The Race to Build Tall In The West

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-seattle-skyscraper-20160204-story.html

Wilshire Grand Tower under construction
Los Angeles, California
commons.wikimedia.org

Hello Everyone:

Welcome to a new week with new things to talk about.  Today we are going to talk about new skyscraper developments on the West Coast of the United States.  It seems that the "Left Coast" has caught the "who can build the tallest building" fever.  Rick Anderson in his article, "New skyscrapers vie for West Coast's 'tallest' title in the Los Angeles Times, writes about the latest entrants into the "how high is high" contest.  This mini-boom of skyscrapers reflects a stronger economy, the demand for luxury residences, and the edifice complex has created a competition for who has the biggest shaft.  To wit, when the Wilshire Grand Tower is completed in 2017, it will eclipse the 1,018 foot, 73-story U.S. Bank Tower in Downtown Los Angles, the currently the tallest building on the West Coast.  However, the Wilshire Grand Tower may be dwarfed by a planned skyscraper development in Seattle, Washington.

Proposed Seattle Tower
Seattle, Washington
seattletimes.com

Rick Anderson writes, "Developers of a Seattle tower, in their city application, have sought what they called a height 'sweet spot'-between 1,050 and 1,150 feet-to gain matchless views of the region's soaring topography, Mt. Rainer and the snow-capped Olympic Mountains."  Not only is bigger better, bigger is breathtaking.

Bigger is better, on steroids, was the message conveyed when the world's tallest building, the 163-story Burj Khalifa in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, opened in 2010.  The internationally recognized tower, the 2,722-foot edifice resembles a stacked pyramid of coins, is the current holder of every imaginable height record, "...including world's highest nightclub (143rd floor), world's highest mosque (138th floor) and the fastest elevator (40 mph).  From its observation deck, you can see Iran."  Bigger is better is not on the mind of West Coast developers, specifically 1,700 feet smaller, still taller than they have ever built.

Salesforce Tower
San Francisco, California
salesforcetower.com

San Francisco, not content with watching their rival city Los Angeles take the title of the West Coast's tallest building, is poised to snatch the tallest tower title next year with the completion of the 1,070-foot Salesforce Tower, beating the U.S. Bank Tower by 52-feet.  The glass walled skyscraper will hover over the "$4.5-billion Transbay Transit Center, the city's new South of Market transit hub."  The Transbay Transit Center is the proposed endpoint of the proposed high-speed rail line to and from Los Angeles.  The Transit Center is trumpeted as the "Grand Central Station of the West."

Wilshire Grand Tower
Los Angeles, California
skyscraper center.com

However, Los Angeles is not conceding to its Bay Area competitor.  When completed, the Wilshire Grand Center will stand at 1,100-feet (including a 100-foot spire), "...a $1.2-billion, mixed-use office/hotel project in the Financial District, is also set to be completed next year,..."  A tapered glass-wall high rise, being developed by Korean Air, "...will be topped by a domed 'sky lobby' with views of the Southland."  It will be 30-feet taller than the Salesforce Tower and earn the title, according to the developers, of "the tallest building west of the Mississippi."  For now.

4/C Tower rendering
LMN Architects
Seattle, Washington
architect.com

In development is the 4/C Tower, the West Coast's first 100-plus high rise in Seattle.  It would beat Wilshire Grand by a paltry 11-feet. What is driving the race for how high is high?  Simply, demand.  According to Jason Barr, an associate economics professor at Rutgers University, told Rick Anderson,

The Wilshire Grand Center and 4/C tower in Seattle are going to be mixed-use projects, with some combination of apartments, hotels, office and shopping...So given the favorable climate for these high-end mixed uses, and the cache, that being 'tallest' brings to the market, I would say that the appearance of these buildings suggests that developers are trying to exploit a demand opportunity.

Another factor in the demand is the prestige of sublime panoramas that holds an allure for developers and clients.  Prof. Barr, the author of Building the Skyline: The and Growth of Manhattan's Skyscrapers,  continued,

Golden Gate Bridge with the TransAmerican Pyramid
San Francisco, California
images-of-america.photoshelter.com

Super-tall projects can earn the developers premiums above more typical high-rise buildings if they convey some useful information or provide other services not available in other building.

In the case of offices, high-powered firms are often willing to pay the higher rents in these buildings because it advertises their profitability.  In the case of luxury condos, very wealthy residents are also willing to pay a premium to live in these buildings, as a form of conspicuous consumption.

Another factor in the race to build tall is advanced construction technologies that have made higher and higher more feasible, taller, and safer, according to Jason Gabel, a spokesperson for the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat in Chicago.  For example,

Super high-strength concrete is a major advancement that provides high strength, high stability, high pumping performance, low heat, low shrinkage, low cost, self-curing, self compacting and self-leveling...This material has been instrumental in realizing tall buildings in very active seismic regions, as it provides superior performance against lateral loads.

Rick Anderson observes, "Perhaps more than anything else, it is the statement implied by an edifice that looms over an entire cityscape."

Los Angeles skyline
Los Angeles, California
en.wikipedia.org

Jason Gabel continued.

Architecture is extremely communicative...and building 1,000-plu-foot is sending a very clear message to the rest of the country and around the world that these are successful, bustling, energetic places to to live.  So there is definitely a 'look at us' element to the phenomenon as well.

To date, the proposed Seattle high rise could become the new West Coast height king as soon as 2018.  The plans include 1,200 luxury residences, 150 hotel rooms, and 163,00 square feet of retail and commercial space.

In there application to the City of Seattle, the Miami, Florida-based developer Crescent Heights described it,

The scale of this building is actually related more to creating the appropriate amount of space-through a broad mix of uses-to activate and animate the neighborhood...

