It quotes a few articles that have picked up that Parisians' discontent with the changes are starting to let their elected officials know, starting with the mayor.

One of the questions that interests me the most right now is how should we organize decision-making in a context where necessary but unpopular reforms need to take place. In this particular case, most citizens understand the need for change, and started out very supportive of Mr. Delanoë's plan.

Naturally, it will be unpopular for the current population to bear the inconvenience and cost of transitional change, even if clear future benefits are apparent to most. It's also clear enough why politicans would be weary to take on such projects. So what do we need to do? Is the answer simply to elect more courageous politicans, or do we need to find a way to insulate them from the whims of the electorate? Is that why we have bureaucracies?

Already succesful in London and Singapore, this sort of congestion pricing has had a hard time getting traction here in the US, even though some cities and states have expressed interest in the idea. This is a textbook example of the type of issue where leadership needs to come from the top. As it stands now, no mayor or governor can seriously embark on this experiment without some federal backing, the political cost would just be too overwhelming. I get the feelings that many cities, including San Francisco, would like to enact some kind of congestion pricing policy, but is waiting on Washington to provide some cover for the effort. This could be it.

I hope that on this topic, the democrats will work with Bush to make something happen.

Link via Planetizen.

The cover story in the current issue of Science News gives a nice overview of the current research on the topic. Essentially, as summarized by Prof. Crane of Urban Planning Research, it does seem that people living in suburbs are fatter, but it's very hard to prove that this is definitevely caused by their living environment. The correlation may be the result of self-selection, for instance.

As interesting as the research is, I wonder if focusing the conversation solely on the research best serves the interests of the public at large. I'm reminded of the conversation around the "scientific case" for Global Warming during the 90's. Our health is also a complex phenomenon influenced by a great number of factors over time. Obviously, that makes finding conclusive, definitive scientific proof difficult. But does that really matter? Isn't there a case to be made that in certain situations the cost of uncertainty is greatly surpassed by the benefits of actually doing something? Everything else seems like stalling.

No one needs infrared satellite images to understand the influence of our environment on our health. I'd add that focusing solely on weight gain and obesity rates is a poor way for us to gauge that relationship. A scientist needs clearly defined parameters, but for the rest of us it is useful to deal with more subtle concepts like quality of life and active living styles.

Two people may have the same weight-height index, say, but have drastically different living styles. One commutes to and from the suburbs to then spend an hour a day in the gym, whereas the other walks home everyday. These are not identically "healthy" lifestyles, even if these two individuals happen to be as healthy. To name just one factor that's often over-looked , there is a profound class-bias to the first case, as not everyone can afford a gym membership.

I do want to add that I don't mean to suggest that we shouldn't be doing this kind of research, only that we have to be able to see the forest for the trees.

The Streets Blog now reports that City Hall has signed an agreement with advertising firm JC Decaux to provide more than 20,000 self-service bicycles around the city. Customers will use swipe-cards to rent them for trips around the capital, to deposit them back later at any of the 1,451 stations planned.

You can find more details and pictures of a similar program already in place in Lyon here.

WHEN: Wednesday, February 7th, 2007
TIME: 3:00pm (approximate start time)
WHERE: City Hall, Board Chamber, room 250, Budget and Finance Committee

As everyone interested in the subject knows, this effort has been in the works for what seems an eternity now. The upside is that there's quite a bit of litterature on it available online. Supervisor McGoldrick has sponsored a resolution on the city's proposed Free WiFi project which you can find here. The SF Budget Analyst has also finished a report on the topic.

As always, the events mentioned here are added to the Urban Commons Calendar.

Pfew. It's good to be back. Anyone else excited about the new sf cityscape?

These suburbs are dotted with massive housing projects which house much of France's ethnic population (African and Caribbean Blacks, Arabs, Kurds, Asian, etc.) Economic and social discrimination is thus compounded by the geographic isolation of these suburbs from the urban core, resulting in the kind of ills that in the US we associate with the inner-city: Massive unemployment, discrimination and blight.

But France's Cites also suffer in other ways: Through stereotypes, and particularly those associated with the youth of the Banlieues. Recently the city north of Paris where the violence first started last year inaugurated an art exhibit to tackle this stereotyping. Clichy-sous-Bois became known to the whole world as the epicenter of the urban unrest, but it's now attempting to redefine itself with the help of some world-reknown photographers. These neighborhoods are people's homes, their community, and these snapshots attempt to show that humanity.

At the same time, the mayor of Clichy is speaking up to get the political leadership to fulfill its promise to act. A year later, little has changed for the residents of his town in terms of economic opportunity, jobs and transportation. Worst of all, the plight of the suburbs seems to have fallen on the sidelines. A telling detail: Not one of the main political leaders chose to come to Clichy-sous-Bois for this event, although they had all been invited. With the presidential campaign approaching, politicians have taken a page out of the US political playbook and are struggling to outdo each other at being "tough on crime". And I guess that means being tough on the Banlieues too. It's a real missed opportunity for France.

