then I decided to make my way to Uptown, Dallas' urban satellite downtown (kind of like Atlanta's Midtown).  I expected to see something like Victory Park- lots of skyscrapers.  There were a few here and there, but it resembled Midtown Atlanta more than anything else- some tall commercial buildings, but lots of small late 19th-c and early 20th-c. houses (about half of which seemed to have been converted into professional offices), lots of restaurants and small shops with small parking lots or parking in back. 

The major difference between Uptown and Atlanta's Midtown is that everything seemed a little more jumbled: in Midtown Atlanta, the high-rises seem to be concentrated around subway stops, while in Dallas they seem to randomly crop up here and there.  It also seemed like more houses had been converted to offices in the Dallas version.

But otherwise lots of similarity: in both places, there isn't a uniform street wall, since some businesses front the street while others are behind a few yards of parking.   I'm not sure to what extent these differences are the result of different zoning policies, or whether something else is involved.   Atlanta's Midtown seems more coherent but also more sterile.

My original plan was to walk from Uptown to the DART light rail (dart.org), then make my way to the Deep Ellum neighborhood, then onward to the inner suburbs. But instead I saw some interesting-looking high rises in the distance.  So I walked from there to a very nice looking street called Turtle Creek, which is mostly residential high rises (by which I mean 10-20 stories, not real skyscapers) adjoining a very nice park.  After a few blocks of this, I looked at my map and noticed I was a lot closer to Highland Park (the suburb I was interested in) than I expected.

So I decided to walk north to Highland Park instead of east towards the light rail.  And I have one thing to say about Highland Park: WOW!  A super-rich, super-safe* suburb with sidewalks on every block!  And grid streets!  And bus routes (OK, not that many, and only north-south heading towards downtown as opposed to within the neighborhood)!  And even a light rail within walking distance (though only at the eastern edge of the town near SMU)!  And it is really, really beautiful- big houses a uniform 10 or 20 feet (i.e. not preposterously far) from the street, kind of like Rosedale in Toronto.  

Only downside from a new urbanist perspective (other than, of course, its high level of social homogenity and sheer expensiveness) is mixed use: most commercial uses are at the fringes of the town, so walkscore.com ratings (which measure mixed use) tend to be in the 50s, not horrible but not great either. 

There is no place in Atlanta which compares: Ansley Park is similar in that it is a well-off 20s neighborhood, but it isn't as large or as rich, has dreadfully complex curvilinear streets, and I suspect is closer to marginal neighborhoods (and of course does not have the advantage of being an independent municipality).  Buckhead is more comparable socio-economically, but you can't count on sidewalks in Buckhead, let alone grids or public transit or walkability in any way, shape or form. 

Then I walk to SMU at the edge of Highland Park, and cross a highway to get to Mockingbird light rail station- but I have one more neighborhood to go before I head south to Deep Ellum and downtown, the "M Streets" (aka Greenland Hills) near Greenville Avenue (so named becuase many of the east-west streets begin with the letter M).  These are like a Highland Park for people priced out of Highland Park : built in the 20s, grid streets, bungalows that scream "cute" in ways that I find hard to describe without photographs (lots of house photos at http://www.mstreetscd.org/database/tour.asp  - just click on any street to see the houses).   Only downside: narrower north-south streets didn't have sidewalks; since there are no houses fronting on the east-west streets, my guess is that the idiot who built the subdivision thought of them more as alleys than streets. So if you are in a situation where you really shouldn't be walking on grass (e.g. wheelchair user) you'd be well advised to go on the east-west streets to Greenville Avenue (the commercial north-south street which DOES have sidewalks) and then go back to your east-west destination. 

Like Uptown, the M Streets gave me a massive attack of deja vu: they really, really remind me of Atlanta's Morningside.  If you want to see the latter area, go on Google Street View and start looking around, oh, 1300 N. Highland and higher numbers, or maybe East Rock Springs. 

Similarly, Greenville Avenue reminds me of the commercial part of Highland Avenue (lower numbers if you are using Street View)- basically low-rise and pedestrian-friendly, but not an even street wall: some buildings front the street, others set back behind small parking lots, so it seems a little less orderly than either a purely urban commercial strip where everything fronts the street or a purely suburban area where every building is set back behind yards of parking. 

Then finally, I went back to Mockingbird station and I grabbed a bus that I hoped would take me to Deep Ellum, which I vaguely knew was a once-hot, entertainment- and bohemian-oriented area full of late 19th-c. buildings.  Though I had a regional bus map it wasn't very clear about where Deep Ellum was: the neighborhood was unfortunately a few blocks too far east to be in the map's "downtown inset" yet too close in to be easily locatable in the regionwide map- perhaps a sign of the trouble that lay ahead.  The bus dropped me off at around the 2000 block of Main, where downtown ended, and about six blocks from Deep Ellum.   Those six blocks were a serious urban wasteland; I don't think I saw a single human being between where I got off and about the 2500 or 2600 block of Main- and frankly I didn't want to.  There was an expressway overpass and vacant lots on either side of it. 

