South Salina Street in Downtown Syracuse, NY

To Fight the Climate Crisis We Need: To Accept that Electric Cars Won’t Save Us

June 29, 2020

For the summer of 2020 I will be releasing a series of articles reflecting on some of the things cities, and urban planners specifically, can be advocating and planning for to help in our fight against the climate crisis. These pieces will reflect on our transportation networks, the need for urban living, and protecting our natural resources while bringing them into the city. While these are not comprehensive of everything that needs to be done to turn the tide of this crisis, they will provide a different vision of what our world could be like if we commit to a different form of development.

So much of the hopes of the environmentalist movement seems to rely on the large scale adoption of electric vehicles. Transportation currently accounts for 28 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, more than any other sector of our economy, and we are currently the only major economy seeing that share increase. While electric vehicles are key to our transition away from fossil fuels, they are not a silver bullet.

First we must consider the amount of infrastructure that must be built in order to accommodate a full on switch to electric vehicles. Private vehicles will require different charging times and configurations than commercial vehicles or delivery trucks. Most personal vehicles will be able to be accommodated at your home or your place of business, but the larger vehicles may need more significant infrastructure to provide the charges necessary to propel their weight. This infrastructure is much easier to build out in urban and suburban areas where charging stations can be located within a decent range for these vehicles, but may become more difficult in long distance passages many tractor trailers use each day.

We must also consider how long it will take to switch everyone into an electric vehicle, let alone electric tractor trailers that can meet our current demands. When factoring in the average length of time cars stay on the road, it’ll be at least 15 years for our current American fleet to turn over. Ensuring that those vehicles are all electric would require a huge boost in production, taxes or regulations to push people towards purchasing electric vehicles, and a quick ramp up of the previously mentioned infrastructure needed to support this change. We must also consider the fact that the production of electric vehicles takes twice as much energy as our current internal combustion engine vehicles. While each of these facts will change as general energy production becomes cleaner, battery technology must also improve to solve some of the issues with current electric vehicles.

According to a report in The Verge, the batteries currently in use for electric vehicles remain difficult to recycle and too dangerous to dispose of in landfills, as “thermal runaway” may occur, resulting in possible explosions. Without a major ramping up of battery recycling programs, along with a redesign of batteries to make it simpler and safer to remove and replace them, electric vehicles will struggle to live up to their greener promises. We must also be concerned with non-exhaust related emissions, which are caused by the wear and tear of tires on asphalt. Replacing all vehicles with electric vehicles may even increase these forms of emissions, due to the heavier weights of the vehicles, which again requires the need to improve battery technology to lighten the load.

In his book Better Buses Better Cities, Steven Higashide references a study by the Air Resources Board in California that notes that even if every car in California switched to electric, and 75 percent of the energy grid used renewable sources, driving would still need to be decreased by over 15 percent to reach their current climate goals. A similar study was conducted in Hawaii, again finding that a switch to electric vehicles was not enough to fully remove their state’s dependence on fossil fuels. s part of this we must ensure that our transit agencies move towards all electric fleets, something that Edmonton, Canada is working towards on a large scale. Their new electric fleet was designed specifically with efficiency in mind, both in terms of charging efficiency and financial efficiency (charging stations with fewer moving parts require agencies to have fewer replacements on hand, and less risk of things going wrong.) Edmonton’s transit agency understood the need for the transition and wanted to ensure that these large scale investments were made in a responsible way. While it's difficult to require private citizens and corporations to move to all electric, requiring publicly supported agencies to make the move is far easier and helps push our urban infrastructure in the direction of an electric future.

Beyond the technological challenges that must be addressed, we must also consider whether the space we currently devote to personal vehicles is healthy for cities and communities moving forward. In the image below, which has made the rounds on the internet, we start to understand that no matter what technology we develop, cars will still take up way more space to move the same amount of people than public transit or cycling infrastructure. Many will argue that autonomous vehicles will “solve congestion” but most of these scenarios assume that pedestrians won’t be around, or they’ll be penned in like animals. Anyone who envisions that as an ideal city must never have spent time in a city. People on foot are the life of cities, and everyone is a pedestrian at some point in their travels.