Smith Tower
Seattle, Washington
en.wikipedia.org

The proposed 4/C Tower eventually would grow to 102 stories on a narrow lot, just blocks from the West's tallest tower, a century ago, the 42-story Smith Tower, built by typewriter magnet L.C. Smith of Smith-Corona.  L.C. Smith never got to see the building when it was completed in 1914-he died before it was finished.  The tower kept its tallest building crown for about a half century until 1962, when another Seattle landmark beat it-the Space Needle.  The Space Needle was built for the Seattle World's Fair and topped out at 665-feet.  Today, at a tiny just under 500-feet, the Smith Tower gamely juts out among the sea of contemporary glass and steel high rises, at least 13 of which are taller and built to last only few decades.

Rick Anderson writes, "If Seattle is to surpass the 100-story mark, however, it must first over come Federal Aviation Administration objections.  The agency told the developer the very reason for building the skyscraper is the reason it can't be built: it's too tall."

In January, the FAA issued a 'notice of presumed hazard" to Crescent Height, declaring "that a building that high on the hilly downtown parcel now occupied by a parking garage would have an adverse physical or electromagnetic interference effect upon navigable air space or air navigation facilities.

4/C with the Smith Tower in the foreground
Seattle, Washington
skyscraper city.com

This complication was similar to the one faced by Seattle mega-developer Martin Selig, who opened the former-tallest skyscraper in the West. the  76-story, 943-foot Columbia Center in 1985.  Mr. Anderson writes, "He wanted to go higher,  but the FAA objected and Selig backed off."  Four years, the Central Library Tower (renamed the U.S. Bank Tower) in Los Angeles beat it.

Crescent Heights remains optimistic, thinking that being a possible obstacle to air traffic to nearby Boeing Field can be overcome.  Los Angeles-based developer spokesperson Christina Disney issued a statement referring the FAA notice,

...a standard, business-as-usual review process which the FAA applies to all tall buildings to downtown Seattle...Once complete, we anticipate that that a determination of " no hazard will be reached.

"How they stack up"
anmengineering.com

Sonny Kahn, the Miami billionaire who runs Crescent Height,

is on somewhat of a streak of high-rise residential proposal around the nation, Mr. Gabel told Mr. Anderson.  This streak includes a 39-story Century City residential development in West Los Angeles.  The company said it intends to create

an iconic building in Seattle that redefines the skyline and changes the way we live. work and play downtown.

For critics, downsizing is more important.  The snarky phallic comments and symbols (including the one made at the top of the post) in the Seattle media and by attendees at public hearings referred to the building's height and design as a long, white middle finger sticking it to the city.  However, the tall, taller, tallest buildings, enabled by innovations in design and construction techniques, are really setting themselves up for all sorts of comments but the market demands them.  Prof. Barr told Mr. Anderson,

My research shows that condo buyers in New York City are willing to pay nearly 1% more for each floor up, on average-thus 25 stories higher can mean up to 25% more income.  Office rent premiums, I find rise around 0.6% per floor, or about 6% for every 10 floors higher.  Furthermore, developers are increasing the ceiling heights in luxury condos because tall ceilings are in vogue-and new technology allow them to provide them more efficiently.

One World Trade Center in New York, the country's tallest building, is 1,776 feet.  Rick Anderson speculates, "Is there a 2,000-plus foot skyscraper in America's future?"  Jason Barr does not believe this to be the case, "citing government reluctance, land and labor costs, and zoning regulations.  He said,

In short...the economic, political and social forces do seem to exit in the U.S. to favor a 200-story building.

At least, for now.

Blogger Candidate Forum: Nebraska and West Virginia Primary Wrap Up

ABC News Democratic Exit Poll for West Virginia
abcnews.go.com

Hello Everyone:

It is time for another edition of the Blogger Candidate Forum.  Not a lot of fireworks from the West Virginia and Nebraska Republican primaries.  Campaigning without the hindrance of opponents, Donald Trump easily won both states.  Some Republican voters in those states registered their protest for the presumptive nominee by checking off either Gov. John Kasich, Senators Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and Dr. Ben Carson, whose names were on the ballot even though they are out of contention.  Over on the Democrat side, Senator Bernie Sanders also had an easy night, handily defeating frontrunner Secretary Hillary Clinton.  That was not a big surprise either because the Gentleman from Vermont was expected to do well.  That aside, the delegate math is still not in his favor.  Let us take a look at the week that was and see what comes next.

The winners of the Nebraska and West Virginia primaries
indystar.com

Let us begin with the numbers.  On the Blue side of the aisle, the Gentleman from Vermont beat Madame Secretary 51.4 to 35.8 percent of the vote.  This victory earned Senator Sanders eighteen delegates, while Secretary Clinton added 11 more to her total.  When you factor in Super delegates, Madame Secretary has a 2,240 out of 2,383 delegates needed to secure the nomination outright.  Senator Sanders still lags behind with 1,473 delegates.  (http://www.nytimes.com)

On the Red side of the aisle, Donald Trump had an easy night.  So confident was the sole Republican candidate, that Mr. Trump was reported to have told voters to stay home and save their vote for November.  That did not deter voters from in both states from coming out and voting for the Gentleman from Texas and the Governor, whose names were on the ballot despite their ignominious exit last week.  Donald Trump won the Nebraska state primary with 61.4 percent of the vote, earning him 36 delegates.  In West Virginia, he won with 77 percent of the to add 34 delegates to give him a grand total of 1,135 out of 1,237 needed to secure the nomination outright.  (Ibid) At this point, his nomination is a foregone conclusion.  What do we know about the night?

