Check Your School’s “Mini-Master Plan” Before the Council Passes the DCPS Master Facility Plan

From the 21st Century School Fund:

Before the Council approves this master plan, make sure that you look at the plans for your school and discuss them with Local School Restructuring Team and PTA representatives, the principal and other interested community members. Concept plans were done with no participation from local schools; they require community review. Please consider how the plan fits current and planned academic programs and community needs with respect to class size, administrative offices, space required for special programs, outdoor activities, assembly and/or cafeteria space, parking, and so forth. Are the condition assessment and the proposed capacity accurate and reasonable?

For instance, the plan for Oyster Elementary School, which was designed for 350 students, calls for 500, and converts the art, music, teacher and library workrooms all into classroom space. Plans for Ballou High School describe the area used by 700 students in the STAY program as “un-assigned space”.

Let your council member know immediately about concerns you may have.

How to find your school’s “mini-master plan” from the latest 2009 Master Facilities Plan for the DC Public Schools:

It is easy to look at your individual school “mini-master plan” through links from DCPS School Close-Ups:

Go to www.21csf.org
- Click on the School Close-Ups school house icon - - upper right corner
- Click the “School List” on the home page, click on your school
- Select the blue “Facilities” tab from the individual school display
- Under the school photo is a link to the Proposed 2009 Mini Master Plan

First there is an aerial view of the school, then a 3 or 4 page condition assessment of the building including a program profile, a history of recent maintenance and repair (called “modernization”), and finally, there is a color-coded floor plan of the concept for the school including any proposed additions, etc.

If you have questions about finding your school plan, please contact Nancy Huvendick at the 21st Century School Fund via e-mail or phone; 202-745-3745 x15.

Fundamental changes in behavior vs. "recycling"

The issue of bags at stores is more about waste and how we use resources than it is about recycling. Sure we can recycle bags, but better to not use either a paper (which is worse for the environment than plastic, see the third page of this article "The Green Issue - Climate Change - Environment - Energy Efficiency" from the New York Times Sunday Magazine) or a plastic (which uses up that limited natural resource, oil) bag at all.

Better to use a bag or backpack that you already have, one that will last for many years. Of course, you have to remember to carry such bags. (There are small rollup bags you can carry that when you open them up they can be quite big.) And this can be a problem if you are on foot or bicycle and don't have bags "in your car" and for whatever reason you don't have a bag.

But in the end, it's no big deal, and it's probably not even worth writing a letter to the editor of the Washington Post about. Now, Corinne Smeriglio of DC did write a letter (as did Andy Shallal of Busboys and Poets, in favor), see "Paper, Plastic -- and a Price" and in it she betrayed that she doesn't understand that this isn't about "recycling" bags but about how we use resources more generally. From the letter:

Sure, politicians like to posture as friends of the environment. But wouldn't more be accomplished by expanding existing recycling programs? The D.C. government should work to raise awareness of these programs and to partner with local businesses. Regular community cleanups are another opportunity to boost recycling.

The fact is, people need bags when they shop. And considering that the recession is causing hardships for so many people, now is not the time to increase consumers' costs. The District should find a better way to ensure a clean environment.

As the U.S. moves from an economy built on using more (what I call an extensive use of resources) and on waste to a more parsimonious and efficient economy (what I call an intensive use of resources), not using bags when you don't have to is one of the many small changes in every day behavior that people will have to make.

Note to Ken, no I still don't have panniers on my bicycle. So when I buy groceries and carry them home, eventually the bag straps tear and break (I often use those bags you pick up at festivals, they're pretty cheap).

In Baltimore at this cool store called Red Tree in Hampden, Suzanne found an amazing bag made out of recycled tire tubes. Sure it was $52, but it will likely never break. Unlike those bags from Trader Joes...
-----------------------------
David writes:

I suspect that Corinne Smeriglio is not writing as a concerned citizen but as an industry rep with an interest to protect. I've been googling and haven't found the connection. She seems to work at Venturehouse.

I don't see a young white zeta tau alpha sister being particularly concerned about the poor having to pay a nickel for a bag.

The Washington Post consciously posts letters to the editor by industry insiders without noting their financial interest in the matter.

Historic preservation and public history: whose history is history anyway?

There is no question that many people don't understand historic preservation of the "every day" -- preservation of neighborhoods -- in the same way that they understand the preservation of buildings, sites, and places that relate in some way to what we might call "the grand forces of history."

Remember that I call preservation of "every day" history the nexus of place, architecture and people (history).

The same kind of movement has happened in the discipline of history (historical studies) and the development of the subfield of "public history." According to the National Council of Public History, in the webpage What is Public History?:

Over the years as the field has evolved there have been numerous definitions of public history. Recently the NCPH Board of Directors described public history as “a movement, methodology, and approach that promotes the collaborative study and practice of history; its practitioners embrace a mission to make their special insights accessible and useful to the public.”

Public history is "where historians and their various publics collaborate in trying to make the past useful to the public." (See article below). That is, public history is the conceptualization and practice of historical activities with one’s public audience foremost in mind. It generally takes place in settings beyond the traditional classroom. Its practitioners often see themselves as mediators on the one hand between the academic practice of history and non-academics and on the other between the various interests in society that seek to create historical understanding.

For me, the difference is communicated very clearly through two different newspaper articles. This morning's Post reports the obituary of Theresa Brown, the "Theresa F. Brown Dies at 86; Advocate for Preserving Historic D.C. Neighborhood" -- but the headline in the paper is better "Tenacious Protector of LeDroit Park."

She led the effort to stabilize and improve the LeDroit Park neighborhood of Washington, DC, one that had been home to the city's "upper crust" African-Americans for many decades, but had declined along with other neighborhoods in the city due to population loss and then the impact of the riots.

From the article:

Hammered by the 1968 riots and the flight of both residents and businesses, LeDroit Park took on a shabby appearance. Homes were left vacant, drug dealers moved in, and Howard University's expansion ate away at the edges of the area. Mrs. Brown, who worked for the old Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Co. and was one of the first black women hired for its Baltimore office, told whoever asked that although she couldn't afford to live in the best neighborhood, she could work to make her own neighborhood the best. So she set to it.

She formed the LeDroit Park Preservation Society and began educating residents about their area's history. The tree-lined streets and landscaped traffic circles remained, as did 50 of the original 64 large homes, featuring beautiful tile roofs and gingerbread trim, expansive chimneys, iron grillwork, solid wood porch columns, bay windows and high ceilings.

In 1974, the neighborhood became an officially registered historic district. Some of her neighbors thought it silly, Mrs. Brown told The Washington Post in 2001. "I didn't care what the neighbors thought," she said. "There weren't enough of them to get in my way. I just kept going."

Theresa F. Brown poses with a child in her beloved LeDroit Park, a neighborhood filled with history. (By James Kenah)

I feel a kinship with Theresa Brown because we both got involved in our neighborhoods in the face of disinvestment, and in searching for strategies for improvement, we came to understand the value of historic preservation as the foundation of successful urban revitalization.