On the other hand, you can look to Helsinki, Finland and the recognition that we must prioritize efficiency and accessibility within cities. On their hierarchy for infrastructure investment they rank personal vehicles last in terms of importance, with an understanding that urban spaces must prioritize residents over commuters. Not only does this help create spaces for communities and neighbors, which are increasingly needed, but it also demonstrates that we have the ability to make significant progress in our climate goals without waiting for technology to improve. But even in the more liberal areas of this country, advocating against the interests of drivers faces stiff opposition. The War on Cars podcast spent an episode reflecting on this blind spot in liberal policy making, but we can also see this reflected in some of the bigger climate proposals of the last few years, who rarely, if ever, question the dominance of the personal vehicle.*

All of this is not to say we don’t need electric vehicles, and in fact we need them quickly. Requiring all new vehicles to be electric would do a great deal of good in our fight against the climate crisis, but we must also work to disincentivize driving and promote other forms of travel, including both public transit and active transit options. As we’ve seen, the space given over to private vehicles must be corrected to provide space for greener, healthier forms of transportation while reducing the amount of vehicles being produced each year, helping further curb our energy needs.

*This piece has focused on the environmental impacts of electric vehicles, but there are general safety concerns that should be considered for personal vehicles, especially with the newer obsession with SUVs and trucks, which also abide by lower emissions standards than sedans due to their classification.

To Fight the Climate Crisis We Need: An Understanding of What is at Stake

June 18, 2020

The climate crisis was headline news heading into 2020 with the record setting wildfires in Australia, flooding in Africa, and the increased speed of deforestation in the Amazon. By March a new existential threat, one with more immediate repercussions for many of us, took hold; COVID-19. The planet shut down, people stopped traveling, and we hunkered down to ride out one of the most widespread pandemics in modern history. As a result we began to see what might be possible when we approach a worldwide crisis with bold moves. As people stayed home, Los Angeles experienced its cleanest air in decades, cities in India were able to see the nearby mountains for the first time in a generation, and you could finally see the marine life in Venice. While we are nowhere near out of the woods with the pandemic, we should be working to ensure that the new normal we return to is better than the one we left, and that means taking on the climate crisis head first.

This summer I will be reflecting on some of the changes cities, states, and countries can take to help address the climate crisis, but to begin I want to look at some of the most devastating consequences of inaction may be.

Let’s think about some of the major natural disasters that we’ve experienced over the last several years. The wildfires in California have been some of the most devastating in history and their intensity can already be linked to climate change. California’s temperatures have risen by more than 1.5 degrees Celsius over the last century, more than worldwide average, which has lengthened the fire season by up to 75 days due to longer periods of drier conditions. Hurricane Harvey, which devastated Houston in 2017, was found to produce 38 percent more rainfall than a storm of its strength typically would if the world wasn’t warming, far more than even the original predictions of scientists. Superstorm Sandy in 2012 was one of the first major storms where scientists were able to prove a connection to climate change through the use of modeling systems. While these are American examples you can look around the world to find similar stories. Each of these stories will become less unique as time goes on, and some will look minuscule compared to what could happen if we don’t begin to act.

In 2018, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) published a report that demanded that we make significant changes by 2030 or risk experiencing a hellish future. The Paris Agreement in 2015 had the world commit to keeping temperatures below a 2 degrees Celsius rise, with a push to cap it at 1.5 degrees Celsius. As of 2018 we were on track to exceed a 3 degrees Celsius rise. Without significant changes the world will see food shortages, water shortages, and an increased risk of all forms of natural disasters. If we have any hope of reaching those targets we must reduce our emissions by 45 percent when compared to 2010… We’ve increased them since then.

But let’s look at some of the other issues associated with climate change. One of the most discussed is sea level rise. Scientists are expecting at least four feet of sea level rise just from the warming that is already taking place across the planet. Many cities are already experiencing nuisance flooding on a regular basis, dropping home values so far that they’re unable to sell them, such as in many of the poorer neighborhoods in Atlantic City. And this rise in sea levels isn’t taking place uniformly. The below video from The Verge helps explain why the melting of the glaciers is even worse for some areas of the world, like New York. Many cities have developed plans to build up barriers to help protect against this risk, but they have been rightfully criticized for emphasizing the protection of wealthier areas while leaving poorer communities and communities of color at increased risk. New York’s Big U project will protect the southern tip of Manhattan up to the Lower East Side. While this does protect a large low income neighborhood, it does not address the issues in Eastern Queens and South Brooklyn where the majority of Superstorm Sandy’s devastation hit. Even in Atlantic City an ongoing construction project is working to protect the casinos and summer homes along the oceanfront while leaving the low income neighborhoods on the bayside of the city vulnerable.