Then when I got to Deep Ellum it wasn't much better; I think I saw about 1 or 2 people per block.  There were a few tattoo parlors and a couple of restaurants open, but lots of vacant storefronts, or maybe just places open Friday and Saturday night and closed for the rest of the week.  Rather than trying to figure out when the nearest bus arrived, I decided I would walk back to downtown as soon as I could and hope for the best- I don't think I've ever felt as happy to be downtown in my life! 

Not being very knowledgeable about Dallas, I'm not sure what went wrong in Deep Ellum; my impression, based on what I have read and heard, is that at one time it was more popular.  My guess is that transportation might have had something to do with it: the fact that it was cut off from downtown by the expressway and no-man's land nearby was never an advantage, and the light rail (and McKinney Avenue trolley serving Uptown) may have meant that Deep Ellum suddenly had to compete with other intown entertainment districts that were more easily accessible.  At any rate, don't waste time going to Deep Ellum; its a hassle to get to without a car and its too yucky and vacant to be worth seeing.

On balance, Dallas reminds me more of Atlanta than I expected: a sprawling Sun Belt city, but with some OK intown and near-intown places.  Dallas's sidewalks and street grids make parts of Dallas more walkable than Atlanta; on the other hand, Dallas streets tend to be wider than those of Atlanta, which is a disadvantage for pedestrians. 

 

*At least for a suburb this close to downtown.  You can find data at city-data.com; basically, robberies per 10,000 residents (not to be confused with the actual number) range from 1-6 per year, while Decatur, GA, the closest-in Atlanta suburb, typically has between 10-20.

SATURDAY 

 

Since I'm shomer shabbat (which means that I don't drive or ride on Friday night or Saturday) I didn't have many travel adventures on Saturday; I walked to shul (Shaarey Tefilla, a modern Orthodox shul in suburban North Dallas) and hung around that neighborhood all day.  Without going into details that would be boring to non-religious readers, I was quite favorably impressed with Shaarey Tefilla.

I was not, however, impressed with its location.  One of the worst things about Dallas, from my point of view, is that there is no opportunity for an observant Jewish urban life- not only is there no synagogue in Dallas' intown neighborhoods, there isn't even a synagogue in the Park Cities (Dallas's elite close-in suburbs). 

The closest-in synagogue (Reform) is 6 miles from downtown, the closest-in Conservative is 7, the closest-in Orthodox 9 or 10.  By contrast, even in Atlanta, the Sprawl Capital of the World, you can find synagogues of all types 2 or 3 miles out (Chabad Intown is about 2 miles from downtown, and Reform, non-Chabad Orthodox and Conservative congregations can all be found about 3 miles away).*

By my "Jewish Urbanism" criteria (discussed in http://planetizen.com/node/39364 ) Dallas gets a C- :  you can walk to shul and take the bus to work - but its going to be a long ride, about 45 minutes to downtown from where I spent Shabbat) 

 

 


Posted by lewyn at 10:43 AM EDT
Updated: Monday, 6 July 2009 11:45 AM EDT
Friday, 3 July 2009
More Dallas-blogging

Today was spent in Richardson and Plano: Richardson because I wanted to go to an Indian kosher restaurant there (Madras Pavillion, which I stronglyy recommend)- otherwise boring sprawl.

Then I went to downtown Plano, since I'd heard about a new urban development there.  Not very much to see; a big set of apartments with some (but not very much) ground floor retail.  There were a couple of gentrified-looking commercial blocks with brick sidewalks. 

However, the surrounding blocks were even more boring- road widenings, the substitution of garden apartments for houses, and parking lots apparently had erased much of the historic downtown.  But (unlike Richardson and N. Dallas) what was left wasn't rich enough or developed enough to look like typical suburban middle-class sprawl. 

Instead, the nearby blocks reminded me a bit of where I used to live in Fort Smith, Arkansas- not historic or as pedestrian-friendly as a real downtown, but still much more small-town like than typical suburbia.  

Then I went home for shabbos; I'll do Dallas' intown neighborhoods (Highland Park, the M Streets, Uptown, Dowtown to the extent I have time) on Sunday.


Posted by lewyn at 7:41 PM EDT
Some extra likes and dislikes about Dallas

Like: You can buy a daily bus pass on every bus, instead of having to go downtown to buy one.

Dislike: Nearly every commercial street I've seen (at least in the suburban area where I'm staying, in far N. Dallas near Richardson) is six to ten lanes wide.


Posted by lewyn at 2:52 PM EDT
Thursday, 2 July 2009
Blogging my way through Dallas, part 1

I decided to visit Dallas for the weekend, mainly to see examples of new (and old) urbanism.

Today I started off with the new.  I took a bus from Love Field to the Mockingbird light rail station, where there is a transit-oriented development named after the station.  In fact, the development's movie theatre was atop the rail station.  The development is what I would call "minimal new urbanism"- some lofts over some shops, but too small to include anything else (the Gulch in Nashville, which I visited a few weeks ago, is pretty similar). 