I met her in 2002, at the Annual Meeting of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which was held in Cleveland. The year before, she received an award from the Trust, as a "Pioneer Preservationist."

I had talked to her on the phone once in 2001, when I was desperately seeking insight on how to present and portray the value of historic preservation in the H Street NE neighborhood. I had applied for a grant on behalf of the Near Northeast Citizens group to begin a survey of the neighborhood. But opposition developed (at the time, I didn't realize that the opposition had been organized by supporters of the H Street Community Development Corporation, which did not favor preservation-based strategies). (She sent me on to her protege, Alan Rogers, who was very helpful.)

Then, there is an article in the New York Times, "Challenge to Landmark Law Worries Preservationists," which discusses how Carol Mrowka is suing the City of Chicago, because she believes "her neighborhood isn't a landmark."

From the article:

Carol Mrowka considers her East Village neighborhood here attractive, comfortable — and ordinary. So when the city deemed the area an official landmark, Ms. Mrowka found it absurd and went to court.

“Sure, it’s a nice neighborhood,” said Ms. Mrowka, a real estate agent who moved 12 years ago to the neighborhood, north and west of the Loop, with its cottages and small, flat buildings that were home to immigrants in the late 1800s. “The basic style of the buildings is pretty, but this is not a landmark.”

Amanda Rivkin for The New York Times. Some residents say the East Village is not as significant as other city landmark districts.

I didn't know about this suit until the article, but it would be pretty simple to lay out the argumentation in favor of the designation of neighborhoods as landmarks.

Simple bungalows in Chicago. Woodstock Institute photo.

And it is no surprise that "real estate" interests are fighting preservation, just as they did in the H Street neighborhood. Especially given that Chicago laws are very loose in terms of allowing teardowns of traditional buildings, and replacement with condos. Preservation Chicago has called attention to this by including neighborhoods on its year to year lists of threats to preservation, the Pilsen Neighborhood in 2006, and the Sheffield Historic District in 2005.

And the Chicago Tribune has two incredible series of articles on how business interests run roughshod over preservation and neighborhood livability in the city, see "Neighborhoods for Sale" and "Squandered Heritage."

But it does communicate very well this dilemma over what is and isn't history.

I think too often that people learned in school that history (and the process of research and writing also) is something that is not part of us, that we aren't part of history and we don't make history

That in a nutshell encapsulates the difference in approach to what historic preservation and history is and could or should be. History of "other people" vs. history of the every day, but history of the every day that explains and informs the history of urban development, and the creation and maintenance of neighborhoods, of transportation, of metropolitan regions, of architecture, of municipalities, etc.

And of course, we have the same dissension over this dichotomy in Washington. In fact, opposition to the survey effort in the H Street neighborhood in 2001 was an early instance of the kind of opposition we see as a matter of course in DC today, in places like Tenleytown (Armsleigh Park), Brookland, Chevy Chase, and Lanier Heights.

------

In the same vein as how do you record and recognize history, today's Seattle Times reports that "Jimi Hendrix childhood home torn down." One issue with "house museums" is that there generally isn't the interest and demand as well as the ongoing funds to maintain a "preserved" house, once it has been "saved." Also see "'Uncle Tom's Cabin' Will Open to Visitors" from the Washington Post, about the preservation of a building in Montgomery County that was the place that inspired the book Uncle Tom's Cabin.

Or I remember when real estate interests put Brookland's Ralph Bunche house on the market at a price at least higher by $500,000-$800,000 than what the house would be worth as a place to live in... but the "exchange value" of the price difference in this case wasn't intended to go towards preserving history, but to the pockets of the sellers. (They weren't able to sell it at that price.)

Tough issues.

-----
On that note, I am not too happy that the Preservation Maryland Conference and the DC Preservation Conference are on the same dates, and that the DC Preservation Conference shares one of the days of WalkingTownDC, when I would normally be giving at least one tour.

New blog from the Office of the DC Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development

DC Development.

And it even links to blogs, including this one, that might not necessarily agree with the various positions taken by the office.

In Phoenix region, Average cost of transport consumes 3 months' pay

See "Average cost of transport consumes 3 months' pay," from the Arizona Republic. From the article:

Maybe you've heard of Tax Freedom Day, theoretically the date when Americans have worked enough to pay off their tax burden for the year.

Researchers have now come up with Transportation Freedom Day, the date when an average household has paid off its annual costs of getting around in a particular city.

For metro Phoenix, that day fell on March 23, but it's different for each city in the region and across the country. Tempe residents cleared the typical cost of car payments, insurance, gas, repairs and transit use on March 18. Residents in New River will keep paying until April 9.

Phoenix is in the middle of the pack for U.S. metro areas. Cheapest are San Francisco, with a March 1 freedom day, and New York (March 7). Tucson (March 30) is near the bottom.

See the Transportation Freedom Day website for images.

According to this report, Transportation Freedom Days from U.S. Metro Areas, the date for the DC region is March 10th. ... but not if you bicycle and/or use transit.

William Donald Schaefer, former Baltimore Mayor and Governor of Maryland

Is the subject of a documentary which shows tonight on WMPT -- Maryland Public Television. In the DC region, it is channel 22. See "The one, the only"and " Documentary shows the arc of a career" from the Baltimore Sun.

It shows at 9 pm.

"Open Source" Transit

Greater Greater Washington, in "Zimmerman urges Metro to embrace "beta testing"" is not too happy with WMATA's closed-mindedness about testing new computer-related information services.

I'm with GGW, but maybe with a slightly different set of reasons. The difference in opinion between WMATA and willing participants is the difference between authoritarian vs. participation in software development, and is the difference between a more distant "representative democracy" to the point of autocracy, vs. participatory democracy. That might be a heavy-handed way of referring to the arguments laid out in Eric Raymond's paper, "The Cathedral and the Bazaar," but that's what it comes down to.

It's also the difference between the traditional kind of large scale software development or "rational planning" model vs. the more iterative model of "rapid prototyping" or the "design" model. The difference is that in the latter model there are more rounds of feedback and prototyping, more opportunities for user participation, and more opportunities to correct for problems or improve the overall product, through the participation of greater numbers of able participants.

I have written about this in terms of government programs more generally in these entries:

-- Social Marketing the Arlington (and Tower Hamlets and Baltimore) way
-- Dispuptive innovation (once again)
-- Prototyping and municipal capital improvement programs

and on WMATA and transit marketing in:

-- More on Metro and rethinking transit marketing

and about transit camps and the need to have an annual Transit Advocates conference in the region, see:

-- We need a transit users conference, now!

Design Method


Rational Planning Model -- lacks a step for prototyping and feedback before final implementation


This comes up because the Chicago region is taking up a distinctly "open source" orientation towards engaging participants. The Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce created a contest seeking proposals from the public, aimed at growing transit use to 1 billion rides a year in the Chicagoland region. See "Chicago transit: Ideas to reach 1 billion rides a year," from the Chicago Tribune.

