One of the sub-plots of my life is that the University of New Mexico’s men’s basketball program exists only to break my heart. I cannot count the number of times it has happened, but they have done so on the court and off the court, and while I was in Albuquerque and in Montgomery and in Auburn and in Chattanooga. Every time they dash my hopes and break my spirit, I swear off them and vow to never be seduced again. They got me again this year. We were good, we were finally really good. On Thursday night their game started well after my bedtime, but I stayed up to watch my brothers in cherry and silver. And what happened? They shit the bed. More accurately, coach Steve Alford (1 day after inking a 10-year contract extension) shit the bed. His match-up strategy blew up spectacularly. I will spare you the details, but know that we checked Harvard’s two-guard Laurent Rivard (193 of his 210 shots this year were 3’s) with a glacially-paced four- and it did not end well. I handled the loss pretty well- certainly better than this guy. But I’m done with them now. My relationship with Alabama football is stronger, longer lasting and more fulfilling. I’ll never let the Lobos seduce me again…oh wait, did someone say that all of our starters are returning next year? Damn, they’re going to get me again…
As evidenced from last week’s post, a big component of this year’s Lobo seduction was statistical. Some say that numbers don’t lie, and others subscribe to the “Lies, damned lies, and statistics” model. A large (perhaps too large) part of the planning profession is dedicated to number crunching and statistical analysis. While I certainly recognize the value of the quantitative planning model, I tend to employ a more intuitive approach to analysis. As 2008 showed us, life has a way of playing messy tricks with statistical forecasts and projections. I respond well, however, to common sense statistical thinking. I’ve been fortunate to hear from the incomparable Donna Williams a couple of times in past few weeks and she makes a fantastic statistical point about our city- how many more Neidlov’s-eating, GreenLife-shopping, Microbrew-drinking, progressive, urban dwellers* exist who don’t already live in downtown? How do we increase population density downtown (which is the name of the game) if that particular demographic has already been exhausted? And how do we provide for the rest of the community?
If someone inquires as to the most affordable downtown neighborhood, the typical answer has been the Southside (and perhaps North Chattanooga). These days, you can’t get into a new house in the Southside for less than $250,000. To some, that’s affordable. The statistics say otherwise. The median house value in Chattanooga is $128,900 and the mean is $165,158. With our median household income of $35,333 a family can afford a house that costs $142,074. So a place in the Southside is nearly twice as expensive as an average Chattanoogan can theoretically afford. Please note that I’m not even talking about low-income housing- I’m talking about housing that a statistically average family with a statistically average income can reasonably afford to buy.
The trend is that homes are becoming more expensive down here- this is good from the standpoint of property values and tax generation, but bad from the standpoint of inclusivity. Appreciation of real estate value is one of the ways that people can improve their financial situation. That appreciation, however, creates a barrier for others trying to enter the market. Rising markets also have an impact on long-time residents who are either cash-poor or rent. A while back, I wrote about what was happening in my neighborhood of Jefferson Heights, and I’m afraid that trend has simply continued. So beyond providing for the average Chattanooga (which we are not), one could argue that it is the moral obligation of the community to ensure that we provide decent and affordable housing for all of our citizens.
[If you want to read two people who are smarter than me, sniping with each like school boys about this very subject read this, then this rebuttal]
As of now, only about 30% of Chattanooga households earn enough to qualify for that $250,000 house in the Southside. I suspect that there is a substantial cohort that would love to live downtown if only they could afford it. I suspect this group is younger and has an income closer to the median. To get the types of urban amenities we all crave, we need to find ways to increase population density in our core and find ways to enable anyone who wants to live downtown to have an option to do so. Maybe we haven’t fully tapped the progressive-with-six-figure-income demographic, but I suspect we’re getting close. It seems to me, the more prudent strategy would be to try to tap the 70% of our population that can’t currently afford to be here. Not only does this seem to be a sound mathematical strategy, it is also more consistent with a philosophy that downtown is for everyone.
*Those are my descriptors, not hers. Please note that those are not necessarily pejorative terms- I LOVE Neidlov’s and microbrews!
...on Urban Design in Chattanooga. (and the Big C)
3.25.2013
3.18.2013
The Good 'Ole Days
It appears, for the weekend at least, that spring has sprung. Oh, the joys of warm weather. The boys had their first soccer games of the spring season (including the young one’s first ever game). The scene is also now set for the big dance. Not good news for the SEC (but the blow of ‘Bama’s burst bubble is softened by the Vols’ snub). Congratulations to New Mexico- Mountain West Conference regular season and tournament champs. I will argue, however, that my Lobos got hosed with a three seed. While at first glance that doesn’t seem so bad, a simple comparison makes my point. Gonzaga, the #1 team in the county is a #1 seed, look at how their numbers stack up against the Lobo’s:
UNM's RPI (power ranking) of 2 is better than Gonzaga's at 9.
UNM's number 3 strength of schedule is far better than Gonzaga's at 68.
UNM's conference SOS (60) is also better than Gonzaga's (172).
UNM has 8 RPI Top 50 wins (highest #16). Zags have 5 with (highest #21).
UNM has played 20 top 100 teams winning 16. Zags have played 12, winning 10.
UNM has played only one team below 200 RPI. Zags have played 6.
Despite the fact that the Lobos have a solid argument for a 1 seed, they got dropped to a 3. While facts say the Lobos are superior, they are ranked significantly lower for a single reason- history. Gonzaga has shown over the course of a decade that they have the ability to go deep in the NCAA tournament. The Lobo’s have a strong record of under-achieving in the national spotlight. Neither team’s performance over the past couple of decades means a hill of beans during games this season, but fair or foul, this is the sole reason for the disparity of the rankings. So, basketball-wise, this is great and exciting time, but simultaneously a time to prepare for the fight. What happened to teams of the past shades the present, but that all goes out the window when it’s time to play new games. So it is in Chattanooga.
The excitement and good vibrations coursing the city now are almost tangible. Everything seems to be pointed in the right direction, and the city seems poised to blow-up (in the parlance of our times). For those with interests in urbanism and design, the election went quite well. Only time will tell what our elected officials will actually do, but for the sake of argument, lets assume they will get stuck in and support the principles and design and urbanism that helped bring downtown back in the first place. If that happens, it’s game over right? We win and we’ll go build this magnificent urban Mecca that will be the envy of the civilized world, won’t we?