We can also think about air pollution and the increased likelihood of illnesses that will come from climate change. Most of us picture Los Angeles or 1970s New York, or even worse would be Pittsburgh in the 1940s, when we think of smog and air pollution. Beijing famously had to deal with their smog issues before the 2008 Summer Olympics out of fear of harming international athletes during the competition. Now India is trying to get a handle on their dangerous levels of pollutants. While these are very visible signs of pollution we must consider some of the less visual signs, such as higher asthma and cancer rates. These primarily show up in less affluent communities and minority communities, the reasons for which can be traced back to many racial policies of the past. As a result of this pollution, these communities are far more susceptible to diseases, especially respiratory viruses such as COVID-19. But even if you don’t live in one of these communities, the climate crisis will increase the frequency and severity of pandemics for all of us. The warmer climate and our development patterns have shrunk the natural habitats for many wild animals, bringing us closer together, shrinking biodiversity, and increasing the likelihood of a disease transferring from one species to another.

1970s New York City

Los Angels

1940s Pittsburgh

If all of this is still not enough to convince you, or perhaps more importantly those in positions of power, to take action, the climate crisis will also cause economic devastation throughout the world. One report from the UN estimates that the United States will see its economy shrink by over 10 percent by 2100 due to the climate crisis. Other reports have put the worldwide cost up to $69 trillion dollars during the same period. While shifting how our economies function and revamping our transit networks, electric grids, and land use policies will carry a significant cost, it will end up driving our economy in the long run. Already the solar industry in the US employs more people than the coal and gas industries combined.

Now I did not cover all of the severe impacts that the climate crisis will bring, but I hope the ones I did mention help illustrate how serious of a crisis we are facing. In the coming weeks I’ll be discussing some ways that we can begin to address this crisis, primarily focused on how our cities function and develop, with an aim to begin a dialogue about what our future should look like.

We Need to Do Better

June 2, 2020

Throughout my life I’ve known and loved people from all walks of life, all ethnic and racial backgrounds. I’ve had the privilege to grow up in a diverse city with a fascinating history at the center of the abolitionist and suffrage movements. Those closest to me espouse liberal views on race, gender, sexuality, etc. and can often be found working to promote causes near and dear to their hearts. But we need to make sure that we acknowledge our own blindspots.

We have all been deeply moved and angered by the death of George Floyd and the hundreds of other African Americans who have been killed by police over the years, including many women and people of the trans community who never seem to garner the same level of attention. No words can fully explain the anger and trauma that our nation is feeling right now. The pure emotion of the protests that have followed only begin to scratch the surface of the pent up anger of generations who have been ignored and taken for granted.

Even with all of this, I can never fully know the pain that the black community feels. But I can listen and continually work to understand, to advocate, and to improve.

As a society we need to start with properly teaching our history. If my educational experiences were like yours, you probably spent a great deal of time on the Revolutionary War and the Civil War, but a very airbrushed version of those histories. We discussed the slave trade and slavery as a whole, but didn’t always dig into some of the more horrific details of it. We especially didn’t address the promise of the Reconstruction Era and how all of the progressive ideas that were fostered during that time were upended and discarded. By the time you get into the Twentieth Century it was May on the school calendar and your teachers were rushing through to cover a couple big dates but missing the substance.

It should not have taken until my 20s to dive into the practice of redlining and restrictive covenants. Our schools should’ve been teaching us about the federal subsidization of white flight and how communities of color were stripped of their ability to build wealth. Suburban kids in almost universally white schools should learn that many of the advantages they take for granted were built on racial policies (this is hard for many suburban liberals to acknowledge as they argue that they moved there just to do what’s best for their children, even if it is ingraining these inequalities further).