West Virginia and Nebraska primaries
wymt.com

The first thing we know about Tuesday night is West Virginia is not with her.  Eight years ago, Madame Secretary defeated then-Senator Barack Obama in the state's primary but it was close.  This election cycle, she was beaten by a wide margin.  Senator Sanders easily won in nearly every demographic, doing extremely well among voters who were concerned with the economy and in coal industry households.  Secretary Clinton, made the mistake of saying "she wanted to 'put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business.'"  Although she tried to step back from the comment, the damage was done.(http://www.cnn.com)

Clinton campaign lawn sign
©Getty Images
msnbc.com

The second thing we know is even though Democratic voters in West Virginia are more conservative and Madame Secretary is a moderate, that did not help.  When queried, "Nearly 40% of Democratic voters said they want the next president to be 'less liberal' than Obama.  Of those voters, 62% went with Sanders."  Strange, given the more moderate character of West Virginian Democrats.  This highlights a weakness in the Clinton campaign.  First, her disappointing finish is founded on more than her coal comments, it demonstrates the challenges she faces in the General Elections while campaigning for President Obama's third term.   In order to beat Mr. Trump in November, Madame Secretary will have to well with moderate-to-conservative voters in the Midwest.  She does not need to win with them but she just needs to do well.  Madame Secretary also wants to focus her attention on exciting and uniting the base going into November.  This seems like mission impossible if she keeps losing to Senator Sanders.  The dwindling momentum is making harder to seal the deal with liberal base.  (Ibid)

2016 Delegate Tracker
host.madison.com

Third,  numbers do not lie.  You can only add, subtract, multiple, and divide.  In this case, the numbers are not in favor of Senator Bernie Sanders.  West Virginia only had 29 delegates at stake, a tiny fraction of the remaining 900 left until the end of Primary season.  Even with his win, the Gentleman from Vermont did little to move the needle substantially toward him.  Entering Tuesday, Senator Sanders "needed more pledged delegates than remain in upcoming primaries to clinch the nomination."  Best case scenario, he can still pick up enough pledged delegates going into the Convention with a slim lead.  He would also need to flip the super delegates his way to secure the nomination.  One final point, while the demographics in West Virginia favored the Senator, this is not the case in California and New Jersey, who vote JUNE 7.  (Ibid)

Undecided Republicans
fivethirtyeight.com

Fourth thing we know is the Republican Party has not completely made up its mind about supporting Donald Trump.  Witness, Speaker of The House Paul Ryan comment about not being quite ready to support the presumptive nominee and Mr. Trump's retort about not needed the Speaker's support.  Word of friendly advice, the Speaker of the House is the one of the most powerful people in Washington D.C. and second in line to the presidency.  You want to get along with the Speaker of The House, especially if he or she is from your own party.  This is not to say that the Democrats are all holding hands singing kumbaya.  However, Blogger is more optimistic about the Democrats coming together under a single banner than the Republicans.

Sanders for President rally in Los Angeles, California
latimes.com

The fifth thing we know is that it is the year of the outsider.  Exist polls have consistently demonstrated that the voters are fed up with the status quo and want a shake up.  In the West Virginia primary, "only 27% said they want a candidate who continues Obama's policies.  In both states, more than 90% of Republican voters said they were 'angry' or 'dissatisfied' with federal government.  And more than 6 in 10 Republicans in Nebraska said they felt 'betrayed' by GOP politicians."    (http://www.cnn.com)  That is a lot of very unhappy voters, to say the utmost least.  However, these statistics reflect an overall pattern that has been building over the past several years, dissatisfaction with the status quo.  This has given rise to the TEA Party and the rise of the progressive wing of the Democratic party.  If either Donald Trump of Secretary Hillary Clinton do not respond to an electorate hungry for major, one or the other will find themselves counting their losses on November 9.  This challenge is greater for Madame Secretary whose campaign platform is founded on President Obama's legacy.

Different Paths To A Better Future

http://www.savingplaces.org

Jane Jacobs vs. Robert Moses
bigtink.com

Hello Everyone:

Before we begin our discussion on Jane Jacobs and Robert Moses, yours truly just wants to express the undying gratitude over reaching 70,000 page views.  You all are the very best audience a person can have.  Thank you all.  Now on to the epic battle between the planner and the critic in early sixties New York.

Lauren Walser of the National Trust for Historic Preservation recently recalled the epic battle waged between Robert Moses, the New York City Parks Commissioner, and Jane Jacobs over a proposed highway that would cut through Ms. Jacobs's beloved Greenwich.  Her article "A Tale of Two Planners: Jane Jacobs vs. Robert Moses," examines the different approaches each took in imagining the future of New York City.  The proposed highway, the Lower Manhattan Expressway, would have cut through Broome Street, transforming Lower Manhattan into a 10-lane elevated highway.  The highway would have "...cut through SoHo and Little Italy, destroying Washing Square Park, demolishing numerous building and displacing thousands of families and businesses."  The plans had been on hold for a long time but, in the early sixties, they were once again put in motion.

Proposed Cross Manhattan Arterials
citylab.com

A group of council members, entrepreneurs, and local activists joined together to fight the proposed highway.  One of the protestors was Jane Jacobs, then a journalist, mother with young children, and West Village resident.  Ms. Jacobs was militantly opposed to the Lower Manhattan Expressway and organized rallies and protests.  She was made chairperson of allied Committee to Stop the Lower Manhattan Expressway.  Lest you think Ms, Jacobs was some polite journalist, she was arrested in 1968, accused to causing a riot at a public hearing.  Ultimately, Ms. Jacobs and her coalition were successful.  The plan was rejected-David defeated Goliath.  Epic is an appropriate word for a battle that highlighted two widely divergent approaches to urban planning taken by two legends in the field.  Nearly fifty years later, it is a good time to look back at their different approaches to urban planning was motivated by a better future for New York City.

Washington Square Park with highway lane
nypl.org

Lincoln Institute of Land Policy (http://www.lincolninst.edu) fellow and author of the books Wrestling with Moses: How Jane Jacobs Took on New York's Master Builder and Transformed the American City (http://www.penguinrandomhouse.com) Anthony Flint told Lauren Walser,

[Robert Moses and Jane Jane Jacobs] kind of circled around each other like tigers in a cage..They were just extraordinary adversaries.