Clearly, the past eight years of (_______) have made us long for the good old days of Kinsey and Corker. Indeed, good days they were. During those times, both City and County Mayors understood and were supportive of good urban design. Ditto for those City Councils. From a staff standpoint, the city was in good shape: the public works directors were good (and in one case outstanding), parks and rec was in good shape, planning had a great director (then an adequate one), we worked around the myopic traffic folks, and of course the design studio was running on all cylinders (not too mention staffed by handsome, witty and athletic planners). Looking back, things were ideal weren’t they?
It’s funny how the mists of time and eight years of (______) can change our perception of the past. As good as the political leadership was, as good as the other elected officials were, as competent as city staff was, and as handsome as the design studio employees were, the urbanists never really had it all their way. In fact, as I recall, I felt like we were fighting an uphill battle both on projects and in education. There were outright wins like the 21st Century Waterfront and Coolidge Park, hard-fought wins like the MLKing/McCallie two-way conversion, and outright losses like Chili’s (which came before Littlefield and set the precedent for the Applebee’s and Buffalo Wild Wings of the world). We never got our zoning code revised, we never got downtown parking needs and standards adequately addressed, and the list of unfinished business was just as daunting. So while I remember the good ‘ole days fondly, I try to always remind myself that it was never easy.
I am very happy to see a new mayor and a new council. I have no reason to believe that the new crew will be anything other than outstanding, and I am looking forward to their leadership. But even if our new leaders turn out be reincarnated versions of Kevin Lynch and Donald Appleyard, there is no guarantee that the urbanists will win the day. We can be happy that everyone seems to be fired up and heading the right direction. We should be excited about the arrows in our quiver. We should not, however, assume that progress will be made without hard work and concerted effort.
UNM's RPI (power ranking) of 2 is better than Gonzaga's at 9.
UNM's number 3 strength of schedule is far better than Gonzaga's at 68.
UNM's conference SOS (60) is also better than Gonzaga's (172).
UNM has 8 RPI Top 50 wins (highest #16). Zags have 5 with (highest #21).
UNM has played 20 top 100 teams winning 16. Zags have played 12, winning 10.
UNM has played only one team below 200 RPI. Zags have played 6.
Despite the fact that the Lobos have a solid argument for a 1 seed, they got dropped to a 3. While facts say the Lobos are superior, they are ranked significantly lower for a single reason- history. Gonzaga has shown over the course of a decade that they have the ability to go deep in the NCAA tournament. The Lobo’s have a strong record of under-achieving in the national spotlight. Neither team’s performance over the past couple of decades means a hill of beans during games this season, but fair or foul, this is the sole reason for the disparity of the rankings. So, basketball-wise, this is great and exciting time, but simultaneously a time to prepare for the fight. What happened to teams of the past shades the present, but that all goes out the window when it’s time to play new games. So it is in Chattanooga.
The excitement and good vibrations coursing the city now are almost tangible. Everything seems to be pointed in the right direction, and the city seems poised to blow-up (in the parlance of our times). For those with interests in urbanism and design, the election went quite well. Only time will tell what our elected officials will actually do, but for the sake of argument, lets assume they will get stuck in and support the principles and design and urbanism that helped bring downtown back in the first place. If that happens, it’s game over right? We win and we’ll go build this magnificent urban Mecca that will be the envy of the civilized world, won’t we?
Clearly, the past eight years of (_______) have made us long for the good old days of Kinsey and Corker. Indeed, good days they were. During those times, both City and County Mayors understood and were supportive of good urban design. Ditto for those City Councils. From a staff standpoint, the city was in good shape: the public works directors were good (and in one case outstanding), parks and rec was in good shape, planning had a great director (then an adequate one), we worked around the myopic traffic folks, and of course the design studio was running on all cylinders (not too mention staffed by handsome, witty and athletic planners). Looking back, things were ideal weren’t they?
It’s funny how the mists of time and eight years of (______) can change our perception of the past. As good as the political leadership was, as good as the other elected officials were, as competent as city staff was, and as handsome as the design studio employees were, the urbanists never really had it all their way. In fact, as I recall, I felt like we were fighting an uphill battle both on projects and in education. There were outright wins like the 21st Century Waterfront and Coolidge Park, hard-fought wins like the MLKing/McCallie two-way conversion, and outright losses like Chili’s (which came before Littlefield and set the precedent for the Applebee’s and Buffalo Wild Wings of the world). We never got our zoning code revised, we never got downtown parking needs and standards adequately addressed, and the list of unfinished business was just as daunting. So while I remember the good ‘ole days fondly, I try to always remind myself that it was never easy.
I am very happy to see a new mayor and a new council. I have no reason to believe that the new crew will be anything other than outstanding, and I am looking forward to their leadership. But even if our new leaders turn out be reincarnated versions of Kevin Lynch and Donald Appleyard, there is no guarantee that the urbanists will win the day. We can be happy that everyone seems to be fired up and heading the right direction. We should be excited about the arrows in our quiver. We should not, however, assume that progress will be made without hard work and concerted effort.
3.11.2013
What Would Hari Do?
This past Friday I heard the term “Big Data” for the first time. During the course of the day, I came across it two other times. I guess I’ve always known that as we keep advancing technologically, massive amounts of data would be generated, but I never gave it much thought beyond that. There are a number of very smart people in our community, however, who are devoting themselves to the exploration of what our new capacity means and how it can be employed to our advantage. I won’t trip- I know design and urbanism, I’m shit at math, and only know enough about technology to have a firm grasp on Adobe CS6. That having been said, from time to time I like to think about how new and emerging concepts could conceivably impact the form of cities.
Obviously, when we consider our smart grid, our internet capacity, and with the world fastest computer ninety miles away, Big Data has profound implications for Chattanooga. The ability to generate, store and analyze massive amounts of data concerning how people live and behave is truly exciting. Given enough data points, it’s possible to create predictive models for how large groups of people will react and respond to certain situations. This has far-reaching implications, from the efficient provision of electricity, to disaster preparedness plans, to buildings and districts that produce more than they consume, to the planning of how cities are built and in-filled. The question that then occurred to me, is that given enough data points about enough aspects of human activity, would it be possible to make more comprehensive predictive models for the future of society?