It should not have taken until the past couple of years for us to even mention the destruction of Black Wall Street and other thriving communities of color throughout the country.

Or, on a more local level, recognize the racial history of our highway infrastructure in Syracuse, or the Bronx, and cities across the country. The higher rates of asthma and other respiratory issues that come along with living beneath an elevated highway, which is even more of an issue in the time of COVID-19. The higher levels of lead poisoning that comes with being segregated into rental units in lower income communities owned by out of town slum lords who don’t see the need of remediating the issue. Perhaps we should acknowledge the effect lead poisoning has on the development of children. Cities are working to correct this, but we should be teaching about it to our students and being more proactive to curb this exposure.

We should be changing the training our healthcare employees go through to include training on preventing bias. There is no reason that black women are three to four times as likely to die during childbirth as white women. There is no reason black people are less likely to be given pain medication for the same symptoms as white people.

And yet, all of this doesn’t begin to address issues related to police brutality and the over policing of black communities. This doesn’t begin to address the racist instincts of some elected leaders, including the current President of the United States.

We simply just need to do better and be better. But doing so is going to be hard work. It’s going to take a complete reshaping of how we teach our children, of what stories get told, of what our neighborhoods look like. We’ve spent the better part of a century re-segregating and finding ways to be around people who look like ourselves. Even people who hold more liberal views do this subconsciously (or perhaps in a conscious way for some). Until we accept what we have done over generations and how we have systematically pushed down an entire community we cannot begin the conversation.

Once we begin that conversation, be sure that we listen first.

The Buffalo Metro: Finishing Phase One

May 21, 2020

Cities across the country have poured money into expanding light rail systems for several decades, with few achieving the success they had promised. While there are many reasons for the success or failure of each individual project, one of the most prominent reasons is the lack of connectivity between where people live and where people work. One system that has achieved this balance, on a small scale, is the Niagara-Frontier Transportation Authority’s (NFTA) Metro Rail, located in Buffalo, New York. With just over six miles of track, the system has a per mile ridership on par with many more transit rich cities throughout the country, and is advancing an expansion proposal that will further connect vital economic centers, finally completing what was once known as Phase One for metro. Buffalo’s metro expansion offers up an example of light rail transit that can both drive ridership and development along the corridor, something the city of Buffalo has recognized it needed for decades.

The Queen City

Buffalo’s long economic downturn obscures the immense prosperity that the region experienced for the first half of the Twentieth Century. Located at the western terminus of the Erie Canal, and on the eastern shore of Lake Erie, Buffalo was a central shipping hub connecting the East Coast with the Midwest. Millions of bushels of grain passed through the city’s ports every year, leading to the development of large grain mills along the shore. By the beginning of the Twentieth Century, Buffalo surpassed Minneapolis in terms of its grain output [1]. Ship building, steel and iron production, and meat packing plants quickly grew along with the city, which was one of the ten largest cities in the country at the turn of the century [2]. Buffalo would reach its peak population of over 580,000 residents in 1950 [1], the same year the last of the city’s original streetcars would end operations [3].

A shift away from shipping and towards the use of trucks and trains to move freight removed the geographic advantage the city enjoyed for over a hundred years [1]. In 1970, manufacturing accounted for over 35 percent of employment in the metropolitan region. By 2014 that share had dropped to around 10 percent, as manufacturing moved towards the south or internationally to find cheaper labor [4]. As the labor market changed, the demographics of the city changed with it. Since 1950, the population of the city has plummeted, losing over 100,000 people in the 1970s alone [1]. As of 2018, the population of Buffalo has stabilized around 256,000 residents, less than half of its peak population [5]. During this time of decline, the city began exploring ways to reinvigorate its urban core and connect its rapidly growing suburbs to downtown. By the late 1960s, a plan for a regional rail network had emerged as a desirable method of drawing investment back into the city.