Using the sport of boxing as a metaphor, Ms. Walser writes, "In this urban theory boxing ring, we have, in one corner, Robert Moses, a larger-than-life personality with endless drive and a,bitten and a remarkable ability to navigate backroom politics."  Mr. Flint added, He was a go getter from the beginning.

Robert Moses
gothamgazette.com

Robert Moses was born in New Haven, Connecticut and was brought to New York City as a child.  He was educated at Yale, Oxford, and Columbia University.  Mr. Moses was New York City Parks Commissioner from 1934 to 1960.  He never held an elected office, at one point he juggled twelve different appointed position simultaneously.  Robert Moses had great plans for what New York City could be and knew how to bring his vision to fruition.  While most adjectives used to describe Mr. Moses have been less than flattering but this "master builder" exerted his influence to transform the City, building highways, bridges, tunnels, public housing developments, playgrounds, and park.

Jane Jacobs quote
azquotes.com

Staying with the boxing metaphor.  In the other corners, is Jane Jacobs, the "...bespectacled, bicycling journalist and activist, who went on to write one of the most influential books in urban planning."  Jane Jacobs was born in Scranton, Pennsylvania and moved to New York City in 1935, eventually settling in Greenwich Village with her family.  She worked as a stenographer and freelance writer, later appointed associated editor of Architectural Forum.

In 1961, Jane Jacobs published her iconic book The Death and Life of Great American Cities.  The books challenged the "short-sightedness of modern urban planning and used her own observations and experiences to conclude what makes a good, safe, livable, desirable neighborhood: smart growth, mixed-use facilities, small city blocks, transit-oriented planning, sufficient density of people and buildings, and a mix of old and new buildings."

Jane Jacobs at a protest
burnhampton100.lib.uchicago.edu

Lauren Walser writes, "Jacobs was openly critical of the top-down approaches to urban planning, where major decisions are made by a select few people behind closed doors."  Instead, Ms. Jacobs preferred more citizen participation, where the neighborhood stakeholders have a say in the city's future.  Anthony Flint told Ms. Walser,

Government and developers are now listening to the people...We have Jane Jacobs to thank for that.

Robert Moses and Jane Jacobs were different as night and day.  Mr. Moses was an Ivy-League Ph.D in political science and Ms. Jacobs did not have a college degree or any sort of training in urban planning.  She detested the top-down, backdoor approach to urban planning-the very method that Mr. Moses was quick to deploy. Jane Jacobs was a populist, fighting for the people, specifically for pedestrians.  Robert Moses was said to favor automobiles over people and in many cases, his plans reflected this preference in the way they displaced people.

A Marvelous Order
mosesjacobsopera.com

This populist versus elitist dynamic (echoed in the current election cycle) has taken hold of the public imagination.  Last month witnessed the premier of A Marvelous Order, (http://mosesjacobsopera.com/index.html)a much talked about opera about the Jane Jacobs-Robert Moses battle over lower Manhattan in the sixties.  When Blogger first heard the murmurings of the opera through the usual social media sources, your truly blanched at the notion.  The Carnegie Museum of Art's Heinz Architectural Center recently closed, HACLab Pittsburgh" Imagining the Modern (http://www.cmoa.org/haclab.pittsburgh/).  This was an experimental exhibition that examined post-war architecture and urbanization in Pittsburgh.  Part of the exhibition looks at how the Pittsburgh Regional Planning Association hired Robert Moses to resolve traffic congestion problems in the downtown area in 1939.  Mr. Moses proposed the "Arterial Plan for Pittsburgh," which led to the Penn-Lincoln Parkway, the Crosstown Boulevard, and the Point State Park-setting the stage for future development.

HAC Lab Pittsburgh
press.cmoa.org

 
Over twenty years later, the University of Pittsburgh invited Jane Jacobs to consult in the city.  Ms. Jacobs was taken on a drive through the city's urban renewal projects,  harshly declaring,

Pittsburgh is being rebuilt by city haters.

Despite or inspire of their differences, both Robert Moses and Jane Jacobs wanted the same thing, a better city.  A better city defined by Ms. Jacobs "...meant human-scale neighborhoods, where community members played an active role in shaping their environment.  For Moses, that meant having strong infrastructure and a plan for density."

Anthony Flint had this to say,

Moses realize the importance of infrastructure and of planning at a regional scale.  And he was able to navigate the bureaucracies, particularly with fundraising...Jacobs was the spokesperson for the human-scale neighborhood and for remembering how people actually function in urban environments.  They brought different things to the table.  But they had the future of the city very much at heart.

Jane Jacobs Said I Told You So

http://www.citylabb.com/design /2016/05/happy-100th-birthday-jane-jacobs/481035/?utm_source=atlfb

"May The Fourth Be With You"
walkasoff.com

Hello Everyone:

This past Thursday was a special day, at least, on the internet.  It was May the Fourth and if you are a Star Wars fan like yours truly, you celebrated your inner Jedi  However, Star Wars was not the only reason to celebrate like Wookie.  May the Fourth was the 100th birthday of the godmother of modern planning-Jane Jacobs.  Her iconic book The Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961; http://www.amazon.com) remains required reading for planners and preservationists.  The book was published the height of the urban renewal movement.  Death and Life was a complete contradiction to mainstream urban planners's misplaced faith in the glories of the "modern" city.  Roberta Brandes Gratz marked the occasion for recent CityLab article, "The Jane Jacobs Century," to look back at just how and why Ms. Jacobs's insights still resonate today.