That’s when I had another “Simpson’s did it” moment.
What I thought was an epiphany was nothing more than a latent, subconscious memory of something I read years ago. When I was in junior high, my stepdad introduced me to the Foundation series by Isaac Asimov (thanks, G!). It was, and remains, my favorite book series, but I haven’t read it for at least a dozen years. The premise is that a dude named Hari Seldon develops a type of mathematics called Psychohistory that uses statistics about human behavior to predict the future. The bigger the data set, the more accurate his predictions, but his tool is ineffective at predicting the actions of an individual. His calculations predict the decline of the Galactic Empire and a dark age that will last 30,000 years. His calculations also showed that while there was virtually no way to stop the decline the Empire, there was a way to shorten the dark age from 30,000 years to a mere millennium. Toward this end he established the “Foundation” that would, over time, make tweaks to society to change the course of history to shorten the oncoming dark age.
So what started off as deep thought about the role of emerging technologies in shaping the future physical form of the city ended with me spending most of my writing time downloading old books. But for now, let me say that we have the unequalled opportunity to improve the quality of life for Chattanoogans, those in the region and those around the globe. Beyond service strategies, and procedural protocols, the analysis of big data has the very real potential to inform how cities are physically organized and how spaces are designed. These are indeed very exciting times to be both and urbanist and a Chattanoogan. When I finish reading my pop fiction, maybe I’ll revisit the subject. Ciao for now.
Obviously, when we consider our smart grid, our internet capacity, and with the world fastest computer ninety miles away, Big Data has profound implications for Chattanooga. The ability to generate, store and analyze massive amounts of data concerning how people live and behave is truly exciting. Given enough data points, it’s possible to create predictive models for how large groups of people will react and respond to certain situations. This has far-reaching implications, from the efficient provision of electricity, to disaster preparedness plans, to buildings and districts that produce more than they consume, to the planning of how cities are built and in-filled. The question that then occurred to me, is that given enough data points about enough aspects of human activity, would it be possible to make more comprehensive predictive models for the future of society?
That’s when I had another “Simpson’s did it” moment.
 |
| The father of psychohistory |
What I thought was an epiphany was nothing more than a latent, subconscious memory of something I read years ago. When I was in junior high, my stepdad introduced me to the Foundation series by Isaac Asimov (thanks, G!). It was, and remains, my favorite book series, but I haven’t read it for at least a dozen years. The premise is that a dude named Hari Seldon develops a type of mathematics called Psychohistory that uses statistics about human behavior to predict the future. The bigger the data set, the more accurate his predictions, but his tool is ineffective at predicting the actions of an individual. His calculations predict the decline of the Galactic Empire and a dark age that will last 30,000 years. His calculations also showed that while there was virtually no way to stop the decline the Empire, there was a way to shorten the dark age from 30,000 years to a mere millennium. Toward this end he established the “Foundation” that would, over time, make tweaks to society to change the course of history to shorten the oncoming dark age.
So what started off as deep thought about the role of emerging technologies in shaping the future physical form of the city ended with me spending most of my writing time downloading old books. But for now, let me say that we have the unequalled opportunity to improve the quality of life for Chattanoogans, those in the region and those around the globe. Beyond service strategies, and procedural protocols, the analysis of big data has the very real potential to inform how cities are physically organized and how spaces are designed. These are indeed very exciting times to be both and urbanist and a Chattanoogan. When I finish reading my pop fiction, maybe I’ll revisit the subject. Ciao for now.
3.04.2013
Happy Birthday Chuck
I’m generally a pretty happy guy, but from time to time I can get moody. This is one of those times. I’m not sure if I should blame it on something I ate, or the fact that I feel like I haven’t seen the sun in a month. It’s in moments of weakness like these that I’m susceptible to making crotchety blog posts (but please note that by the time this actually goes live, I will likely be back to my normal cheerful self). This one is all over the place, so forgive me.
A couple of weeks ago, famed Alabamian Charles Barkley celebrated his 50th birthday. One of the sports channels ran a top ten list of Barkley’s best quotes (for a few more go here). My favorite: “I don’t care what people think. People are stupid”. But truthfully, I’m not one of those cynical folks that walks around expecting the worst of everyone. To the contrary, I think that individuals are more often than not reasonable with thoughts and actions influenced by their unique life experiences. But when considered as a whole, “people” are indeed stupid. (How else can one explain the popularity of some of our restaurants? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but for me, the dining options in this town are abysmal. It also seems that the more popular a place is, the worse the food is. On the bright side we are blessed to have Lindley and Niel).
I’m a designer, not a sociologist. I’m sure that somewhere there is a very smart person who can give you a thoughtful and reasoned explanation of why groups of folks act they way they do. I’ll leave that to the professionals, but as it relates to urbanism and design I don;t mind making a few observations.
Consider the city. For the past sixty years people in our country have flocked to the sub-urbs. This shift has been detrimental to our urban cores, has stratified society, has destroyed massive areas of viable farmland, has homogenized life experiences, has led to a rise in obesity, has led to the erosion family structure and has done so in a way that is not sustainable, that harms our air, water and land, that is totally dependent on fossil fuels, and that requires them to surrender hours of their life every day to sitting in a car. These facts are self-evident, yet people still think that the sub-urbs are a great place. In fact it is nigh upon impossible to separate the development model from The American Dream.
Consider housing. “People” think that poor iterations of vernacular and/or classical architecture, poorly adapted to site, built in antiseptic sub-urbs in a way that is unresponsive to their actual needs, detrimental to the environment in which they live, and assembled of crap materials using poor technique is a good thing. Despite the fact that these “homes” are unhealthy, inefficient, wasteful, and generic, developers still build them, and people still buy them. In fact, the more unhealthy, inefficient, wasteful and generic a house is, the more desirable it seems to be (think gated community with monster McMansions).