The Original Metro Plan

Source: Forgotten Buffalo, “Metro Report: Niagara Frontier’s 1995 Transit System”

Governor Nelson Rockefeller [R] was an early supporter of the plan to bring rail transit back to the city of Buffalo, with an eye towards connecting the newly constructed SUNY University of Buffalo (UB) campus in Amherst with the downtown core [6]. A combination of federal and state funding was awarded to begin studying the proposed corridor, two-thirds of which came from the Urban Mass Transit Administration (UMTA). As planning evolved, NFTA was created in 1967 in order to bring all modes of public transportation in the Buffalo metro area under one roof, including the Port of Buffalo and the two international airports in the region [7]. By 1973, a proposal for an extensive regional heavy rail network was unveiled, titled “Metro Report: Niagara Frontier’s 1995 Transit System,” [7] laying the groundwork for the only major investment in rail transit in New York state outside of the New York metropolitan area.

Over the course of multiple phases the planned network would reach a total length of 46 miles, connecting Buffalo with its largest suburbs along with a line directly to Niagara Falls, New York. The first phase, known as the Blue Line, would run from Downtown Buffalo northeast to the SUNY UB North Campus in Amherst, the most populous suburb of Buffalo, almost entirely along the Main Street corridor, for a total of 12 miles. The route required the removal of 99 families, 78 businesses, and the acquisition of 130 structures, with plans to run service as frequently as every two minutes during peak periods with connections to bus routes at every station [7]. Phase Two would include a new line that headed directly north out of the city into the town of Tonawanda toward Niagara Falls, along with an extension of the Blue Line to the north and south. Future phases would look to expand into the metropolitan region including the Cheektowaga Corridor heading east, the Hamburg Corridor heading south, and the Richmond Corridor to the northwest [7].

A Need to Scale Back

As soon as the regional plan was published, hope for the ambitious network to be completed began to fade. Governor Rockefeller would leave the governor’s mansion to become the Vice President of the United States, removing the plan’s strongest ally in the state government. At the same time, the town of Amherst pulled support from the plan, citing concerns over mass transit bringing “urban ills” to their community, a devastating blow as one of the network’s major destinations, SUNY UB North Campus, is located within its borders [6].

Federal funding is key to the success of any transit plan of this scale succeeding, which proved to be the final blow to the initial ambitions of this network. Concerns over Buffalo’s shrinking size and economic downturn, coupled with the federal government’s new found reluctance to invest in public transit projects resulted in the project scaling back considerably [3]. Phase One was scaled back from a 12 mile route to just under 6.5 miles, ending at the city’s border at SUNY UB’s South Campus. Another major alteration was the switch from heavy rail to light rail, significantly reducing the cost of infrastructure along the route [6]. Even with this switch, the plan still called for amenities similar to heavy rail systems, such as raised platform boarding and prepaid fares. With these changes, UMTA agreed to fund the project in 1976 at an estimated cost of $336 million [8], eventually growing to $530 million ($1.24 billion today) [6].

Source: Knight, Kenneth G. “Buffalo’s Light-Rail Rapid Transit System”

Construction began in 1979 with the downtown street level tracks opening to the public in 1984. This 1.2 mile stretch would operate as a transit mall and provide free service to those using the system at the six stations within this zone. The final 5.2 miles of track, all underground, would not be opened to the public until 1986, bringing the total length of the line to 6.4 miles [6]. Upon its grand opening, Rep. Henry J. LaFalce [D], of Tonawanda, believed the new system would only succeed if two extensions were added to the route [3]. Those extensions never came, and as a result this network remains one of the shortest lines in the country.

Current State of the Metro

Even with its shortened line, Buffalo’s metro has enjoyed healthy ridership throughout its existence, although it has experienced a gradual decline in ridership overall. In the early 1990s Metro Rail’s share of all transit usage in the region was around 25% [9], with ridership peaking in 1991 at 8.5 million annual riders [6]. Today Metro Rail accounts for around 17% of total ridership, with around 4.5 million annual riders. Even with this decline, the system functions with a higher per mile ridership than most light rail networks throughout the country, with just under 2,500 riders per mile, even when compared to cities many would deem transit rich, such as Portland [10].