Fellow blogger Aaron Renn of The Urbanophile won the contest and the $5,000 offered for first place. (I met Aaron a few weeks ago when I was in Chicago for the National Main Street Conference. I joke that Aaron's blog is one of the few with regular entries that are much longer than the entries I typically write.)

From the article:

The goal of the competition was to generate new ideas for the CTA, Metra and Pace to help them increase transit trips in the region and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from autos, said Lance Pressl, president of the Chicagoland Chamber Foundation. The contest was conducted with InnoCentive, a network that works with companies and groups to solicit creative thinkers around the world for ideas to solve challenges.

The competition generated more than 125 entries from as far as Kenya, Australia and Japan. Renn and three runners-up who received honorable mentions are all from Chicago. ...

Renn also said a priority must be placed on vastly improving the experience of riding transit, and he challenged decision-makers to set a clear role for transit in the region, create performance criteria and provide incentives and funding to help ensure success.

The values of mass transit are in conflict because of disagreements over the role of transit today and the absence of a game plan for what it should be in the future, Renn said. Transit is seen as a public service, a social service for the poor and the disabled, a solution to traffic congestion and pollution and a tool to revitalize urban neighborhoods, he noted.

"Programs today that may provide some boost to ridership—free rides to seniors or using transit to link the inner-city transit-dependent with suburban jobs—do so at the cost of creating a societal view of transit as primarily a social service," Renn wrote. "But to achieve significant market penetration, transit needs to be seen as a public service."

His proposals, while perhaps representing a successful blueprint to attaining 1 billion transit rides a year, are clearly controversial. First, they suggest changing the habits of transit riders, as well as drivers, using strong incentives and disincentives. In addition, Renn's plan isn't likely to please suburbanites. It relies heavily on directing new investments mostly toward the CTA's core service zones, with only limited service available elsewhere. His argument: " … to boost ridership, you need to go where the riders are. This means the CTA, not Metra or Pace," he wrote.

(For another take on user involvement in transit, see "Tech savvy teenager takes Lexington transit in new directions" from the Boston Globe.)

Similarly, in the DC region, much of the intellectual energy (in addition to the work of the elected officials and professionals in Arlington County, see the Commuter Page and the Arlington County Transportation Plan, and the planners at WMATA) about extending and improving transit comes from blogs such as Greater Greater Washington, BeyondDC, Track Twenty-Nine, Washcycle on bicycling, and my own.

Where my writing tends to differ the most from the others is the attempt to build the understanding of the system through extension of "theory" -- such as my concepts of the national transit network and the metropolitan transit network ("The (Meta) Regional Transit Network and transportation "vision" maps" and "The DC Transit Network"), as well as the concepts of the mobility shed ("Updating the mobilityshed concept") and the transit shed -- and thinking regionally instead of parochially.

For example, in April I will release my version of the 2009 DC Transportation and Mobility Vision Plan. It will be more structured than the first edition of last year's version in terms of the organizing framework, but pretty similar to the final version from last year, based on six organizing principles and six implementing principles.

Organizing Principles

1. Complete Places (this is an extension of the "Complete Streets" concept to include livability in a broader sense)

2. Transit First/Mode Shift away from SOV trips (TF is enshrined in the municipal charter of San Francisco, primary focus on shifting away from SOV trips is in the Arlington County VA transportation plan)

3. Transit City, no one should be disadvantaged by not owning a car (this principle of equity in transportation is being implemented by the City of Toronto).

4. Linked transportation and land use planning paradigm.

5. Green infrastructure going forward.

6. Life cycle costing/100 year investments/do it right the first time.)

Implementing principles

1. Urban design

2. Accessibility planning (i.e., Utrecht, where uses are rated for transport demand, and places are rated for their transport capacity, and uses are directed to the locations where demand can be met, with a focus on shifting away from automobility)

3. Metropolitan transit networks (this is regionally focused, Metropolitan transit networks connect and are subsidiary to regional [multi-state] and national transit networks)

4. Mobility shed planning (optimal mode utilization within neighborhoods, districts, transit station areas)

5. Transit shed planning (mobility planning within the catchment area of local and metropolitan transit networks)

6. Transportation demand management planning to implement mobility and transit shed planning principles (based on what is done in places like Arlington County and the Travel Smart programs in Australia)

CFL bulb in a porch light, 2nd Street SE

CFL bulb in a porch light, 2nd Street SE
Originally uploaded by rllayman

Duck at Washington Harbor, Georgetown, Washington, DC

Duck at Washington Harbor, Georgetown, Washington, DC
Originally uploaded by rllayman

"Old Allegheny City" neighborhood map mural, Pittsburgh

"Old Allegheny City" neighborhood map mural, Pittsburgh
Originally uploaded by rllayman

This photo shows the map a bit better.

Deaccessioned fire house for sale, Mexican War Streets neighborhood, Pittsburgh

Deaccessioned fire house for sale, Mexican War Streets neighborhood, Pittsburgh
Originally uploaded by rllayman

On street bicycle parking on St. Paul Street, Charles Village, Baltimore

On street bicycle parking on St. Paul Street, Charles Village, Baltimore
Originally uploaded by rllayman

A rainy day meant few bicyclists were out on Saturday.

Sign about Frederick Douglass affixed to a sign pole, Fells Point

Sign about Frederick Douglass affixed to a sign pole, Fells Point
Originally uploaded by rllayman

Interesting way to call attention to a neighborhood's history, or key personages from a neighborhood's past.

Your commercial district is only as successful as your least desirable patrons

And if you have potentially a great number of less desirable patrons, the long term health of your commercial district (or shopping center) is not assured. To deal with the potential problems, a very strong retail plan must be in place, with a robust security plan. By way of example, see today's Post, and the article "Violence, Vacancies, Image Issues Trouble Md. Mall."

It will continue to be difficult for Prince George's County to attract high end retail for some time to come.

The Art of Revitalization

is a tome by Sean Zielenbach, published in 2000, and is about revitalization in low and moderate income neighborhoods. It's based on a study of a set of neighborhoods in Chicago, and includes comparison case studies of the Englewood and North Lawndale neighborhoods. The book has been recommended to me by a colleague for a number of years, and since this particular copy was on sale at the Chicago Architecture Foundation bookstore when I was there earlier in the month, I picked it up and read it the next week.

At the time of the study, while most neighborhoods in Chicago were declining relative to the suburbs, North Lawndale declined at a lesser rate, and improved by comparison to other neighborhoods.

The biggest factors of success were proximity to Downtown, proximity to other high demand neighborhoods, revitalization opportunities, outward looking community leadership, connections with organizations beyond the neighborhood, and coherent social and organizational capital able to be tapped in a revitalization effort.