The most obvious hurdles are good schools and affordable housing, but I've opined on these before and think the city can't tackle those issues alone. The State and Federal Government need to be part of the solution. I'm interested in what cities can implement on their own today. The San Francisco universal preschool initiative is perhaps an exception, but I hope something like Prop 82 will pass statewide someday so the burden to do the right thing on education doesn't always fall on city government.

On the other hand, there are many other policies that cities should be thinking about through the lens of retaining kids and families. Family-friendly doesn't have to mean white-picket fences and parking lots. City governments already manage and work on many projects that directly benefit urban families, such as pedestrian and bicycle ways, public transit, parks and recreational activities.

Parks and public spaces are absolutely critical, both as venues for recreation and play, and as shared cultural spaces. A city is defined by the mingling of people and ideas, and public spaces is where that mingling takes place. Making those spaces available, safe and comfortable should be paramount.

Good transportation is also essential. I moved from an urban environment to a suburb in my teens, and it was a real shock to find myself so dependent on cars -and thus on adults- to go and do anything. I applaud cities that focus not only on public transit, but on the wider concept of mobility in the urban environment. Reclaiming the streets from cars for bikes and pedestrians, creating wider and more pleasant sidewalks: All of these factors contribute to an urban landscape that is easier and more inviting to families and kids.

Cities also host museums, libraries, cinemas and other cultural institutions that should all be made more available to families and children. Kids in cities have a great deal more available to them than their suburban counterpart. Perhaps cities need to invest in the kind of PR effort that suburbs have benefited from over the last 50 years to better convince people that they are a great place for kids and families.

I've recently finished reading The City: A Global History by Joel Kotkin, noted author and speaker on global economic, political and social trends.

The City is a whirlwind tour of cities through the ages. A macro-historical study of various cities in time, to which the author assigns three essential and universal functions shared by all: Cities as centers of religion, political power, and commerce. By placing urban spaces at the heart of his analysis, Kotkin offers a convincing look at what has made them central to human society and civilizations, as well as what distinguishes the more successful examples from the rest.

My main problem with Kotkin's account rests in its theoretical frame. He fails to convincingly explain the ups and downs of past civilizations' great cities. The three roles he outlines in the beginning are a good start, but he doesn't delve much deeper than that. His account ends up reading like laundry-list of cities throughout history, and he seems to justify their success or failure largely on whatever point he is trying to make at that moment. Amsterdam's expansion is presented as a necessity, one nearly as evident as its eventual demise explained away briefly on the next page. Kotkin reverts to this kind of tautology again and again. Often, I couldn't see from his account wether the three factors to which he ascribes so much importance were the only or even the primary causes for a city's growth or slow-down.

I appreciate his effort to keep his work on the shorter side, as some of these macro-histories tend to drag on for far longer than is necessary to make their point. But succinctness shouldn't be an excuse for poor analysis. At times that brevity felt like the result of tunnel-vision.

Kotkin is best when he focuses on the global nature of cities, and when he looks to their future development. There in particular he has some interesting points to make about what will happen to cities when their physical roles (as market places, centers of human interaction, etc.) become less important as a result of technological change. This work also echoes his criticism of the Ephemeral City. Cities cannot depend only on the "creative classes" for their survival, he has argued, since only a vibrant middle-class can lead to successful cities. I see a link between that realization and his assertion that cities need some shared sacred myth(s) to thrive. Both necessitate the masses to be central participants in the urban project. What happens to cities when those people are priced out?

I should point out that these include many of my friends, including Jason Smith, the "chuckle-prone" owner of the Cereal Factory, members of local bands like Battleship, the Mothballs, Dreamdate, etc. as well as many of those that have struggled in the past to keep alive the now-defunct 40th St. Warehouse and French Fry Factory. If you don't live in Oakland: Yes, these names are a bit strange, but know that they represent the very vibrant heart of the Oakland music and art scene, places where the underage and the broke can also partake in the fun. It's good to see that the folks that are helping make this a reality are getting some recognition for their efforts.

I was also pleased that the reviewer touched on the efforts by responsible organizers like Smith to work with their neighbors to make sure the shows don't alienate the local community. Too often tensions with neighbors and the city flare up, resulting in crackdowns on alcohol and noise violations, making it very difficult for the warehouses to survive.

I think that these venues exits because there is a need for them, and the wonderful creative energy of Oaklanders is responding to that need. The city should do a better job of bringing some of these warehouses into the fold of legality, rather than focusing on shutting them down. Obviously, I don't condone selling alcohol to minors, and not all warehouses should be -or would want to be- turned into for-profit businesses. But some of these warehouse organizers could very well make the jump from members of the underground-economy to full-time, recognized and licensed venues. Provided the city is interested in helping them along the way. Lobot Gallery strikes me as a possible example for a successful model. The city will benefit by capturing that tax revenue, and with time can increase the prestige of Oakland as a place for night-life, helping it achieve it's stated goals of bringing more residents to Oakland.
-------------

post scriptum:

Since we're on the topic of the Oakland music scene, I encourage all you locals to go to the fundraiser on September 30th for the drummer of Oakland's own Rogue Wave at the Independent. Poor Pat Spurgeon's got some serious kidney problems, and this fundraiser is to help him pay for the cost of the surgery. I'm sure it will come as a surprise to no one that record labels don't often provide health insurance. So help Pat out by going to the show.