Many factors contribute to the continued success of the network, including its connectivity and fare pricing, while the service hours may be a hindrance. Unlike many of the recent investments in light rail and streetcar systems, Buffalo’s Metro Rail successfully connects residential neighborhoods with some of the larger economic centers in the region, including Downtown Buffalo and two of the SUNY UB campuses, South and the medical campus. Within a 15 minute walk, riders are also able to reach many cultural destinations, such as the Buffalo Zoo, Delaware Park, and the Elmwood neighborhood, which is known for its local culture [9]. A flat fare system also benefits riders, with both buses and Metro Rail costing $2 per ride, with all day and monthly passes available, keeping it easy and affordable for most riders using the system. One thing that may be holding back some ridership numbers is service ending at 1am, even on the weekends. With bars and restaurants being open until 4am, an early service end may be preventing some from considering Metro Rail as a transit option on their night out [11].

While ridership is comparatively high, the original intent of the network, to boost economic development in the urban core, is only now starting to see some success. For over 40 years, Main Street through Buffalo has been emptying out, leaving vacant storefronts and buildings along the corridor. Over the last several years, Buffalo has followed the national trend of seeing reinvestment in central cities, with a large portion of the local investment coming from SUNY UB and its medical campus [6]. Due to the line’s central positioning, NFTA has seen this as an opportunity to capitalize on the reinvestment, looking for private partners to revamp some of its older, dated stations [6].

Not all of the new developments in Buffalo have been positive for Metro Rail. Over the last few years, the city has been reintroducing cars to Main Street, with a plan to completely revamp the downtown portion of the corridor in the next several years. The mayor of the city has touted this reintroduction of cars as an economic boon for the community, and believes it is a major reason for the reinvestment that has been occurring there [12]. This claim is tough to prove, when considering the overall momentum cities have experienced over that same period of time, but its effects on Metro Rail can be seen with falling on time performance [13]. This decreasing reliability impacts the mode choice of residents, while continuing to promote the use of cars over transit. Yonah Freemark writes in City Lab that, “Increases in transit use are only possible when the low costs of driving and parking are addressed, and when government and private partners work together to develop more densely near transit stations.” [14] This current action by the city, with support from Senator Schumer, has done the exact opposite in terms of promoting the use of transit within our central cities. At the same time, NFTA has been working to develop a plan for expanding Metro Rail into the suburbs to finally connect to SUNY UB North Campus, with full support from Governor Andrew Cuomo [D].

Expansion Plans

New York State’s transportation funding formula does not take into account Buffalo’s unique position as the only community in Upstate New York to have rapid rail transit, leaving the system’s state funding on par with cities that only operate buses [15]. As a result, NFTA has been arguing in favor of expanded funding, pointing out that the proper maintenance of Metro Rail is vital in terms of gaining access to federal funding for capital programs in the region. As a response, the state awarded NFTA a $100 million grant to fund needed repairs and upgrades throughout the system including trackbed replacement, implementation of a new fare collection system, vehicle upgrades, and a new video surveillance system [16]. In 2017, Governor Cuomo announced Phase Two of the Buffalo Billion program, with $215 million going towards revitalization and smart growth programs. Around $5 million of that new funding was earmarked for environmental reviews and preliminary engineering for a Metro Rail extension program [16].

The expansion program aims to extend Metro Rail by 6.5 miles, reaching SUNY UB North Campus and beyond, just north of I-990. Ten new stations, including three on the North Campus, will help to connect high density job and residential centers [17]. With over 30,000 students and 14,000 employees [9], the three SUNY UB campuses are vital economic centers for the entire region. The newly extended line will allow students and employees to commute between campuses in under 20 minutes, one of the major reasons ridership is predicted to rise to around 45,000 commuters per day [18].

Not only does this $1.2 billion plan look to increase ridership, but it is again seen as an economic development tool and a way to lure in younger generations who are looking to live in more affordable cities where owning a car is optional [6]. With the majority of the new route being at grade, the hope is the stations will drive up commercial activity in the surrounding areas. The towns of Amherst and Tonawanda, which the proposed extension runs directly between along Niagara Falls Boulevard, support the plan with an eye towards investment along the corridor. Over $1.7 billion of investment is expected to follow, with an increase of $310 million in property value [18].

FTA Puts Up a Roadblock

Even with this positive outlook, the plan received a significant setback in early 2020. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) left Metro Rail’s extension off of its New Starts program report, denying the project a grant for the Project Development phase. Without acceptance into the New Starts program, federal grant money will remain unavailable to NFTA, requiring the agency to reapply with an adjusted plan [19].