I fully believe that just because a majority believe something or do something, that doesn’t make it right. Our mom’s asked: “if all of your friends jumped off a cliff, would you do it too?”. I would ask: “if most people live in the suburbs, does that make it right?” As a group, “people” don’t understand good design- if they did our cities wouldn’t look the way they do. Therein lies my struggle with how a community works together to build the city. I firmly believe in robust civic participation. But if the citizenry doesn’t understand design (or is collectively incapable of embracing good design) how does that work? This is one that I’ve been grappling with from time to time over the past decade or so. I’ve made peace with the mechanics of how the two seemingly incongruous points can coexist on a case-by-case basis, but I have been unable to reconcile them from philosophical point of view.
If we look back at some of our successes, what can we learn? Miller Plaza enjoyed robust community involvement. However, I don’t think any member of the general public had input on Koetter’s deign guidelines. We had a ton of public involvement in the 90’s, but do you think Chermayeff was soliciting ideas for how the aquarium would look? The same could be said for any number of designed places in downtown. I suppose there is something to be said for the education of the public in bringing them along concerning what makes good design. I suppose there is also something to be said for establishing general directions and frameworks through public participation and fleshing out the details by the interpretations of individuals.
I think that it’s a good thing that we don’t design by committee or leave those types of decisions to the people. It is my belief that the public at large simply does not have to ability to produce good design. Chattanooga was lucky in that we had a Design Studio that was able to advocate on behalf of the people while dealing with design professionals. Perhaps this is a best-case scenario, where the voices of the people are heard, and designers are allowed to express their expertise (although not unchecked).
Further evidence that people are stupid: remember eight years ago when our friends and neighbors lost their ever-loving mind? Let’s not have that happen again – go vote.
A couple of weeks ago, famed Alabamian Charles Barkley celebrated his 50th birthday. One of the sports channels ran a top ten list of Barkley’s best quotes (for a few more go here). My favorite: “I don’t care what people think. People are stupid”. But truthfully, I’m not one of those cynical folks that walks around expecting the worst of everyone. To the contrary, I think that individuals are more often than not reasonable with thoughts and actions influenced by their unique life experiences. But when considered as a whole, “people” are indeed stupid. (How else can one explain the popularity of some of our restaurants? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but for me, the dining options in this town are abysmal. It also seems that the more popular a place is, the worse the food is. On the bright side we are blessed to have Lindley and Niel).
I’m a designer, not a sociologist. I’m sure that somewhere there is a very smart person who can give you a thoughtful and reasoned explanation of why groups of folks act they way they do. I’ll leave that to the professionals, but as it relates to urbanism and design I don;t mind making a few observations.
Consider the city. For the past sixty years people in our country have flocked to the sub-urbs. This shift has been detrimental to our urban cores, has stratified society, has destroyed massive areas of viable farmland, has homogenized life experiences, has led to a rise in obesity, has led to the erosion family structure and has done so in a way that is not sustainable, that harms our air, water and land, that is totally dependent on fossil fuels, and that requires them to surrender hours of their life every day to sitting in a car. These facts are self-evident, yet people still think that the sub-urbs are a great place. In fact it is nigh upon impossible to separate the development model from The American Dream.
Consider housing. “People” think that poor iterations of vernacular and/or classical architecture, poorly adapted to site, built in antiseptic sub-urbs in a way that is unresponsive to their actual needs, detrimental to the environment in which they live, and assembled of crap materials using poor technique is a good thing. Despite the fact that these “homes” are unhealthy, inefficient, wasteful, and generic, developers still build them, and people still buy them. In fact, the more unhealthy, inefficient, wasteful and generic a house is, the more desirable it seems to be (think gated community with monster McMansions).
I fully believe that just because a majority believe something or do something, that doesn’t make it right. Our mom’s asked: “if all of your friends jumped off a cliff, would you do it too?”. I would ask: “if most people live in the suburbs, does that make it right?” As a group, “people” don’t understand good design- if they did our cities wouldn’t look the way they do. Therein lies my struggle with how a community works together to build the city. I firmly believe in robust civic participation. But if the citizenry doesn’t understand design (or is collectively incapable of embracing good design) how does that work? This is one that I’ve been grappling with from time to time over the past decade or so. I’ve made peace with the mechanics of how the two seemingly incongruous points can coexist on a case-by-case basis, but I have been unable to reconcile them from philosophical point of view.
If we look back at some of our successes, what can we learn? Miller Plaza enjoyed robust community involvement. However, I don’t think any member of the general public had input on Koetter’s deign guidelines. We had a ton of public involvement in the 90’s, but do you think Chermayeff was soliciting ideas for how the aquarium would look? The same could be said for any number of designed places in downtown. I suppose there is something to be said for the education of the public in bringing them along concerning what makes good design. I suppose there is also something to be said for establishing general directions and frameworks through public participation and fleshing out the details by the interpretations of individuals.
I think that it’s a good thing that we don’t design by committee or leave those types of decisions to the people. It is my belief that the public at large simply does not have to ability to produce good design. Chattanooga was lucky in that we had a Design Studio that was able to advocate on behalf of the people while dealing with design professionals. Perhaps this is a best-case scenario, where the voices of the people are heard, and designers are allowed to express their expertise (although not unchecked).
Further evidence that people are stupid: remember eight years ago when our friends and neighbors lost their ever-loving mind? Let’s not have that happen again – go vote.
2.25.2013
Beware the Freixenet
Last night, my Twitter feed blew up. Apparently, everyone I follow has an Academy Awards fetish. The Oscars don't turn my crank, but now I know what my non-football-loving friends must think of me on Saturdays in the fall- fair play.
As fate would have it, I did attended the local level awards ceremony for the worlds largest advertising design competition. The Addy’s are sponsored by the American Advertising Federation and are structured so that the winners of local awards move through to regional judging, and the regional winners move along to national judging. My primary job at the show was to accompany D.Rushing, smile, be pleasant, and otherwise serve as eye candy (or something like that). I was also there as an interested observer since the website for the Design Studio Retrospective had been nominated for an award. The event was good fun, It’s always nice to be in a room full of creative people. I was, however, sorely disappointed to find that the inimitable Jim Kennedy did not emcee this year.