Mockingbird Station (mockingbirdstation.com) has some defects from a new urbanist perspective: too much space devoted to a surface parking lot blurs the difference between this development and neighboring strip malls (though even so the difference is, I think, visible).   Also, it is cut off from Highland Park and Southern Methodist University (just to the west) by an expressway- or more precisely, some weird hybrid of an expressway and a surface street. Finally, there wasn't all that much residential- looked to me like just one set of lofts, though maybe there was something else I did not notice.

Then I went on the DART rail station to the Forest Lane station in North Dallas (where I was staying).  I was really surprised by how crowded the trains was.  I was expecting more or less empty trains, but instead it was jam packed- not just standing room only, but standing shoulder to shoulder.  And this was 2:00 or so, not even rush hour.  Normally I would have walked the mile or so to the hotel, but the weather was over 100 and I was carrying a pretty big bag so I took a bus.  

After decompressing at the hotel for a few minutes, I took a DART bus to Addison Circle, a much more well-known new urbanist development.* Addison is much bigger, maybe half a mile wide - amazing in some ways, less so in others.  What I really liked:

*Lots and lots of public space - one really neat, heavily forested mini-park, a couple of less exciting ones, plus one big park at the edge of the development. 

*Incredibly quiet residential streets.  I heard doves coo, and was able to make a cell phone call with ease (by contrast, I tried on the bus but it was too noisy).

Downside: a little monotonous, since it was all the same height and all multifamily.  No high rises (unlike Atlantic Station in Atlanta), and no single family (unlike Celebration).  Not the best I've seen but still nice.  I'd live there if it was convenient.

Then I went grocery shopping for Shabbat (in sprawl halfway between Addison Circle and my hotel) and walked down a truly dreadful street, Forest Lane between Preston and Coit.  Most of the houses and subdivisions were surrounded by walls; I felt like I was in some Third World country where walls protected the mansions from the riffraff.

*There doesn't seem to be just one web page for this development, so just google "addison circle" for more info.


Posted by lewyn at 11:20 PM EDT
interesting things in Little Rock

Over the past few days I've finally managed to do some sightseeing here in Little Rock (where I've been teaching for the summer). 

I saw Central High School, site of a desegregation crisis in 1957 (when black students sought to enter, were kept out by a mob, and reentered after President Eisenhower sent federal troops).  What an amazing building! (Here's an image- http://www.igougo.com/journal-j24270-Little_Rock-Little_Rock_Central_High_School_Historic_Site.html 

Or if you really like photos, just go to google images and type in "Little Rock Central High").  And from what I've heard its still a good school- at least one professor at UALR Law has kids there. 

The neighborhood itself, alas, needs work.  Like most of Southwest Little Rock it combines poverty and single-use zoning.  There is minimal retail within a short walk, but at the same time there's lots of rundown single-family housing.  The Walkscore is 52, but that's misleading since the school itself adds to the walkability score, and most of the retail is gas stations and mini-marts rather than restaurants and real grocery stores.

I also saw another interesting area that needs work: the West 9th Street corridor near the Mosaic Templars (once a fraternal lodge, now a museum of Arkansas African-American history).  Half a century ago, W. 9th near Broadway was Little Rock's African-American downtown, kind of like Harlem in NYC or Sweet Auburn in Atlanta.  Now, it is mostly vacant lots; where there are businesses, they are warehouse-type businesses surrounding by barbed-wire fences.  What went wrong?

Part of it, of course, was movement of the black middle class to suburbia and to white neighborhoods.  But that was true everywhere; however, the devastation on 9th St. is far more complete than in Harlem or Sweet Auburn.  Those places became bad neighborhoods, but still have restaurants and similar retail.  W. 9th looks downright rural.

A little reading reveals the real villian: highway departments.  By running an expressway just south of 9th St., the government cut off this street from its customer base.  And by turning nearby streets one-way, the city government discouraged motorists from stopping at 9th St.


Posted by lewyn at 10:21 AM EDT
Sunday, 14 June 2009
CNU, last day

I didn't do as much on the last day as on the first three, partially due to Shabbat restrictions (I prayed a little and lounged around, thus causing me to miss the first session) and partially because I went to two "Open Source" sessions where we talked more about CNU business than about public policy.

I spent most of the afternoon at sessions on the new transportation bill which Congress is likely to consider this year or next.  I learned:

*That roads don't always pay for themselves even if the gas tax as a whole pays for itself, due to cross-subsidies.  Suppose you are a suburbanite who travels heavily on a new road.  Are you paying for that road? Not necessarily- most of the road's construction was paid for before it was built, by all the nation's drivers.    By contrast, if you live in the city and drive on non-federally financed municipal roads, you pay the same gas taxes as suburbanites but don't really benefit.  

*That compact urban development need not be promoted solely through transit.   Highway spending could be focused on interconnected, intimate streets rather than on widening sprawl-generating speedways.

I also spent a little time at a session on fire codes; the International Fire Code may be amended to provide fire chiefs with more discretion, thus making it easier for narrower streets to be built.  However, its not clear how much impact this will have at the municipal level, since every city has different types of fire trucks (and thus different problems in insuring that they can fit on streets) and different types of hazards.

 


Posted by lewyn at 1:03 AM EDT

Newer | Latest | Older