Here are some quotes from the book that I thought were particularly good:

(p. 249) City officials by themselves simply cannot address the problems of poor neighborhoods. The physical and economic regeneration of certain communities requires a significant influsion of resources, and municipal governments have a limited pool of funds from which to draw. The monies must support the provision of basic city-wide public services such as fire prevention, policing, education, and garbage pickup, services that maintain both a city's economic activity and its general quality of life. Obtaining the monies to meet other needs proves problematic. Cities already tend to have higher property tax rates that their surrounding suburbs, in part because of the broader rant of services they provide and because of the proportionally higher concentration of tax-exempt nonprofit and governmental property in the downtown area. If public officials raise taxes much more, they risk driving individual and corporate residents out of the muniicpality, thereby reducing many sources of revenue (property taxes, sales taxes, income taxes, user fees, and so forth).

(p. 251) Resource constraints prevent agencies [...] from targeting all of Chicago's needy neighborhoods for development. They therefore must be strategic in the communities they do target, concentrating on areas whose inherent regional and locational advantages and existing social and institutional base offers the greateest potential return on the City's monies. For example, certain neighborhoods within Chicago are more suitable for retail development than others because of their higher population densities, existing commercial activity, land availablility and so forth.

(p. 253) The political structure of Chicago militates against attempts to promote substantial neighborhood change. With limited city resources, new endeavors implicity involve trade-offs and reductions in other programs; targeting additional resources to a community requires the diversion of funds from another locale and/or the expansion of the revenue base, both of which prove highly problematic ventures. The city's inter-ethnic and inter-neighborood tensions have hampered attempts to establish and maintain the broad coalitions necessary for inter-neighborhood projects, to say nothing about initiatives tailored to a single community. The continued dominance of the mayor in the development of city-wide policies has caused more policy-oriented alderman to opt for positions [of higher political office]... The prevailing acceptance of the status quo, a legacy of the Machine and a product of American politics in general, has effectively marginalized reformers.

(p. 263/4) This book defines revitalization of a low-income community as both the reintegration of the neighborhood into the market and the improvement of economic conditions for existing residents. Such a focus combines the traditional physical redevelopment and private investment aspects of revitalization with an anti-poverty component. Some may argue that the two are antithetical, in that economic improvements in a neighborhood have little positive effect on the poor. They feel that increases in property values, private investment, and the number of more affluenct residents in a community leads to the displacement of low-income residents of the neighborhood; in short, all revitalization is a form of gentrification. Others believe that the two may go hand-in-hand. They cite examples of incumbent upgrading and adaptive reuse, in which local residents spearhead the physical redevelopment of an area for their own benefit. Inner-city development and poverty alleviation may or may not be synonymous--that is an empirical question--but the improvement of low-income urban neighborhoods is essential for the betterment of their residents. Individual opportunity and achievement depend in large part on environmental factors. People who live in stable, safer, and more affluent neighborhoods typically fare better socially and economically than individuals who live in areas of high crime and high poverty. Communities that are better integrated in the urban and metropolitan markets typically attract more outside resources and therefore increase the opportunities available to their members. The book's focus on the benefits for existing residents not only addresses the issue of poverty reduction but also differentiates revitalization from gentrification. In the latter process, improvements generally benefit more affluent individuals living outside the community and can often lead to the displacement of the neighborhood's present population.

(p. 264) The study found that although they are positively correlated, changes in a neighborhood's level of private investment have generally operated independently of changes in a neighborhood's per capita income. ...

Part of the explanation for the discrepancy bgetween the two components of revitalization may lie in the time period under consideration... The various aspects of economic change may not move at the same rates. ... More likely, the factors that promote private investment in inner-city neighborhoods are not entirely the same ones that improve individuals' economic well-being. As will be highlighted in more detail in what follows, increased private sector activity in a community largely results from factors characteristic of that particular area. ...

(p. 266) The qualitative analysis found that no single factor accounted for economic change in these low-income, overwhelmingly black neighborhoods. Revitalization resulted from the interplay of numerous local individual, institutional, and organizational decisions, in concert with the locational characteristics of the community and the economic and social forces affecting the city and the broader metropolitan region. The skills and motivations of particular individuals (factors that defy easy quantification) played instrumental roles in catalyzing and shaping economic improvement. The social capital within the community greatly affected the decision-making of these individuals and their institutions, as well as the impact of those decisions on the broader community.

A bunch of good articles on k-12 teaching from the Christian Science Monitor

Basically, the research says that short timers from programs like Teach for America aren't all that effective. Of course, that is the model that has been espoused by the Chancellor of DC Public Schools, Michelle Rhee. At the same time, while the articles don't lay out a better way to do it, problems with traditional methods are identified--that new teachers need ongoing assistance and different kinds of training in order to be more effective at the outset.

The articles:

Teacher training: what's the best way? Some policymakers say the focus needs to be on improving traditional education schools, while others are advocates of so-called alternative models, which can speed up entry into the profession.

The research: Both theory and practice are important. A study looks at the effectiveness of teachers in the New York City schools who came from different training programs.

The approach of Teach for America. It recruits top-flight candidates from universities and consists of an intense five weeks of training. Afterward, graduates commit to teaching two years in urban classrooms.

Lessons from most successful schools abroad. Education trends from other nations are gaining cachet as political and educational leaders strive to bring American schools in line with the demands of the 21st-century global economy.

Why Singapore is another model for teaching excellence. It's an honored and very selective profession – and teachers are highly paid.

Roundup: Other countries' efforts to develop and support teachers. A recent study identified teaching-related areas in which nations with high student achievement tend to have an advantage over the US.

One of the advantages from a regional passenger railroad system

would be the ability to travel throughout the region and see and do things that you might not otherwise do. See "The $5 weekend: THINK METRA Let train provide cheap and easy route to nearby adventures," from the Chicago Sun Times as an example of weekend excursion possibilities offered by the Metra system.

Of course, if you want to do urban excursions in our region, your ability to do so can be limited by the mobility connections on the other end. For example, while it is easy to get to Baltimore from DC by train, the transit system on the Baltimore end is clunky and time consuming. Since Baltimore is spread out, if you want to go to a number of different areas, you need a car or bike.

Speaking of bicycles and transit, I noticed yesterday that Maryland Mass Transit Administration has added bicycle racks to Baltimore's buses (I didn't get a photo). In another example of who is in office does make a difference, in the Ehrlich Adminstration, the MTA was never interested in pursuing this.

MARC trains do not allow for bicycles to be transported.

At this time, you can take bikes to Baltimore via the DC subway system, the B30 Metrobus, and Baltimore light rail (see "Getting to Baltimore (and Artscape) with a bike") but the B30 bus is limited to 2 bikes at a time. There are 3-bicycle racks for buses. Perhaps the B30 bus could upgrade to that rack.

-------------

Addition: Cleveland's RTA also has organized a set of "One Pass Trips" of 6 different neighborhoods. See this webpage, "One Pass Trips" for links to the neighborhoods, with listings of the various destinations present in each.

"not very good" Associated Press on the opportunities presented by high speed rail

From "Billions for high-speed rail; anyone aboard?":

Since the 1980s, every state effort to reproduce such service has failed. The reasons often boil down to poor planning and simple mathematics.