As it turns out, the Retrospective website won a silver Addy for digital. I am very appreciative for the hard work and effort that Neathawk, DuBuque & Packett put in to the design of the site. I also commend them for dealing with a tetchy, hands-on client. So, for this week’s post, I encourage you to go have another look at the Urban Design Studio Retrospective website...
www.chattanoogastudio.com
(sorry, it's been a busy week)
As fate would have it, I did attended the local level awards ceremony for the worlds largest advertising design competition. The Addy’s are sponsored by the American Advertising Federation and are structured so that the winners of local awards move through to regional judging, and the regional winners move along to national judging. My primary job at the show was to accompany D.Rushing, smile, be pleasant, and otherwise serve as eye candy (or something like that). I was also there as an interested observer since the website for the Design Studio Retrospective had been nominated for an award. The event was good fun, It’s always nice to be in a room full of creative people. I was, however, sorely disappointed to find that the inimitable Jim Kennedy did not emcee this year.
As it turns out, the Retrospective website won a silver Addy for digital. I am very appreciative for the hard work and effort that Neathawk, DuBuque & Packett put in to the design of the site. I also commend them for dealing with a tetchy, hands-on client. So, for this week’s post, I encourage you to go have another look at the Urban Design Studio Retrospective website...
www.chattanoogastudio.com
(sorry, it's been a busy week)
2.18.2013
Unfinished Business
At risk of sounding like a broken record, cities are like forests – there is no finished state, they grow and shrink, change, cycle and recycle. But for the sake of argument, let’s say it’s possible to finish a city- to achieve an ideal state or a state that is “good enough” for its citizenry. If you listen to some voices in the community, downtown Chattanooga has reached that point. On more than one occasion, I have heard or overheard people making the case that we’ve done everything we can downtown and now need to shift our focus to (fill in the blank with the name of an industrial park, suburb, region, etc).
Notwithstanding the fact that cities can never be finished, I still don’t buy the concept that downtown Chattanooga is “done”. That’s Hogwash. In fact, the best you could say in that regard is that we have started a lot of things. Please consider the following items, and then see if you can say we’re finished with a straight face. Please note that this post is not an exhaustive list of opportunities and challenges, this is just what I came up with off the top of my head on a Saturday morning. Brighter minds than mine could probably double or triple this. In any event, I submit for your consideration, some of our unfinished business:
Riverfront
With the construction of the 21st Century Waterfront we’ve completed our triumphant return to the river, right? Wrong.
- The “town green” is almost always dead as a doornail.
Part of the reason for this is the fact that parcel 3a never got built. Having an animated western edge would go a long way toward giving the green some scale while providing more opportunity for activity and engagement. That parking lot now contributes to the fact that…
- The waterfront peters out as it heads west.
The original plan for the waterfront called for vertical buildings along Riverfront Parkway and at the Marine Max site. Obviously, mixed-use buildings there would have inherent value by adding people and activity to the district. However, they also served as very important role as edges to the waterfront. The Marine Max site created one of two “dueling” anchors (opposite The Passage) that make the space in between them more viable, interesting and valuable. Without this western edge, the waterfront loses momentum as parks and buildings give way to parking lots, services areas, and awkward “park” and playground spaces. Unfortunately, the Spring Hill Suites built farther down on the riverfront do nothing to mitigate this, but they do highlight the fact that…
- A massive swath of the riverfront has not been addressed.
The 21st Century Waterfront Plan called for improvements from Ross’s Landing extending west around the bend all the way to a proposed extension of MLKing (on both sides of the river). The land between Parkway and the River on the Westside represents a massive opportunity for the continuing evolution of our waterfront. Which brings us to the…
Westside
It is readily apparent to all that things aren’t ideal on the Westside. Despite that, any time the topic comes up a familiar list of excuses gets trotted out: “the time isn’t quite right for that”, “the scale of the issues is too big”, “it’s too isolated from the rest of downtown”, “it would require a massive amount of resources to make a difference”. Excuses aside, there is work be done there, because…
-Downtown is cloven by TDOT interventions.
It’s not a secret that in the 50’s, US-27 divided downtown and conquered the Westside. Well TDOT has now come back to finish the job. If we want to give our kids a chance at making the downtown whole again, then we have to fight for the highest and best level of connectivity and permeability across that damned road now. 27 and the Westside are inextricably linked, and this is partly because…
-The scale is suburban.
Everything on the Westside is large scaled: The Blue Cross Compound, the Jaycee towers, the Alstom site, the Aerisyn site, the car dealerships, the housing projects. There exists the opportunity to work within some of the larger-scaled elements to create a finer grain and to make the Westside a more animated and activated destination. But beyond attracting new residents and visitors, it needs to be done because…
-There is a disenfranchised population.
I struggled with how to characterize this headline sentence, and perhaps it’s not phrased exactly right. It is evident, however, that there are large residential areas in the Westside that have not shared in downtown prosperity in the same ways that other downtown neighborhoods have. The issues are complex, and efforts have been made in the past. That does not, however, mean that the issues and responsibilities are any less real now and in the future. Speaking of large residential areas…
Southside
What has happened in the Southside since the mid-90’s planning efforts by the likes of Calthorpe, McDonough and Dover Kohl is nothing short of amazing. The big thing that the Southside has going for it is that we have now created a functioning market- the private sector is now actively engaged (although there is still at least one big project that may need some help). On the other hand, there are still public realm issues, such as the fact that…
-The primary Southside gateway into town is crap.
Market from I-24 to Main is potentially one of the grand gateways into downtown. The quality of private development and public realm improvement in this stretch now, however, belies that importance. This is not the only gateway street that needs attention since…
-The 20th Street corridor is also crap.
20th is one of the few places where we have an excellent opportunity to connect the Southside with Westside. The quality of development and public realm in this stretch now, however, also belies that importance. 20th is another remnant of our industrial heritage. That particular former land use creates some quirky situations and means that…
-There are still gaps that need stitching.
Another potential connection between Southside and Westside is West Main from Broad to Riverfront Parkway. This stretch has been largely unattended to. The great potential there is to use this corridor to connect with Finley Stadium and its associated developments. The stadium has been a bit isolated, but could be a part of a larger animated district. Whereas that is an active use that’s looking for a district, elsewhere we have districts looking for activities...