NFTA had been exploring alternative routes and construction methods, with an aim of reducing costs by around $200 million. Underground construction is to be reduced from around 10,000 feet to 3,900 feet, moving most of the construction for the project to street level. Keeping as much of the construction within the right-of-way, along with slight rerouting, will also help reduce the cost of construction along with reducing the amount of disruption residents and businesses will experience [18]. Without the acceptance into the 2020 New Start program, NFTA remains hopeful of gaining approval in the near future, although acquiring any Fully Funding Grant Agreement from the FTA before 2025 seems unlikely [19].

Although the project is experiencing a significant setback, it remains a promising prospect for the Buffalo region. In pushing for this expansion, NFTA looks to make good on its promise of Phase One from the original 1973 plan, finally connecting some of its most populous suburbs and largest employers with the city center. If what we ask of transit projects is to connect people with destinations and provide frequent service, Metro Rail in Buffalo is looking to do just that. With a fully realized Phase One, Metro Rail may be able to begin living up to the promises it made nearly five decades ago and begin to justify the extensive network that was once envisioned.

Sources

[1] Glaeser, Edward L. “Can Buffalo Ever Come Back?” City Journal, Autumn 2007. https://www.city-journal.org/html/can-buffalo-ever-come-back-13050.html

[2] Encyclopedia Britannica. “Buffalo, New York.” Accessed April 15, 2020. https://www.britannica.com/place/Buffalo-New-York

[3] Gargan, Edward A. “Buffalo Trolley Line Clangs to a Start.” The New York Times, October 10, 1984. https://www.nytimes.com/1984/10/10/nyregion/buffalo-trolley-line-clangs-to-a-start.html

[4] Bacheller, John. “The Decline of Manufacturing in New York and the Rust Belt.” Policy By Numbers. October 26, 2017. https://policybynumbers.com/the-decline-of-manufacturing-in-new-york-and-the-rust-belt

[5] World Population Review. “Buffalo, New York Population 2020.” Accessed May 1, 2020. https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-cities/buffalo-population/

[6] Byrnes, Mark. “A Struggling Metro System’s Big, Vague, Self-Destructive Idea.” City Lab, August 24, 2018. https://www.citylab.com/design/2018/08/a-struggling-metro-systems-big-vague-self-destructive-idea/567634/

[7] Forgotten Buffalo. “Transit Development Program.” Accessed March 10, 2020. http://www.forgottenbuffalo.com/forgottenbflofeatures/metrorail1973.html

[8] Knight, Kenneth G. “Buffalo's Light-Rail Rapid Transit System.” Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority. Accessed March 11, 2020. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/sr/sr182/182-007.pdf

[9] Horbovetz, Arian. “Buffalo’s Metro Rail: What Transit Should Be.” The Urban Phoenix, December 6, 2018. https://theurbanphoenix.com/2018/12/06/buffalohardworkingrail/

[10] Bliss, Laura. “A U.S. Transit Atlas That Ranks the Best (and Worst) Cities for Bus and Rail.” City Lab, November, 28, 2018. https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/11/best-transit-american-cities-bus-rail-subway-service/576739/

[11] Mapa-Metro. “Metro of Buffalo.” Accessed March 10, 2020. https://mapa-metro.com/en/united-states/buffalo/buffalo-metro-rail-map.htm

[12] Buffalo Rising. “The Next Phase of Cars Sharing Main Street Gets Underway.” August 27, 2018. https://www.buffalorising.com/2018/08/the-next-phase-of-cars-sharing-main-street-gets-underway/

[13] NFTA-Metro. 2017-2018 Annual Performance Report. Accessed May 3, 2020. https://metro.nfta.com/media/nclhoayl/annualperformancereport-18.pdf, p. 8

[14] Freemark, Yonah. “Have U.S. Light Rail Systems Been Worth the Investment?” City Lab, April 10, 2014. https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2014/04/have-us-light-rail-systems-been-worth-investment/8838/

[15] Smith, Sandy. “Buffalo Argues It Deserves Light Rail Funding — And Gets It.” Next City, April 3, 2019. https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/buffalo-argues-light-rail-funding