Jane Jacobs quotes
azquotes.com

The Death and Life of Great American Cities was Jane Jacobs's observations on her beloved Greenwich Village, which she successfully fought its razing and redevelopment.  The Village was her laboratory.  Ms. Brande Gratz writes, "I stress 'observations' because Jacobs was not ideological, not prescriptive."  Specifically, she did not argue in favor low-rise neighborhoods as the cure-all for every place.  Nor did she unilaterally oppose tall buildings-unless they overshadowed or weakened a "viable urban fabric."  Jane Jacobs also did not oppose infrastructure and city park projects.  Ms. Brandes Gratz adds, She did not oppose roads 'as long the city is not reshaped to accommodate them....'"  Ms. Jacobs  also did not have a problem with urban infill redevelopment as "...as long as it was beneficial and appropriately scaled."

Gaslight Cafe
Greenwich Village, New York City, New York
gvshp.org

Jane Jacobs was not always a vocal advocate for smaller is better.  In her early career, she was an architectural critic for Architecture Forum.  During her tenure at the magazine, she was seduced by the promise of the post-war urban utopia that promised a better and newer city built on the rubble of the old one.  The she witnessed the after effects and recanted.

The Death and Life of Great American Cities and the six books that followed it were Ms. Jacobs's observations on what worked and what did not.  One thing she did acknowledge was "a parallel to the ecology of cities in complex ecology of nature."  She observed that parks designed as landscapes, instead for actual use, were empty.  Further, she also paid attention to shopping streets with a variety of businesses drew the customers retail requires to do well.

In the preface to Death and Life, Ms. Jacobs writes,

The scenes that illustrate this are all about us.  For illustrations, please look closely at real cities

Scene from the Beatnik Riot, April 1961
Greenwich Village, New York City, New York
gvshp.org

Contemporary American cities have become magnets for the young, old, in-between, and the tourist.  This point is accurate in cities that did pave over their economic and cultural centers; "traditional sidewalk-rich neighborhoods" during the apogee of Urban Renewal.  If Jane Jacobs were alive today, no doubt she would be savoring a cocktail at the White Horse Tavern, thinking to herself, "see I was right.  I told you so."  Experience tells us that the pre-war American city, noted by its economic and cultural diversity, walkable, transit dependent nature can endure and flourish if it is permit to grow with contemporary additions that do not obscure its essential strengths.

Consider the resurgence in popularity of historic neighborhoods-no just the ones designated historic districts.  Empirical data suggests that these places most often have the highest property values.  Start-up companies choose lofts and commercial neighborhoods for their businesses's headquarters, gradually reviving production-centered urban economies.  Millennial residents have embraced bicycle and mass-transit as an option to the automobile.

White Horse Tavern
Greenwich Village, New York City, New York
gvshp.org

Contrast this with single use "centers"-shopping malls, in particular, which do not survive past their 30-year mortgage with a major renovation.  Yours truly is thinking the Beverly Center in Los Angeles, which is slated to undergo major renovations for about the second time.  The mall has been in existence since the early eighties.  That aside, Roberta Brandes Graza writes, "Car-based cities struggle to create 'walkable' town centers.  Many first rung suburbs are being vacated by residents who either mover farther out or return to downtown living."  Who is moving into the suburbs?  Low income residents, frequently immigrants and small businesses unable to afford rent on their space.

However, the mistake would be to assume that all cities have regained their strength or recovered from decline.  Just the opposite, American cities have been contracting since the post-war love affair with the suburb.  The silver lining is, where smart policies have been implemented, where growing decline is recognized and appropriately mitigated, urban regeneration slowly takes hold and expands.  Again, Jane Jacobs is sipping her cocktail, thinking "I told you so."

1950 S. East East Harlem
East Harlem, New York, New New York
pinterest.com

Jane Jacobs's epiphany came in the mid-1950s, during a visit to East Harlem.  She saw "New, high-rise public housing surrounded by pretty but functionless lawns had erased the formerly dense mix of retail, institutional and residential uses."  Ms. Jacobs learned about what was paved over from the settlement house workers and the tenants.  One resident shared with her:

Nobody cared what we wanted when they built this place.  They threw our houses down and pushed us here and pushed our friends somewhere else.  We don't have a place around here to get a cup of coffee or a newspaper even...But the big men come and look at that grass, 'Isn't it wonderful!  Now the poor have everything.

In her own way. Jane Jacobs celebrated the multiplicity of uses now seen in reviving cities; however she separated it from the congestions that accompanies excessive single-use development.

Washington Square Fountain
Greenwich Village, New York, New York
greenwichvillagehistory.wordpress.com

Roberta Brandes Grata writes, "Perhaps most relevant to the controversies engulfing today's reviving cities is her warning about 'cataclysmic money' the king that brings excessively tall towers for the super wealthy, foreign and domestic, along with tax and zoning policies that favor tourist over tax-paying residents."  Jane Jacobs admonished in The Death and Life of Great American Cities,

...steady but gradual change...retains staying power after its novelty has gone...requires a myriad of gradual, constant, close-grained changes...

That close-grain element is precisely what is missing in the mad rush encouragement of more and more tourists.

The negative impact of accelerated change is barely acknowledged-especially in the mega-popular destinations of New York, New Orleans, and San Francisco.  Ms. Brandes Gratz points out, "These cities ignore the wisdom of Jacobs at their peril.  Not today or tomorrow, maybe not for years to come, their downfall is inevitable and it will be painful, unless they wake up to the urban dynamics that Jacobs chronicled and analyzed half century ago.

One thing is certain, if you heed the words of Jane Jacobs for the local, the tourist will follow; fi do it for the tourist, you lose the local and,  eventually the tourist because it is the existing fabric that gives a place character.  Read Jane Jacobs.