MLK/UTC
In a sense MLK and UTC are like the Westside. In my time here, I have found that there are a few challenges that we always greet with the same tired (if not true) responses. For MLK, we always say that property owners have unreasonable expectations for property values, that politics will prevent substantial reinvestment, and that there are too many immovable, dead spatial elements to allow for critical mass. We always hear that UTC won’t engage with the downtown community, that the transient student population means it will always be dead, and that changes in administration make it difficult to sustain long-lasting relationships. The fact that we have excuses and reasons, however, does not mean that we don’t still have the responsibility to work to make things better. These places represent a large chunk of the downtown footprint, and there is plenty of work to be done within them, and to connect them to…
The Rest of Downtown
Other opportunities and challenges in the core are actually a bit more straightforward. In fact, this brief (and incomplete) bullet list should suffice:
-700 Block
-Corner of 4th and Broad
-Firestone lot (2nd, between Broad and Market)
-Corner of Market and MLKing
-Ross Hotel/patten Parkway
-Civic Forum lot
-The swath of land between 20th Street and I-24
-And lest we forget, there is also the equivalent of five full city blocks of unimproved property in one of the most desirable places in downtown (The UNUM properties).
We have seen a great deal of focus on regional issues over the past few years. This type of thinking and work is prudent and necessary. One of the key arguments for beginning work in downtown Chattanooga 30 years ago was that the health of downtown has a direct bearing on the health of the region. Downtown also serves as a symbol, not just of the city, but of the region. If we consider trends for the future and the demographics that drive them, we see that core urban areas will be facing tremendous growth pressures. In that light, does it make sense shift our focus away from downtown and leave it to fend for itself? Now, more than ever and certainly into the future, a healthy region is dependent upon healthy urban cores.
Everyone who is involved in the building of the city will have their own personal finish line. Every building and space in the city will eventually have its own individual finish line. For the city, however, the race goes on. So while some may argue that we have reached the finish line, I will argue that we’ve made a good start.
Notwithstanding the fact that cities can never be finished, I still don’t buy the concept that downtown Chattanooga is “done”. That’s Hogwash. In fact, the best you could say in that regard is that we have started a lot of things. Please consider the following items, and then see if you can say we’re finished with a straight face. Please note that this post is not an exhaustive list of opportunities and challenges, this is just what I came up with off the top of my head on a Saturday morning. Brighter minds than mine could probably double or triple this. In any event, I submit for your consideration, some of our unfinished business:
Riverfront
With the construction of the 21st Century Waterfront we’ve completed our triumphant return to the river, right? Wrong.
- The “town green” is almost always dead as a doornail.
Part of the reason for this is the fact that parcel 3a never got built. Having an animated western edge would go a long way toward giving the green some scale while providing more opportunity for activity and engagement. That parking lot now contributes to the fact that…
- The waterfront peters out as it heads west.
The original plan for the waterfront called for vertical buildings along Riverfront Parkway and at the Marine Max site. Obviously, mixed-use buildings there would have inherent value by adding people and activity to the district. However, they also served as very important role as edges to the waterfront. The Marine Max site created one of two “dueling” anchors (opposite The Passage) that make the space in between them more viable, interesting and valuable. Without this western edge, the waterfront loses momentum as parks and buildings give way to parking lots, services areas, and awkward “park” and playground spaces. Unfortunately, the Spring Hill Suites built farther down on the riverfront do nothing to mitigate this, but they do highlight the fact that…
- A massive swath of the riverfront has not been addressed.
The 21st Century Waterfront Plan called for improvements from Ross’s Landing extending west around the bend all the way to a proposed extension of MLKing (on both sides of the river). The land between Parkway and the River on the Westside represents a massive opportunity for the continuing evolution of our waterfront. Which brings us to the…
Westside
It is readily apparent to all that things aren’t ideal on the Westside. Despite that, any time the topic comes up a familiar list of excuses gets trotted out: “the time isn’t quite right for that”, “the scale of the issues is too big”, “it’s too isolated from the rest of downtown”, “it would require a massive amount of resources to make a difference”. Excuses aside, there is work be done there, because…
-Downtown is cloven by TDOT interventions.
It’s not a secret that in the 50’s, US-27 divided downtown and conquered the Westside. Well TDOT has now come back to finish the job. If we want to give our kids a chance at making the downtown whole again, then we have to fight for the highest and best level of connectivity and permeability across that damned road now. 27 and the Westside are inextricably linked, and this is partly because…
-The scale is suburban.
Everything on the Westside is large scaled: The Blue Cross Compound, the Jaycee towers, the Alstom site, the Aerisyn site, the car dealerships, the housing projects. There exists the opportunity to work within some of the larger-scaled elements to create a finer grain and to make the Westside a more animated and activated destination. But beyond attracting new residents and visitors, it needs to be done because…
-There is a disenfranchised population.
I struggled with how to characterize this headline sentence, and perhaps it’s not phrased exactly right. It is evident, however, that there are large residential areas in the Westside that have not shared in downtown prosperity in the same ways that other downtown neighborhoods have. The issues are complex, and efforts have been made in the past. That does not, however, mean that the issues and responsibilities are any less real now and in the future. Speaking of large residential areas…
Southside
What has happened in the Southside since the mid-90’s planning efforts by the likes of Calthorpe, McDonough and Dover Kohl is nothing short of amazing. The big thing that the Southside has going for it is that we have now created a functioning market- the private sector is now actively engaged (although there is still at least one big project that may need some help). On the other hand, there are still public realm issues, such as the fact that…
-The primary Southside gateway into town is crap.
Market from I-24 to Main is potentially one of the grand gateways into downtown. The quality of private development and public realm improvement in this stretch now, however, belies that importance. This is not the only gateway street that needs attention since…
-The 20th Street corridor is also crap.
20th is one of the few places where we have an excellent opportunity to connect the Southside with Westside. The quality of development and public realm in this stretch now, however, also belies that importance. 20th is another remnant of our industrial heritage. That particular former land use creates some quirky situations and means that…
-There are still gaps that need stitching.
Another potential connection between Southside and Westside is West Main from Broad to Riverfront Parkway. This stretch has been largely unattended to. The great potential there is to use this corridor to connect with Finley Stadium and its associated developments. The stadium has been a bit isolated, but could be a part of a larger animated district. Whereas that is an active use that’s looking for a district, elsewhere we have districts looking for activities...