Most any state effort to deliver high speed rail, except perhaps in a state like California or New York, is likely to fail because to make such systems succeed in all likelihood they need to function on international, national, and/or regional scales.

I define regional as multistate.

See the delineation of transit networks from this blog entry "Second iteration, idealized national network for high speed railpassenger service"

-------
this is based on thinking about transportation networks in five overarching dimensions:

1. International -- connections between countries. (The map above shows a couple connections between the U.S. and Canada, and one connection from San Antonio to Monterrey, Mexico through Laredo.)

2. National -- anchors of a national transportation system, current anchors are the Interstate Highway system, the freight railroad system, and airplane travel. We do not have a national passenger railroad network presently.

3. Regional -- multi-state connections -- for the most part these don't exist for transit, but do for freight railroad, airplane travel, and the Interstate highway system. The Northeast Corridor railroad passenger service offered by Amtrak is an example of such a transit network.

4. Metropolitan -- transit systems like the WMATA subway and bus system, the combined railroad, subway, bus, and waterborne transit services in the NYC or Boston regions.

5. Sub-metropolitan transit systems (in the DC region, locally provided services such as RideOn in Montgomery County Maryland or the Downtown Circulator in DC are examples of services within the subnetwork category of the Metropolitan Transit Network).
---------

Anyway, on their own, states work at the wrong scale to make high speed rail work. Plus, with regard to "mathematics," as long as roads and airplane travel are disproportionately subsidized through transportation, land use, and public finance policy, it is impossible for the mathematics of high speed rail to work, given the significant difference in expectations and the framework within which the respective modes work.

We need a national railroad transportation policy framework. And I would define that as a plan independent of "Amtrak," a broad plan for passenger rail, and then the construction of a network and method for delivering such a system within a broad plan.

The closest that exists to a national passenger railroad plan is that put forth by the National Association of Rail Passengers: NARP’s Passenger Rail Revitalization Plan.

My idealized national high speed railroad passenger network


is a national network, whereas the map produced by the National High Speed Rail planning efforts thus far would be defined, according to my framework, as a collection of regional railroad-based transit networks.

A disgusting example of how connected groups game the DC budget and legislation system

(While bad, this doesn't even enter the league of disgustingness as it relates to the urban renewal plans mandated by DC City Council legislation for the Florida Market.)

Michael Neibauer has a great piece, "Odd deal sends D.C. fire truck, ambulance to Dominican town" in the Examiner about the ridiculousness of giving a DC fire engine (admittedly they have more pieces of "apparatus" than they need, because they went through a massive purchase of new equipment during the Williams Administration) to some town in the Dominican Republic at the behest of the incredibly well-connected group, Peaceaholics, which deals with crime issues.

Now, don't forget that in the U.S. we have separation of church and state. Here is the "legislative intent" for the boneheaded decision:

“Even though it’s $340,000, we see the city getting a lot back from it,” said Peaceoholics co-founder Ron Moten. “And it’s just a good deed. We believe if you can help anybody, God blesses you 10 times over.”

But the donation has struck numerous city officials as unusual, if not unprecedented. According to the Office of Contracting and Procurement’s Web site, all surplus government supplies are subject to auction so the District can recoup some of its costs.

This is another example of how DC City Council itself is exempt from the contracting requirements that all other agencies of the DC Government must follow.

This decision should be overturned. It is ridiculous.

District of Columbia fire department personnel respond to smoke coming from the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington, Sunday, Jan. 25, 2009. Washington fire officials say the Eisenhower Executive Office Building near the White House was evacuated briefly after smoke from a fireplace clouded one of the floors. (AP Photo/Lawrence Jackson)

DC needs to exhibit regional quality leadership on transit issues: and right now, maybe it isn't

Today's Post reports that hearings on bus service cuts are in the making. See "Proposed Metrobus Cuts To Get Public Hearings." From the article:

The service cuts, proposed by the jurisdictions served by Metro, would affect 42 Metrobus lines across the region, with the largest impact in Prince George's County. Fairfax County did not recommend any service cuts. Ten lines would be eliminated, including five in Prince George's. Another 12 lines would have some routes or segments eliminated. Two lines -- J7/J9 and W19 -- would charge $3 express fares instead of the current $1.35 fare. And 14 lines could undergo wider gaps between bus arrival times. ...

The board voted 4 to 2 in favor of giving riders a chance to comment on a fare hike vs. service cuts. Virginia and Maryland members, who supported the idea, said riders had told them that they would rather pay higher fares than lose service.

"I'd rather give customers an opportunity to respond to options rather than lose those bus routes," said Elizabeth Hewlett, who represents Maryland. A 5-cent fare increase would generate $15 million to $17 million.

Most transit systems across the country face major budget deficits due to falling tax receipts on the part of state and local governments. Various types of taxes: sales; property; income; gasoline excise; fund transit systems, and all of these sources are drying up. Not to mention increased costs for energy and the costs relating to rising demand.

While no one likes the idea of increases in the cost of transit fares, it can be worth considering, especially if it comes at the cost of massive service cuts. The deficit that WMATA needs to make up--either by increases in fares or cuts in service--at this point is pretty paltry, $29 million.

Is it worth keeping fares the same at the cost of service cuts that disproportionately impact bus riders, and will make it difficult for many people to use transit? See "With No B37, Bay Ridge Gets Too Big" from the New York Times about similar questions being asked in New York City--and New York City faces multi-billion dollar funding deficits. The Washington region's transit funding problems barely register in comparison.

But WMATA isn't considering even a small increase in fares, because the DC representatives on the WMATA Board adamantly oppose fare increases. The way procedures work for how the Board of Directors conducts business, each jurisdiction must have at least one "yes" vote (there are representatives on the WMATA board from three jurisdictions: DC; Maryland; and Virginia) to consider fare increases.

While fare increases are never desired, sound public policy means that they should be considered, when the alternative is significant cuts in service, even if those cuts in service will mostly impact suburban riders, rather than Washington residents.

For good background on bus service more generally, see this Washington Post article from 2005, "Progress Has Passed Metrobus By: Outdated System Is Plagued by Unreliable Schedules, Inefficient Routes" and this editorial, "Missing the Bus."

While it is true that there is always the potential for improvement in scheduling and routing, improvements in scheduling and routing should be real improvements, rather than reductions in service that disproportionately impact those in need.

The sad thing about this is that from a historical standpoint, it is a familiar posture. Generally, when transit systems were privately owned, fares were regulated by the Public Service Commission of the relevant jurisdiction. (In DC, it is the same PSC that today reviews matters concerning public utilities--telephone, natural gas, and electricity.) Generally, these boards worked to keep fares low, often below the amount required to maintain the system and provide a fair rate of profit. This led many transit systems to become grossly unprofitable and led to such systems being taken over by local, regional, and state governments and/or public authorities.