The benefit concert has been added to the calendar, and will feature Ben Gibbard, Nada Surf and John Vanderslice.

From the website: Architecture and the City is the first series of its kind in the Bay Area to feature architectural tours, film screenings, exhibitions, design lectures and more. Now in its third year, the month-long celebration engages members of the public, design enthusiasts and architects and designers with a deeper appreciation for San Francisco's rich architectural and design community.

There are a few interesting events left, including this Thursday when the AIA's Ed Mazria will explore How Architects Can Reverse Global Warming. Interesting.

Thanks to the talented Bree of 6FO clothing for the design work. It wouldn't have turned out this nice without her help.

Now everyone go buy some T-shirts.

In particular, I've enjoyed Rob Walker's MLK Blvd Project. Rob, a contributing writer for the New York Times Magazine, explains:

[I decided I would] turn “MLK Blvd” into a sort of “open source” journalism project — interested parties could send in their own photos, or histories, or interviews, or documents. It could be open-ended. It would be a great thing for students of journalism or sociology or urban planning to participate in.

I find the idea of exploring the stereotypes associated with certain urban areas by documenting them in this way fascinating. Too often, our perception of space is influenced by only a few images or a single narrative, especially -tragically- when it comes to black or poor neighborhoods. East Oakland thus becomes defined almost entirely by crime, and MLK/West Oakland by images of urban decay. Nothing else gets reported, and a culture of fear and alienation about our cities spreads.

These pictures of MLK Blvds illustrate some of that poverty, but more often they show the diversity of the MLK experience from accross the country. The beautiful, the touching and at times, even the humorous find their way into the collection of pictures. Together, they create a fuller and hopefully truer representation of these urban landscapes.

I rushed over to San Francisco yesterday afternoon and was able to catch the end bit of Park(ing) Day 2006.

I had been waiting at the location of what was to be Temporary Park #5 for the day for about 10 minutes when the group rolled up in bikes up Grant Avenue in a joyous cacophony. They then proceeded to build up the Park(ing), with impressive efficiency, and we were then free to talk and enjoy a glass of wine from the bar to whom the Rebar group had just offered a temporary park-side view.

It was part demonstration, part performance piece. And it looked like a successful experiment: The street was full of curious onlookers to whom Park(ing) Day volunteers could spread their message about urban space and reclaiming streets for people.

I like the idea of using this kind of guerilla/surreal art tactics for advocacy. It can be very useful to shake people up. I'll keep following the Rebar group's other projects with interest.

I hope the panelists, all distinguished "industry insiders", don't fall into the Scene boosterism trap, because the real story here is not a rosy one. Pushed out by high rents, with venues closing because of noise violations and other challenges, it's tough being a musician in San Francisco.

If the moderator can steer the conversation on those topics, and explore the impact that a disappearing arts community can have on the fabric of a city, it should be a fascinating evening.

As always, it's been added to the calendar. Feel free to suggests other events!

Some of this is the result of market pressures (cheaper rents for students, artists, etc.), and in some cases from the active encouragement of city officials, glad to see higher income residents set up in Oakland, even if only for a few years. But is there a risk in having too many nomadic renters? Are we really creating an Ephemeral City?

It seems evident that these renters, because of their transient nature, aren't as likely to invest in their neighborhoods. And because of their demographics (post-college 20-somethings), they are less likely to be active in their community, even if they spend years there. And that can contribute to a neighborhood's deterioration: Dirtier and less safe streets, destruction of property, blight, etc. Not that I'm blaming young renters for these things mind you -I don't go around breaking windows- but if we accept Jane Jacobs' assertion that diverse and engaged populations make for better and safer neighborhoods, then we should be concerned about this evolution, no?

Well, not really. We should be concerned about many of the changes taking place in our cities. A socially and economically diverse population is one of the greatest assets a city has to offer. That diversity today is threatened, particularly by the forces of gentrification. I agree that we need to focus on keeping the middle class in our cities and not focus solely on making a city "hip". But we need to think about this at the regional level to tackle that problem. That's the bigger picture of the Ephemeral City debate. The nomadic young are only a small part of it, and probably the most susceptible to be engaged in the solution. It's not true that all of them will move out when they start families, especially if more housing is built and if we create more family-friendly cities. In particular, better schools and public spaces come to mind.

I also think that by engaging that population into the community earlier, we can reduce some of that flight. I think the Internet could help. Oaklog is one of my favorites. It's an interesting example of a geographically based forum for conversation and information sharing, but it's only really tailored to the nomadic young. Particular neighborhoods will often have online groups, but these generally aren't aimed at the young renter population. This Place Is... recently posted about a service by the Project for Public Space related to this effort. They are offering free customized websites (Community Planning Centers) whose purpose is to involve local people more directly and effectively in a public space project.

I hope that more of this online activity will help connect residents and neighborhoods, including the nomadic young. I also hope that more cities will establish Municipal Wifi, as I believe it will help reduce the digital divide that too often gets in the way of connecting people and place.