Blogger Candidate Forum: Hoosier Primary

Are you registered to vote?
Do you know where your polling place is?
in.gov

Hello Everyone:

It is Wednesday, which means it is time for Blogger Candidate Forum.  Today we have no shortage of things to talk about.  One thing about this election cycle is there always something to say.  This election cycle has upended all manner of conventional political wisdom.  The general public is sick and tired of the same old, same old.  They want someone different, out of the mainstream, with fresh solutions to the issues that challenge the American public.  Blogger believes this can be a good thing but without a mechanism of implementation or the slash-and-burn approach, that out of the mainstream candidate can exacerbate matters.  Before we look at the latest developments, let us take a look at the results.

Senator Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump
indystar.com

First of all, congratulations to Senator Bernie Sanders and Donald on their respective victories.  For Senator Sanders, it was a much needed victory after a series of losses in the previous primaries.

His win in the Hoosier State reinvigorates his flagging campaign.  Last week, Senator Sanders was in a state of introspection after losing to Secretary Hillary Clinton in four out of the five Mid-Atlantic states and the New York state primaries.  Senator Sanders retreated to his home state of Vermont to re-assess the state of his campaign. The media, including this blog, reported that the Sanders campaign laid off hundreds of workers.  This was seen as an indication that Sen. Sanders was getting ready to suspend his campaign.  The other way to look at it, field offices were shut down as logical end of a state primary campaign.  However, thanks to the state of Indiana, Senator Bernie Sanders lives to fight another.

Early results from the Indiana Primary
youtube.com

Senator Bernie Sanders won the Indiana State Primary with 52.7 percent of the vote.  Madame Secretary received 47.3 percent. (http://www.ap.org)   It was a slim margin but enough to give the Gentleman from Vermont an additional 44 delegates, to raise his total of pledged and super delegates to 1,450.  Sec. Clinton still holds a commanding delegate lead.  Despite yesterday's loss, she has amassed 2,223 pledged and super delegates. (http://www.nytimes.com) While the Sanders campaign can look forward to potential victories in West Virginia and Oregon, with her commanding lead in the delegate count, Madame Secretary could have the nomination wrapped up before June.  Senator Bernie should savor this victory.  It did a lot for campaign morale, especially after the recent losses. His Social Democracy movement lives on.  However, you cannot deny that Secretary Clinton's lead is insurmountable.  In order for Senator Sanders to overcome the 773 delegate difference, he would have to win the remaining primaries by at least 59 percent.  Either that, or Secretary Clinton's campaign suffering a major collapse or her being escorted out of her headquarters by federal marshals.  Since neither one is going to happen in the immediate future, Senator Bernie Sanders can continue to remain competitive and play a major role in shaping the fall campaign platform.

The remaining Republican candidates as of Monday
rawstory.com     

Blogger supposes it should be no surprise that Donald Trump won the Indiana primary by a wide margin.  Mr. Trump handily defeated his two remaining rivals: Senator Ted Cruz of Texas and Ohio Governor John Kasich 53 percent of the vote to 36.7 and 7.5 percent of the vote respectively.  (http://www.ap.org)  It should also be no surprise that both the Ohio Governor and the Gentleman from Texas finally dropped out of the race.  Although, Blogger has to give both gentlemen credit for staying in as long as they did, especially Gov. Kasich.  It is rather too bad that the anti-Trump faction did not embrace the more moderate governor.  However, the Republican electorate wanted someone completely out of the mainstream.  Even TEA Party favorite Sen. Cruz was still too mainstream for the Republican voters.  Mr. Trump's resounding victory gives him 57 delegates, to raise the total to 1,013, putting him 224 delegates within clinching the nomination.  (http://www.nytimes.com)  Looking ahead to the remaining caucuses and primaries, stating the obvious, Mr. Trump should also have the nomination clinched before June.  The primary and his remaining rivals dropping out leave Mr. Trump the presumptive nominee.

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton
online.com

Where does this leave us?  If you are a California, like yours truly, you have to feel like why bother voting in the June primary? After all, the General Election candidates are pretty much a foregone conclusion.  They have been since March.  Even though the Republican nominee has been, for all intents and purposes, decided there are down ballot candidates that deserve your consideration and the Democratic race is still not over, despite what the Gentleman from Vermont may think.  Senator Sanders is wrong to assume that Madame Secretary considers their contest over.  She is too smart of a candidate to think this.  As the race slowly turns toward November, both Mr. Trump and Secretary Clinton are beginning the process of vetting potential running mates.  This is the wise thing to do.  While Blogger does not believe that Madame Secretary Clinton will announce a running mate until the nomination is absolutely secure, yours truly is not so sure about Donald Trump.

Just a friendly reminder when Election Day is
voteforthepresidentonline.com

What happens next?  The Republican party has no choice but to rally around Donald Trump.  Dropping an anti-Trump candidate at this stage is as useless as Senator Ted Cruz announcing his running mate despite being mathematically eliminated from winning the nomination on the first ballot.  It is an act of desperation on the part of the anti-Trump faction.  Blogger got momentarily excited when former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg floated idea of running as an independent but wisely decided against the idea.

An article in today's Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com) argued in favor of Sec. Clinton conceding the nomination to Sen. Sanders-"Hillary Clinton Should Concede to Bernie Sanders Before The FBI Reveal Its Findings."  The writer, H.A. Goodman, makes some good points about the state of the ongoing investigation of Sec. Clinton's emails, however, suggesting that concede the race before the FBI recommends indictments is premature.  Yes, a presidential candidate being investigated for federal crimes gives the other side ammunition but that would not be something that Sec. Clinton would do.  She is taking a "wait and see" approach regarding this matter.  It maybe the more prudent approach but better this than act in haste.

For now, the campaign moves on.  The candidates have set up tent poles in California, the biggest prize.  Always save the best for last.  More next week.