No area municipality does it better: Arlington County extracting mixed primary use benefits from publicly supported facilities

The obituary of Tom Newman in today's Post ("Arlington Official Pushed for Ice Complex")states:

A lifelong hockey fan and player, he spearheaded the county's efforts to build a pair of skating rinks on top of a parking garage, eight stories above the Ballston business district at North Glebe Road and North Randolph Street. They are the only full-size ice hockey rinks inside the Capital Beltway in Northern Virginia.

The $42 million project was completed in late 2006. Since then, the Capitals have used the facility, called the Kettler Capitals Iceplex, as the team office and practice site. They had previously practiced in Anne Arundel County. "It's the finest practice facility in the NHL," Capitals General Manager George McPhee told The Washington Post in 2006.

The Ballston complex also houses the front office of the Washington Mystics WNBA team. When the Capitals are not practicing, the twin rinks are used by the hockey teams of Georgetown and George Washington universities, six high schools and several youth leagues.

Imagine, a sports facility built for a professional hockey team that also supports another professional sports team, and college, high school, and youth league hockey when the facility is not in use by the Washington Capitals.

That's a form of what Jane Jacobs called "mixed primary use" at least in my book.

Rest in Peace Mr. Newman. Your creative efforts will be remembered and will continue to be appreciated.

------
From "Who wears Jane Jacobs’s mantle in today’s New York? " in the Downtown Express, on last year's (or was it the year before?) Jane Jacobs exhibit at the Municipal Arts Society:

Four conditions, Jacobs argues, are indispensable for exuberant diversity in a city’s streets and districts. First, mixed primary uses. A city’s internal parts (basically its neighborhoods) must serve more than one primary function, and ensure that people go outdoors on different schedules. Second, most blocks must be short, with frequent opportunities to turn corners, run into people, vary a route, etc. Third, streets must mingle buildings of various ages. And fourth, there must be a sufficiently dense concentration of people, including residents, for various purposes.

I argue that the "mixed primary use" concept needs to be applied not just to areas ("districts") but to municipal capital improvements planning. For example, shouldn't a senior wellness center be combined with a recreation center, and better utilize and leverage the municipal investment in the facility for as many hours in the day as possible?

Or how about putting in an expanded "gym" at the Thomas Jefferson Junior High School in Arlington, a gym that has an indoor track and exhibition capabilities that can be used for the entire county, not just the students in the school?

Or having a theater and theater company attached to a branch library (Shirlington), etc.

Even Takoma Park combines a community center, city library, and city hall into one (expanded from time to time) facility.

Etc.

Neighborhood investment fund issues

(Disclosure: I am part of bidding teams for a couple of projects that have been submitted in response to NIF request for proposals.)

The Washington Post today reports that funds from a program that was created to support neighborhood revitalization efforts in specific areas of the city are instead to be directed to large institutional actors in other parts of the city, on non-revitalization efforts. See "CITY BUDGET: Awarding of Neighborhood Funds to Large Nonprofits Draws Criticism."

I am the first to say that there are issues with the Neighborhood Investment Fund. First, many of neighborhoods don't have organizations with solid capacity, and the program hasn't built into the process capacity development activities. Second, the Ward Councilmembers can get too involved with regard to grantmaking in their Ward, so issues of worthiness and merit can get swept up in politics, and good projects may get kicked to the curb in favor of considerations other than merit. Third, the review process is opaque.

That being said, generally, while DC funds a lot of culture-related projects, and such projects are often worthy, there is not a standard, open and transparent set of procedures ("a process") where these projects are reviewed generally, and against a set of stated priorities specifically.

And rather than deal with this for legislative earmarks (see "D.C. Earmarks: The city embraces a questionable budgetary practice" a 2008 editorial from the Post and "D.C. Council hardens line on handouts to nonprofits"from January 2009 in the Examiner) a few months back, the Council just voted to not allow groups to get grants two years in a row, which was a particularly stupid thing to do, at least for successful projects, because rather than having successful projects be continued forward in a new grant cycle, they have to sit out for a year.

I have a couple iterations of a memo on cultural planning in DC. The full memo is in this past entry, "Cultural resources planning in DC: In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king." These are the recommendations from that memo:

1. That DC develop a comprehensive cultural development, management, and funding plan, setting priorities for the development, harvesting, and funding of cultural resources assets;

2. And consider the development of an allied tourism management and development plan, either separately or within the same framework;

3. create a comprehensive Cultural Resources Management office, likely merging a variety of programs and assets currently spread around various agencies

4. Provide funding, both for capital improvements and operations, that that also considers providing significant ongoing funding to cultural resources deemed important.

5. Develop an open and transparent grant process.

-----------------------
With regard to an open and transparent grant process, I didn't detail recommendations, but elsewhere I have written about the process for awarding arts and heritage grants in Maryland, from the State Arts Program and from the Heritage Areas program.

These are the eligibility requirements for Maryland Heritage Area grants:

A. Eligibility Generally. The Authority may provide grants from the Fund to eligible grantees to:
(1) Develop management plans for designating a recognized heritage area as a certified heritage area by the Authority;
(2) Assist noncapital projects which:
(a) Are located within certified heritage areas; and
(b) Address or complete priority activities which are:
(i) Identified in the management plan approved for the certified heritage
area, and
(ii) Consistent with the goals, objectives, strategies, and actions outlined in
the management plan; or
(3) Assist capital projects which:
(a) Are located within target investment zones identified in the management plan
approved for the certified heritage area; and
(b) Address or complete priority activities which are:
(i) Identified in the management plan approved for the certified heritage
area, and
(ii) Consistent with the goals, objectives, strategies, and actions outlined in
the management plan.

Note that grants have to address priorities as laid out in management plans for the heritage areas.

We don't have this kind of straightforward priority based criteria for cultural funding from the city government.

This could be easily rectified.

But I don't think the powers that be want to regularize the system. Instead they prefer the "loosey goosey way" because that gives everyone more ability to game the system and for elected officials to overly shape the process and reward supporters.

Note that with the Neighborhood Investment Plans, priority plans were developed. The problem is that most neighborhoods don't have organizations with deep capacity and that in my opinion the priorities, if truly oriented to auguring revitalization, were still too diffuse.

For example, murals... not to mention mural topics that have little to do with an area, such as a proposal by Byron Peck to do a mural on the "Underground Railroad" in the H Street neighborhood, when the H Street neighborhood has absolutely no connection to that history. Instead, the H Street neighborhood has a connection, historically, to "above-ground" railroads such as streetcars and trolleys, passenger and freight railroads, and even to civil rights organization by organizers for the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters.

Funding

The other issue is regularized funding. Earlier in the week, Tim Lemke wrote in the Washington Times about the proposed merger of the Washington Convention Center Authority and the DC Sports and Entertainment Commission. See "Sports Commission, Convention Center Authority to merge" from the Washington Times. From the article:

Both the convention center authority and the sports commission were quasi-public groups created by the city to perform specific functions but designed to operate as self-sufficient entities. While the groups generally do not rely on District funds on an annual basis, the sports commission in the last two years received $2.5 million in subsidy from the District government to help offset the loss of revenue when the Nationals moved from RFK Stadium to Nationals Park.