MLK/UTC
In a sense MLK and UTC are like the Westside. In my time here, I have found that there are a few challenges that we always greet with the same tired (if not true) responses. For MLK, we always say that property owners have unreasonable expectations for property values, that politics will prevent substantial reinvestment, and that there are too many immovable, dead spatial elements to allow for critical mass. We always hear that UTC won’t engage with the downtown community, that the transient student population means it will always be dead, and that changes in administration make it difficult to sustain long-lasting relationships. The fact that we have excuses and reasons, however, does not mean that we don’t still have the responsibility to work to make things better. These places represent a large chunk of the downtown footprint, and there is plenty of work to be done within them, and to connect them to…
The Rest of Downtown
Other opportunities and challenges in the core are actually a bit more straightforward. In fact, this brief (and incomplete) bullet list should suffice:
-700 Block
-Corner of 4th and Broad
-Firestone lot (2nd, between Broad and Market)
-Corner of Market and MLKing
-Ross Hotel/patten Parkway
-Civic Forum lot
-The swath of land between 20th Street and I-24
-And lest we forget, there is also the equivalent of five full city blocks of unimproved property in one of the most desirable places in downtown (The UNUM properties).
We have seen a great deal of focus on regional issues over the past few years. This type of thinking and work is prudent and necessary. One of the key arguments for beginning work in downtown Chattanooga 30 years ago was that the health of downtown has a direct bearing on the health of the region. Downtown also serves as a symbol, not just of the city, but of the region. If we consider trends for the future and the demographics that drive them, we see that core urban areas will be facing tremendous growth pressures. In that light, does it make sense shift our focus away from downtown and leave it to fend for itself? Now, more than ever and certainly into the future, a healthy region is dependent upon healthy urban cores.
Everyone who is involved in the building of the city will have their own personal finish line. Every building and space in the city will eventually have its own individual finish line. For the city, however, the race goes on. So while some may argue that we have reached the finish line, I will argue that we’ve made a good start.
2.11.2013
Rollin'
I am treading a treacherous path this week- Please don’t send me any hate mail. Prerequisite knowledge for this post: a) Alabama and Auburn are most bitter rivals, b) I was born an Alabama football fan and continue to be to this day, and c) I went to grad school at Auburn and dearly love the place.
My wife, an Auburn grad, informed me this week that she’s headed down to spend the weekend with her old college roommate at this year’s A-Day game (Auburn’s annual spring football scrimmage). In truth, she informed me that she was going down for an alumni council meeting that happened to coincide with A-Day, but all I heard was football. A-day this year will be a bittersweet event for Auburn people. On one hand there is the promise of a brighter future under new coach Gus Malzahn. On the other hand, this is the very last opportunity to roll the trees at Toomer’s Corner.
I have a vivid recollection of the night of September 20, 1997. I had just enrolled in graduate school at Auburn that fall, but on that weekend was back in Montgomery baby-sitting for a friend. I put the little one down early that night so that I could tune in to see #12 Auburn play #10 LSU in Baton Rouge. Auburn won an incredibly entertaining game with a last minute touchdown by Rusty Williams. When the child’s mother returned, I decided on a whim to drive the 45 minutes back to my apartment in Auburn rather than return to my folks’ house. It was about 2 a.m. when I arrived, and despite the win the town was asleep. It was then that I happened rather unexpectedly on one of the most beautiful things I’ve ever seen. Approaching Magnolia Avenue on College Street, I noticed a great, ethereal, fluttering white mass ahead in the darkness. I pulled the car over and got out for a walk around in what was a still, humid and warm night. The white mass that I saw from down the street turned out to be toilet paper…lots of toilet paper. There were prodigious amounts of TP everywhere: on the ground, on street signs, on gates leading to campus, on cars, and on traffic signal mast arms. The focus of the TP’ers, however, was on two 100-year-old oak trees. That was my first experience with the rolling of Toomer’s corner.
The intersection of Magnolia and College is called Toomer’s corner, taking the name of Toomer’s Drugstore which occupies the northeast corner. The intersection is in many ways the heart of Auburn as it is the center of downtown and the place where the University meets the town. Toomer’s corner is where Auburn people congregate to celebrate community. Understanding the role that football plays in the life of the state and its citizens, one can imagine that the largest community celebrations are reserved for when Auburn wins a football game. On those occasions, thousands of fans make their way from Jordan-Hare Stadium to Toomer’s to celebrate with one another and to throw rolls of toilet paper into the trees. The bigger the game, the bigger the mass of paper.
I have a vivid recollection of the night of November 26, 2010. On that day my beloved Alabama Crimson Tide blew a seemingly insurmountable 24-point lead to lose to Auburn. I dearly love Auburn, but not on that day. I, however, did not take it as badly as others. After the game, and idiot Alabama “fan” named Harvey Updike drove from his home in Dadeville, AL down to Auburn. Mr. Updike arrived armed with a jug of Spike 80DF, an industrial strength tree poison, and proceeded to give the Toomer oaks a lethal dose 50 times more potent than required. The trees are now dead and will be removed after the A-Day game. The university has plans to replace the trees with other elements (presumably they will be TP friendly).
The whole ordeal is incredibly stupid, depressing, and sad and it gives the state yet another black eye. There is a bright side, however, to how things went down. If one accepts Neil Young’s* view that “it’s better to burn out than to fade away”, and is sympathetic to The Who’s wish that “I hope I die before I get old”, then this is a near-perfect death. For a tree that is over a hundred years old, would it be better to be dismantled over a decade as your limbs die off, or go out in a blaze in glory? The fact that the tree met its demise at the hands of a moronic fan of an archrival means that it has been effectively martyred. The trees will now be an active part of the rivalry dialogue in a way that would not have otherwise happened if they merely succumbed to old age. So rather than depriving Auburn people of a symbol, Mr. Updyke has actually given them one that, although intangible, is more powerful and longer lasting.
I love to make the analogy of cities acting as forests, the life of the whole being informed by the cycles of single buildings and spaces. There are, however, differences. None of us has the ability to create life or prevent death. It is, however, entirely within our means to create and maintain buildings and spaces indefinitely- as long as we have the will. It has come to my attention that some otherwise reasonable people are clamoring for a certain historic former hotel to be demolished. The argument being that it doesn’t look good in its current state and that the peculiarities of the structure mean it may never make financial sense to fix the building.
