Infographic, "Help Make San Francisco Streets Safer," Walk San Francisco, 2012
I am trying to reduce the amount of "unnecessary information" I have stuffed in boxes, so I am doing some "processing." Most of the articles I've clipped no longer seem that necessary. But I still come across some gems.
I like this infographic from Walk San Francisco, promoting their advocacy for more investment in walking infrastructure.
Speaking of walking, the Toronto 360℉ Wayfinding Strategy Plan is a exemplary document Although the fancy pdf doesn't seem to be available online, the accessible version without graphics is. (Toronto Wayfinding Strategy - Valuing the Benefits).
The webpage for the project links to four related wayfinding programs--Metrolinx, the "underground" pedestrian walkway system called PATH, parks, and cycling.
I haven't read the Implementation Handbook or the 2019 Project Handbook.
And while in Alexandria recently, seeing one of their wayfinding signage setups on Cameron Street by Gadsby Tavern made me realize that the signage "fails" in that it is focused on King Street but doesn't extend outward from King Street as necessary, such as along Washington Boulevard, and in the streets perpendicular and parallel to King Street.
Plus, while the wayfinding program for the Del Ray neighborhood predates the later system in Alexandria, they probably should have been integrated.
Labels: bicycle and pedestrian planning, urban design/placemaking, wayfinding signage systems
posted by Richard Layman @ 1:46 PM&Permanent Link
2 Comments:
offtopic, austerity, you can blame the conservatives but austerity came from germany and currency pressures;
https://on.ft.com/2Z9X9Hy
when do you move?
September. I was hoping to be part of the winning team for the planning study for Eastern Market, which would have meant I'd be here a lot from Oct. to June, but the project lead totally bombed his part of the presentation (it didn't help that we basically had 26 hours to prepare from the time we were notified -- even if we would have had a couple more hours to prepare it would have helped) so I don't think that's likely.
(Plus the element he insisted on, that I kept arguing was esoteric and wouldn't be understood by the city, the people beamed onto too, which didn't help.)
And because Suzanne's parents house ended up selling before it went on the market (closing date 10/15) we won't end up staying in SoCal (damn). We're going to Salt Lake City, where Suzanne's best friend lives, and her father's relatives are there and in the Intermountain region.
And the core of SLC is a lot like SLC in terms of bikeability, transit, and access to amenities, even though the blocks are 4x of a normal city (thank you Brigham Young), although in many places they are broken down into normal sized blocks. The city is pretty progressive, although it is an outlier in a conservative and religious state.
wrt austerity, I haven't read the article yet, but I guess I would argue there were three very different strands
US, UK, Germany.
In the US and UK were the same kinds of ideas. Anti-Keynes, anti-debt, using the idea that you have to run a government like you would a household, that when revenues are down you spend less.
Would the Republicans have argued differently if a Republican President, not Obama, was in office? Given the tea party types, e.g., the comments by Ted Yoho that debt default wouldn't hurt the country's financial system, etc., it's doubtful. They still use the same arguments, even though they passed massive tax relief for the rich and corporations.
Germany has that sense of the world--run the country's financial balance sheets like an individual household--even more.
It didn't help though that countries like Greece and Italy have deficient taxing regimes and a lot of evasion, so Germany felt justified.
And that's how the IMF did/does things for secondary countries anyway (a la Naomi Klein's _Shock Doctrine_).
If in the US had bankers been sanctioned after the crash, and had help been given to "the people" vis a vis foreclosures, maybe there would have been a different response.
Ironically, in the UK, I would argue austerity, which was blamed by the Conservatives on the EU, even though for the most part the EU had nothing to do with it, led to the positive vote for Brexit.
Plus, since the Conservatives used the crash as a way to call out "Labour profligacy" austerity fit their worldview and most importantly, could be used to further shrink government.
(In college I got pretty "fat" and then delivered newspapers. I had hundreds to deliver each day and I drove from section to section and ran the papers in strings to the door. I would lose weight. Then plateau. Then get the flu and sick and start losing more weight. That's sort of how neoliberals use everything at their disposal to trash government and reduce funding.)
When I did the series of articles on European urban revitalization, I was surprised to learn how often structural readjustment and revitalization funding came from the EU. E.g., Britain basically stopped funding revitalization, instead relying on EU programs to do it. But it was key too in projects in Marseille, Thessaloniki, Bilbao. Can't remember about Dublin. Not in Hamburg or Helsinki.
Germany still has a real hard time accepting Keynesian ideas.
… I look forward to reading the article. (Not on the computer as much, cleaning. I procrastinated, should have been "processing" my boxes of miscellaneous papers, articles, etc. for the last two months. But I am finding some interesting stuff, even if the majority gets tossed.)
Post a Comment
<< Home