This isn't entirely correct.

While "additional" DC Government revenues aren't going to the WCCA, the Authority is funded via public funds, in this case "tourism" taxes. I am not sure about what comprises the complete definition of the tourism tax revenue stream in DC, but it generally is constructed from at least five sources: (1) hotel occupancy taxes; (2) rental car taxes; (3) parking taxes; (4) a portion of sales taxes on restaurant meals; and (5) "amusement" taxes -- taxes assessed on tickets to sporting and other events.

Actually, here is the information, from ANNUAL INFORMATION STATEMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2003 SENIOR LIEN DEDICATED TAX, a document of the Washington Convention Center Authority:

Pursuant to an Official Statement dated September 17, 1998, $524,460,000 Senior Lien Dedicated Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 1998 (the “1998 Bonds”) were issued by the Washington Convention Center Authority (“WCCA”). The 1998 Bonds were sold to finance a portion of the construction costs of a new convention center (the “New Convention Center”) in Washington D.C. (the “District”) in an area bounded by 7th and 9th Streets, Mount Vernon Place and N Street, NW.

The 1998 Bonds are special obligations of WCCA. These Bonds are without recourse to, not a debt of, nor a pledge of the District. The principal and interest on the 1998 Bonds are secured by and payable solely from dedicated tax receipts (the “Dedicated Taxes”) and pledged funds established under a trust agreement. The Dedicated Taxes consist of 4.45% of the 14.5% sales tax on hotel room charges and 1.0% of the 10% sales and use tax on restaurant meals, alcoholic beverages consumed on premises and rental vehicle charges.

So that does leave money from "tourism taxes" for other related tourism and cultural development activities.

I have argued for going on 5 years, that the tourism tax revenue stream should also fund arts and cultural activities. Some monies probably do come from that revenue source, such as for CulturalTourismDC. But again, the funding stream isn't transparent, and largely the monies go to pay for the Convention Center. I argue that within the context of broader tourism and cultural development plans, the tourism tax revenue stream should fund more than just the Convention Center, that otherwise the positive impact of tourism is inadequately leveraged.

The above-cited blog entry didn't go into detail about this idea, although it discussed various cultural asset management systems. It doesn't mention the Allegheny Regional Asset District in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania (Pittsburgh and the surrounding county), where 1/2 of the monies generated by the 1% Allegheny County Sales and Use Tax are directed to the financing of "regional assets in the areas of libraries, parks, cultural, sports and civic facilities and programs," recognizing in part that anchor institutions in the center city serve the entire region and shouldn't have to rely solely upon the center city for revenues. (The rest of the tax goes to the municipalities in the county, where the revenues are used to ease the reliance on property taxes to fund municipal functions.)

Note that while institutions such as the Smithsonian Museums, the Ford Theater (see "District to become largest donor to Ford’s Theatre" from the Examiner) and the Kennedy Center are "national" institutions funded in large part by the federal government, they are also regionally serving institutions, so that it can be justifiable, in the context of a broader cultural management and development plan and a tourism management and development plan to direct local funds to these institutions.

But this has to be done in the context of a plan, that the Kennedy Center provides some training for DC schoolchildren in and of itself isn't justification for providing monies to the Kennedy Center.

One could argue that such service is the equivalent of "payment in lieu of taxes" since federally-owned facilities such as the Kennedy Center don't generate local property tax revenue while commercially owned theaters such as the National Theater or Warner Theater are taxed and therefore generate property and income tax revenues for the city.

But this is what is in today's Post article:

Council member Jack Evans (D-Ward 2), who has supported the arts and earmarking for them, said, "They're good organizations." Although the Kennedy Center is considered a national organization, Evans said it has programs for D.C. public school students.

"We're both local and national," said Darrell Ayers, vice president for education at the Kennedy Center. "We are a D.C. organization, and we have to be responsive to the community here." The Kennedy Center has a special program that allows every public school fifth-grader to see a show there, including performances by the National Symphony Orchestra, Ayers said. "We pay for tickets and transportation," he added.

So what. Only in the context of a citywide cultural plan and a citywide tourism development and management plan should such funding decisions be made.

Plus, teaching DC schoolchildren isn't the same as funding neighborhood revitalization activities and the two shouldn't be conflated.

Furthermore, given that funding schoolchildren already takes up about $1 billion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! of the city's annual budget, it's reasonable to fund arts activities for DC schoolchildren from that giant firehose of a funding source, rather than from monies that are supposed to be directed to specific neighborhood revitalization activities.

Leon Krier to speak on Architecture and Community

The map image on the top of the book cover is of a Krier produced plan for the National Mall in Washington, DC, produced in the 1980s.

From Island Press:

With our society becoming increasingly crowded and natural resources rapidly depleting, we are forced to look for innovative ways to build and also rebuild our communities in a more resilient way. Leon Krier, widely acknowledged as one of the world's most outstanding and provocative architects and urbanists, has been at the forefront creating sustainable, humane and attractive urban spaces. His newest book, "The Architecture of Community," is a practical, contemporary roadmap for the creation of livable towns.

Krier's most notable projects including the Krier House and Tower in Seaside, Florida, as well as the town of Poundbury in England, which was commissioned by the Prince of Wales and has become a reference model for ecological planning and building that can meet contemporary needs.

In The Architecture of Community, Krier uses drawings, diagrams and photographs of his built works in order to illustrate his theories on classical urbanism and architecture while also providing a practical, contemporary roadmap for the creation of livable towns.

Krier will discuss his work and his expertise at upcoming talks at Catholic University on Monday, March 30, 2009 and the University of Maryland on Wednesday, April 1, 2009.

Event Information:

DATE: March 30, 2009
LOCATION: Catholic University of America Crough Center/Koubek Auditorium
TIME: 5:30 p.m.

DATE: April 1, 2009
LOCATION: University of Maryland School of Architecture Planning and Preservation Auditorium
TIME: 6:30 p.m.

It makes sense that there are better bicycles for city riding in Europe

Copenhagen Duo
Originally uploaded by [Zakkaliciousness]

(Image from Copenhagen Cycle Chic blog, uploaded to Flickr by [Zakkaliciousness].)

Because there are so many urban bicycle riders in Europe, creating market demand, and demand for quality bicycles serving urban needs.

The Swedish Embassy featured an exhibit on high quality Swedish design (it was written up in last Thursday's Express), and one of the entries was the Skeppschult V bicycle. I especially like the optional accessory of a rear lockable carrier.

See ""V" Bike Sweden's Answer To City Cycling" from Treehugger for more.

Image from Treehugger.

New rail service in Virginia

Main Street Station, Richmond.

The two lines, one from Richmond and one from Lynchburg, with service to and from Union Station in Washington, DC are more about access than they are about speed, but in terms of setting the framework for a regional railroad system (see the excerpt from a past blog entry below) they are a step forward.