Let Us Make Mass Transit A Key Issue This Year

http://nextcity.org/daily/entry/2016-president-race-winner-invest-public-transit

Secretary Hillary Clinton going through a subway turnstile
April 7, 2016 AP Photo/Richard Drew
theguardian.com

Hello Everyone:

We are stepping back into the Blogger Candidate Forum today for a look at the candidates's position on public transit.  To wit, when the primary circus rolled into New York, at the beginning of April, each of the candidates made sure to be photographed taking public transportation.  Who could forget the infamous photograph of Secretary Hillary Clinton swiping her Metrocard five times before she finally got through (Saturday Night Live had fun with this moment).  Senator Bernie Sanders had a bit of a senior moment trying to buy a token-the New York City subways has not used tokens since 2003.  Daniel J. McGraw's NextCity article, "Will Next U.S. President Be All Aboard for Transit?" speculates how the eventual President of The United States will invest in public transportation.

The front page of the Daily News
politicsusa.com

Republican presidential nominee candidate Texas Senator Ted Cruz jumped on the transit bandwagon as well.  This was, perhaps, a response to his comments about "New York values."  The New York Daily News decided to offer some friendly and free travel advice.  The tabloid suggested that Sen. Cruz suggested that the Gentleman from Texas take trains "identified with the sixth and 21st letters of the alphabet as the best way to get out the Bronx."  Hence, the picture on the left.

Snarky advice aside, the ubiquitous campaign photo-ops do raise the issue of public transportation.  Public transportation investment has been on the campaign back burner so far and the remaining candidates have not had much to say on the subject.  Granted that public transportation investment is not a really glamorous campaign issue like health care.  Nor is it quite as polemical as immigration and guns.  Nevertheless, Mr. McGraw reports, "As a country, we are in the middle of a radical shift in our relationship to the automobile and its role in transportation, and the current candidates aren't speaking much to the change."  Whether this is a matter of not formulating a transportation policy or a matter of focusing on core issues their would-be voters care about, the bottom line is the remaining candidates are just not acknowledging the fact that pubic transit ridership is up.

Los Angeles MTA
en.wikipedia.org

This is a pity because, as Mr. McGraw reports, "While ridership has increased over the last decade, the growth has happened while funding for transit has remained relatively flat, and many systems are aging and growing more desperate for repair and upgrades."  To underscore this point, the American Public Transportation Association believes that national public transit systems require about "...$86 billion worth of repairs just to get them functional any growth."  Therefore, we have to ask, where to the remaining candidates stand on public transportation?

On the red team, Sen. Cruz placed the New Starts Transit Program on his list of federal programs he would end if elected president.  In a preview of things to come, the Senator voted no in December on a the first real multi-year transportation bill passed since 2005.   No need to worry, the Cruz campaign is floundering badly.  Donald Trump has expressed a certain amount of envy over other countries's high-speed trains.  Mr. Trump told the British newspaper The Guardian in 2015 "the U.S. has to spend more on mass transit, but hasn't yet explained exactly where funding will come from."  In March, Time magazine reported that he came off like a Democrat when speaking about infrastructure investment, minus any real details.

Railroad tracks
americanprogress.org

David Von Drehle wrote in the March 14, 2016 cover article:

Trump has admitted that rebuilding American infrastructure would cost taxpayer dollars.  But then waved away the concern with Trumpian bravado.

"On the federal level, this is going to be an expensive investment, no question about that.  But in the long run it will more than pay for itself," he said.  "It will stimulate our economy while its is being built and make it a lot easier to businesses when it's done-and it can be done on time and under budget.  (http://www.time.com)

Senator Sanders's missing subway tokens
hereandnow.wbur.org

On the blue side of the aisle, both Madame Secretary and the Gentleman from Vermont both agree that more spending on mass transit is an absolute necessity.  Senator Bernie Sanders would like to spend $1 trillion over the next five years on infrastructure, including public transportation improvements.  The proposed spending package includes an extra $75 billion per annum for state infrastructure projects: roads, bridges, and transit.  Secretary Hillary Clinton also wants to increase spending by $275 billion, spread out over a five year period on the same items.  However, she does not go into specifics regarding how much money to allocate for mass transit and road construction.

What separates the Democratic candidates is how the money would be spent.  Daniel McGraw writes, "Sanders wants to increase the spending but disburse it in much in the same way it has been for decades.  Clinton, on the other hand, wants to make a major change have more ways that the federal money can go directly to the transit systems for capital projects and bypass state control."

710 Freeway North
misreagentia.com

Secretary Clinton's proposal to direct federal transportation funds directly to the transit systems acknowledges the fact "In the past few decades, states have taken more of a lead in how transportation funds are spent."  While there are no guidelines for how much the states spend or how, but one thing is certain: "Urban mass transit systems have suffered-either through lack of maintenance or lack of expansion-when governors and state legislatures have seen mass transit as wasteful."

Mass transit spending as wasteful?  Really.  In truth, how the money is spent needs to part of the discussion right now.  Mr. McGraw writes, "About $60 billion a year is spent in total on mass transit in this country..."  This works out like this: "About 25 percent comes from fares, 20 percent from the federal government, and the rest state and local sources."  In previous years, the funds allocated by the federal government was used for capital improvements like light-rail expansions.

I-95 Northbound at the I-40 Interchange
Benson, North Carolina
en.wikipedia.org

However, over time, many of the states-which exert control over disbursing federal funds-have sliced state and federal contributions being used more frequently for essential operating costs.  This is the reasons why transit systems are running a $86 billion deficit in maintenance capital projects, at the same time not expanding further.

On the positive side, Senator Bernie Sanders's plan is an improvement over current state of affairs, "giving money to some governors who have favored spending on suburban sprawl over urban mass transit doesn't change much."  However, while it might increase the number of highway lanes and make bridges safer, it does not facilitate mass transit projects.  While the Clinton plan is short on details, it does have some positive aspects that would allow "...a better one-to-one between the federal and local governments when trying to fund capital improvements that could include expansion of the existing mass transit system."