What are the Toomer’s oaks worth? If saving the trees was a matter of money, do you doubt that Auburn people (or Alabama people for that matter) would pay the costs? The trees, however, represent something beyond money- they represent the collective, shared history and memory of generations of Auburn people. We must consider the historic buildings in our community in the same light. The St. George hotel is more than just a building. The hotel is part of our collective memory, a reference to the era when Chattanooga became the “Dynamo of Dixie”, and a damn fine example of an urban building. Unfortunately, it’s current state offends the sensibilities of some new residents who aren’t prepared to consider the long-term picture and who demand a more antiseptic site immediately. While I will stop short of likening those who are actively seeking the destruction of a piece of our identity with Harvey Updike, I will argue the other side of the coin. It is the responsibility of those of us who care about things such as community and collective history to make our case. It is our responsibility to organize resources for things that are beyond price. The St. George presents a problem that can be solved by (but it’s value not quantified by) lucre- What is our history worth?
While it may be fitting for the trees in Auburn to go out with a bang, our historic buildings don’t have to. We have the ability and means to save our “Toomer’s oaks”. We simply have to muster our vision and will. I tried to rewrite Mr. Young’s song, but “It’s better to be resurrected, than to burn out, or to fade away” doesn’t have the same ring to it.
*Please no comments regarding the irony of an Alabamian quoting Neil Young. Turns out that “Southern man don’t need him ‘round anyhow” is a false statement when he can be used to make a point on the blog.
My wife, an Auburn grad, informed me this week that she’s headed down to spend the weekend with her old college roommate at this year’s A-Day game (Auburn’s annual spring football scrimmage). In truth, she informed me that she was going down for an alumni council meeting that happened to coincide with A-Day, but all I heard was football. A-day this year will be a bittersweet event for Auburn people. On one hand there is the promise of a brighter future under new coach Gus Malzahn. On the other hand, this is the very last opportunity to roll the trees at Toomer’s Corner.
 |
| If it's academics, I'm like... |
 |
| If it's football, I'm like... |
 |
| No matter what team you root for, you have to admit, this is cool. |
The intersection of Magnolia and College is called Toomer’s corner, taking the name of Toomer’s Drugstore which occupies the northeast corner. The intersection is in many ways the heart of Auburn as it is the center of downtown and the place where the University meets the town. Toomer’s corner is where Auburn people congregate to celebrate community. Understanding the role that football plays in the life of the state and its citizens, one can imagine that the largest community celebrations are reserved for when Auburn wins a football game. On those occasions, thousands of fans make their way from Jordan-Hare Stadium to Toomer’s to celebrate with one another and to throw rolls of toilet paper into the trees. The bigger the game, the bigger the mass of paper.
I have a vivid recollection of the night of November 26, 2010. On that day my beloved Alabama Crimson Tide blew a seemingly insurmountable 24-point lead to lose to Auburn. I dearly love Auburn, but not on that day. I, however, did not take it as badly as others. After the game, and idiot Alabama “fan” named Harvey Updike drove from his home in Dadeville, AL down to Auburn. Mr. Updike arrived armed with a jug of Spike 80DF, an industrial strength tree poison, and proceeded to give the Toomer oaks a lethal dose 50 times more potent than required. The trees are now dead and will be removed after the A-Day game. The university has plans to replace the trees with other elements (presumably they will be TP friendly).
The whole ordeal is incredibly stupid, depressing, and sad and it gives the state yet another black eye. There is a bright side, however, to how things went down. If one accepts Neil Young’s* view that “it’s better to burn out than to fade away”, and is sympathetic to The Who’s wish that “I hope I die before I get old”, then this is a near-perfect death. For a tree that is over a hundred years old, would it be better to be dismantled over a decade as your limbs die off, or go out in a blaze in glory? The fact that the tree met its demise at the hands of a moronic fan of an archrival means that it has been effectively martyred. The trees will now be an active part of the rivalry dialogue in a way that would not have otherwise happened if they merely succumbed to old age. So rather than depriving Auburn people of a symbol, Mr. Updyke has actually given them one that, although intangible, is more powerful and longer lasting.
I love to make the analogy of cities acting as forests, the life of the whole being informed by the cycles of single buildings and spaces. There are, however, differences. None of us has the ability to create life or prevent death. It is, however, entirely within our means to create and maintain buildings and spaces indefinitely- as long as we have the will. It has come to my attention that some otherwise reasonable people are clamoring for a certain historic former hotel to be demolished. The argument being that it doesn’t look good in its current state and that the peculiarities of the structure mean it may never make financial sense to fix the building.
 |
| Perhaps a "T.P. St. G" fundraiser? Or may not... |
What are the Toomer’s oaks worth? If saving the trees was a matter of money, do you doubt that Auburn people (or Alabama people for that matter) would pay the costs? The trees, however, represent something beyond money- they represent the collective, shared history and memory of generations of Auburn people. We must consider the historic buildings in our community in the same light. The St. George hotel is more than just a building. The hotel is part of our collective memory, a reference to the era when Chattanooga became the “Dynamo of Dixie”, and a damn fine example of an urban building. Unfortunately, it’s current state offends the sensibilities of some new residents who aren’t prepared to consider the long-term picture and who demand a more antiseptic site immediately. While I will stop short of likening those who are actively seeking the destruction of a piece of our identity with Harvey Updike, I will argue the other side of the coin. It is the responsibility of those of us who care about things such as community and collective history to make our case. It is our responsibility to organize resources for things that are beyond price. The St. George presents a problem that can be solved by (but it’s value not quantified by) lucre- What is our history worth?
 |
| It is still possible to save one of these. |
While it may be fitting for the trees in Auburn to go out with a bang, our historic buildings don’t have to. We have the ability and means to save our “Toomer’s oaks”. We simply have to muster our vision and will. I tried to rewrite Mr. Young’s song, but “It’s better to be resurrected, than to burn out, or to fade away” doesn’t have the same ring to it.
*Please no comments regarding the irony of an Alabamian quoting Neil Young. Turns out that “Southern man don’t need him ‘round anyhow” is a false statement when he can be used to make a point on the blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)