Click here for an image of Kemper Street Station in Lynchburg.

See "Va. to Fund Intercity Train Service" from the Washington Post, this very old story from the Richmond Times-Dispatch, "All aboard? Main Street Station serves an average of 31 rail passengers a day," about Main Street Station in Richmond, this recent article from the Times-Dispatch, "State will pay to add two round-trip trains to Washington," "Culpeper closer to capital rail link" from the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star, and "Passenger rail has potential to remake Central Virginia" from the Nelson County Times. From the NCT article:

More than a decade ago, the Lynchburg Regional Chamber of Commerce and its board, led by President Rex Hammond, began pushing for statewide passenger rail service.

The TransDominion Express would run from Bristol and Roanoke in the west to Lynchburg, where it would then break off into two routes, one east to Richmond and one north through Charlottesville to Washington. (You can learn more online at http://www.tdxinfo.org.)

From a past blog entry:

Create a single railroad system for DC-MD-VA. Rather than having two separate systems oriented to commuters, although Maryland is in the process of transforming the MARC system to a 7 day system, with more service later in the evening, the region would be best served by one system that is vastly expanded. (Think of the equivalent of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey but for the railroad system.) And connect MARC to SEPTA.

BeyondDCs conceptual railroad map for one regional railroad system for DC, Maryland and Virginia, including service to parts of West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Delaware. (Although this particular map focuses on the Baltimore-Washington region.)

I suggest calling this system the RACER, standing for the Railroad Authority of the Chesapeake Region. BeyondDC is working on new maps for this, and is fond of calling the system the Potomac Express. And Greater Greater Washington calls it the MVX, Maryland-Virginia Express. (But they can both do graphic design, and I can't, so they may win out...)

Image by BeyondDC.

Blogs and online sources

1. Reuters has a blog on retail issues called Shop Talk.

2. Project for Public Spaces has sadly dropped their topic focused email lists and forums (e.g., on Public Markets) but has replaced them with a "social network" called the Placemaking Movement, which includes a blog.

3. I am working up a blog entry called "Open Source, Maximarketing, Participation and Democracy" on some of the issues with social networking and social media. For "producers" of content, there can be different issues than for non-producing consumers of content. I have a problem with using social networking tools for what we might think of as polling or outbound communication, while not distinguishing between the levels of access and influence that may or may not be provided.

Open source as a movement enables participation by those able to participate. In fact, six years ago or so when I first read the classic paper on open source software development, "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" I was struck by the paper's relevance to the issues of participatory democracy.

But calling any technology, such as the polling methods touted by organizations like America Speaks, "open source" or "open source democracy" misses a fundamental point, that constraining the boundaries within which people are "allowed" to participate/comment restricts democracy, doesn't add to it, unless you believe that the number of people ostensibly participating through surveys is more important than the how and why of participation.

Polling is being substituted for democracy, and the use of online technology does not in and of itself qualify as the promotion of democracy.

That being said, it's great that the DC regional transit system, WMATA, is introducing Twitter feeds to alert people about delays. See "Metro 'tweets' rail service delay information." While I think that's great, does it strengthen participatory democracy? No, but it is helpful nonetheless. And more importantly, it provides multiple ways for people to receive/consume the information that they want ("Maximarketing"). From the press release:

The brief messages, or tweets, are a quick and easy way for riders to get basic, yet immediate information about Metrorail service online or on their cell phones. Messages on Twitter are restricted to 140 characters. For example, a message may read, “Blue-Orange: Expect delays to New Carrollton and Largo Town Center due to emergency track maintenance at Cheverly station.” Individuals must sign up to receive Metro tweets at www.twitter.com/metroopensdoors. The service is free to Web users. Customers who use SMS may incur text messaging charges from their phone service providers.

I have been thinking about this because of WMATA's release of information to Google Transit. See "Metro "punts": Will release transit schedule data for Google and others" from Greater Greater Washington and "Upgrading Transit's Interface: Metro Releases Google Transit Data" from the Post.

Now for me, I am content to use the RideGuide function on the WMATA website, it works great, and in all likelihood, it will be better/more robust than what Google can provide. But that doesn't matter to the people who prefer the Google option and will prefer it forever, regardless of which one is simpler or more robust. Maximarketing (see the book by Rapp and Collins) is about using all marketing channels maximally. It's not about what we prefer, but what the customer prefers.

Florida Market Tour, Saturday April 4th

tour guide and FL Market enthusiast
Originally uploaded by emilygoodstein

From the Capitol Hill North Neighborhood Association:

Explore Florida Market
When: Saturday, April 4, 2009
Where: Meet at the SW corner of 4th and Morse Street.
Time: 10 AM
Cost: Priceless/Free

Explore Florida Market. The tour pairs the historical significance of the market with visits to shops selling produce, food and other hard to find goods. The tour ends at A. Litteri’s the oldest continuously operating Italian deli in the city serving some of the best Italian sub sandwiches in the city!!!

Led by urban revitalization advocates, this tour is a partnership with Capitol Hill North Neighborhood Association, Trinidad Neighborhood Association, Frozen Tropics weblog, and Rebuilding Place in Urban Space weblog. Be prepared for cash only purchases and the spirit of the city’s largest wholesale market.

Flickr photo by emilygoodstein of a past Market tour. The photo features a shot of the "guerrilla wayfinding and interpretational signage" that was created by Christopher Taylor Edwards and myself. While we haven't erected actual signs (yet), we will be passing out copies.

Pdfs of the signs are here:

-- Florida Market Map & Directory
-- Florida Market History Sign

although they are in the process of being updated for next week's tour.

IBM is committed to and makes money from high speed rail... in China, Taiwan, and the Netherlands

See the CNET story, "IBM hops aboard high-speed rail." There is a 2:40 video by IBM about their efforts embedded in the story.

Streets as advertising places

The Reuters blog, in "Pothole filling that’s finger-lickin’ good," reports that the fast food company KFC is offering 5 U.S. cities financial support for filling potholes in the street, provided the filled pothole is branded with the KFC logo and notice that KFC paid for the repair.

Image: KFC via Reuters.

Do desperate times justify more commodification of the public space?

3 new reports from the Project for Public Spaces

(Done in conjunction with the American Association of Retired Persons, which next year I will be able to join...)

-- A Citizen’s Guide to Better Streets: How to Engage Your Transportation Agency

-- Streets as Places: Using Streets to Rebuild Communities

-- The Quiet Revolution in Transportation Planning: How Great Corridors Make Great Communities

I haven't read any of them yet, but I am sure they will be useful. PPS has initiated a transportation practice, and has a workshop on "streets as places." The next workshop is next week in fact.

Shark, "chalk art," Pedestrian safety advertising campaign, Auckland, New Zealand

Shark, "chalk art," Pedestrian safety advertising campaign, Auckland, New Zealand
Originally uploaded by rllayman