Nashville Bus Rapid Transit
Nashville, Tennessee
metro-magazine.com

One example is the city of Nashville, Tennessee.  The city has worked in recent years to establish a bus rapid transit line only to have the Republican-controlled statehouse place obstacles in Nashville's path.  If elected president, Sec. Clinton's plan would make it easier to execute local plans, "because the federal grants under her proposal would be project specific and not part an overall state funding package."

Whatever the differences between Secretary Hillary Clinton and Senator Bernie Sanders, regardless of who the nominee is, he or she would be wise to curry favor in states like Florida and Ohio by making mass transit funding reform and expansion of services a priority.

Indiana Primary Update:  Donald Trump is the projected winner of the Indiana Republican Primary while on the Democrat side, it is still too close to call.  After two weeks of flailing about the campaign trail, Senator Ted Cruz is officially suspending his campaign.  More tomorrow.

The Spectacle Of It

http://www.citylab.com/design/2016/03/the-tackiest-architecture-vasily-klyukin-cobra-tower/473946/?utm_source=nl_031716

Top Sexy Tower
Vasily Klyukin
New York City
vasilyklyukin.com

Hello Everyone:

It is Monday and that means new things to talk about.  Today, we start the week with the story on one architect's infinite supply of the ugliest design.  Kriston Capps recently wrote about Russian billionaire banker Vasily Klyukin, in his article "The Tackiest Architecture in the Entire World."  Mr. Capps describes Mr. Klyukin as "...Russian-born Tony Stark, a billionaire banker and real-estate mogul turned science fiction novelist turned self-styled starachitect." Mr. Klyukin is the designer of the Top Sexy Tower in New York City (left) and a number of other buildings that would make a person say, "What The ____," literally.  Granted, there is nothing wrong with inventive design.  After all, some of the most iconic buildings around the world had critics and the general public thinking if the architect was off his or her medications.  However, there is a big difference between innovative design and just plain tacky architecture.

Not everyone is on board with innovative design.  The President of China, Xi Jingping, issued a directive banning "weird architecture."  To western ears prohibiting Chinese architects from "pursuing new directions in design" sounds draconian.  Mr. Capps writes, "While hasty and awkward designs have plagued China's unrivaled building spree, President Xi may have thrown the baby out with the bathwater by curbing design in hopes of bolstering building standards."  As true this statement may sound, some design is just so outrageous, so hostile that state directives against them seems almost necessary.  For example, Mr. Klyukin's plan to build a shapely leg in Lower Manhattan.

Asian Cobra Tower
arch daily.com

Vasily Klyukin understands that not everyone will fall in love with his tower.  He writes.

Someone will be shocked by this idea, someone will find it beautiful and sexy.  Someone-vulgar, but everybody, without an exception, would to observe such a tower or visit it least once in a lifetime...I personally would to live in this tower.

That sexy leg in a stiletto shoe and fishnets emerges from a curtain wall of the central tower.  The Top Sexy Tower.  On his website Mr. Klyukin writes,

The higher it gets, the more breathtaking it is and this applicable to the skyscrapers as well as models' legs, as well as Wall Street quotes. (http://www.vasilyklyukin.com)

Now, Mr. Klyukin is proposing building unusual looking towers around the world.  One example is the Asian Cobra Tower (above left) is not specific to any site, beyond any Eastern city.  (Ibid)  Some of his proposed towers are rendered in multiple sites: Dubai, London, and New York to name a few.  Kristen Capps observes, "It's not clear whether he thinks that a Venus Tower (below left) could be dropped in any those cities or whether the thinks each of them needs a Venus Tower.

Venus Tower
vasilyklyukin.com

These designs are way beyond whatever your conception of good design looks like.  These flights of fancy are doodles enhanced by computer-aided design, which has made it possible for anyone, with a modicum of imagination, to design buildings.  Think something like a "...vast frigate-shaped spa" or "...the leg lamp from A Christmas Story, enlarged to the scale of a city..."  One argument you can make is these products of Mr. Klyukin's over active mind is "not in a million years."  Another is the sound of retching and gagging, accompanied by a flurry of poop, shock, and horrified emojis.

Kriston Capps observes, "One thing that Klyukin's designs reveal that will resonate in New York and London-and perhaps in President Xi's China-is the billionaire's contempt for locality."  These proposed designs ignore context and region because it is irrelevant. If Vasily Klyukin has a design philosophy it is globalism-"a High International Kitsch."

Lest you think Vasily Klyukin is some heartless Russian

In Love Tower
London, England
vasilyklyukin.com

banker billionaire with a lot free time.  At a pitch meeting for one design-the In Love Towers, which involves one tower gently hugging another tower-Mr. Klyukin recited a poem:

We were in love, but not together
No chance to touch, it broke my heart.
But once the dream came true forever
Now we could lean and never part  (Ibid)

A lovely bit of poetry, just not lovely poetry dedicated London.'

To date, none of Vasily Klyukin's projects have been commissioned or built.  Perhaps this is because no one really wants to see a cobra-shaped building or a glass and steel version of the Venus de Milo decorating their urban skyline.  Alright, maybe an adolescent Kriston Capps would love to see a menacing snake looming his city.  Instead, Mr. Klyukin's architectural meanderings point to the more problematic issue of the public's conception of "what architecture means."  Kriston Capps writes, "His work is the opposite of design by someone like Annabelle Selldorf, a subtle and context-driven architect."  Vasily Klyukin's work, to put it bluntly, is tacky.

This all well and fine if you want proof that architecture has a sense of humor.  Nevertheless, on a serious note, Mr. Klyukin's conceptions do not exist in a vacuum.  He is pushing the envelop of spectacles resulting by "...major museum commissions and open-resin competitions, allegedly honest arbiters of material culture and the built environment."  Vasily Klyukin is simply ready to take the spectacle as far as possible.

White Sails Hospital and Spa
vasilyklyukin.com

Virgin RB
London, England
vasilyklyukin.com