[16] New York State. “Buffalo Billion: Light Rail Extension Study.” Accessed March 10, 2020. https://buffalobillion.ny.gov/light-rail-extension-study

[17] WSP. “Planning Underway to Extend Buffalo Light Rail.” Accessed March 10, 2020. https://www.wsp.com/en-US/insights/extending-light-rail-in-buffalo

[18] McCarthy, Robert J. “NFTA Proposes New, Cheaper Route for Metro Rail Extension to Amherst. The Buffalo News, November 20, 2018. https://buffalonews.com/2018/11/20/nfta-proposes-new-cheaper-route-for-metro-rail-extension-to-amherst/

[19] Penner, Larry. “NFTA Denied FTA New Starts Qualification.” Railway Age, February 21, 2020. https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/light-rail/nfta-denied-fta-new-starts-qualification/

Dense, Mixed-Use Neighborhoods Are Even More Important Now

April 3, 2020

In the time of COVID-19 we have repeatedly heard the phrase “reducing the density” as a way to combat the virus. While staying a safe distance apart from one another is important during this time, the phrasing may lead to the wrong conclusions about dense, urban development. This should not be seen as an indictment of urban living, but instead a call to arms to rethink how our cities function and who public space is meant for.

As social animals, we crave access to others, even if the way we interact and how big of a social dose we need varies. Our current urban and inner ring suburban infrastructure limits our ability to share open spaces with one another at safe distances. Newer, far flung suburban neighborhoods may have more personal open space for people to occupy privately, but they reduce the social interactions we desire with others.

It is likely that a major infrastructure bill and jobs program will materialize as a way to build back our economy. This is the moment to rethink how our urban spaces work and advocate for changes that will not only improve our day-to-day lives but also function better in times of crisis. We shouldn’t double down on the development patterns of the past, but instead look to figure out how to improve the future. In some ways, this could be the beginning of a Green New Deal that progressives have been arguing for. Here are a few ideas that we should explore:

True Neighborhood Units

Over the last several decades we’ve moved away from neighborhood businesses and schools, and we’ve emphasized distance away from others. Suburban development has been almost entirely residential with large commercial plazas attracting residents from miles away to a centralized location. Even though these plazas, which are dominated by regional and national chains, often cut the price of the distribution of goods and lower the prices of products, there are several downsides to this development style, beyond hurting small, local businesses.

As we emphasize the need to avoid close encounters with others, these centralized shopping centers make this impossible. Many communities only have one or two options for basic necessities, such as groceries, resulting in thousands of customers flocking to this single point. When a worker, or shopper, tests positive for the virus, this news now affects a wide swath of communities, making it difficult to track down how the virus may have spread. Locally, the Dewitt Wegmans, the largest Wegmans around, had an employee test positive. Figuring out who may have interacted with this employee, and then who they in turn may have infected, becomes complicated as customers spread out across the region.

A true, complete neighborhood helps simplify this process, with the added benefits of promoting locally owned businesses and a sense of community. First to define what I consider a neighborhood in this context. While most will consider a neighborhood to be related to a common history, culture, or defined by a specified boundary, but in this context I’m looking to consider a neighborhood as anywhere that you can walk to within 15-20 minutes, or up to 30 minutes in some cases. For this neighborhood to be considered complete you should be able to access grocery stores, pharmacies, small home improvement stores, along with a neighborhood bar or restaurant. A true neighborhood should provide you easy access to your daily necessities on foot.

This is how neighborhoods functioned in the past, developing close knit communities that often created distinct cultures and traditions, until we began subsidizing suburban development patterns that pushed us further and further apart. At the same time, these neighborhood units would make it easier for ourselves to isolate communities during a pandemic like we’re experiencing today and stop its spread. With most residents frequenting the stores closest to them, it becomes easier to track down customers and enforce quarantines should someone catch the disease. For communities outside of the infected area daily routine errands can continue mostly uninterrupted as long as they stay within their neighborhood unit.

Rezoning efforts that promote neighborhood business corridors and mixed-use development can spark the creation of these neighborhoods that should also be supported through tax incentives for local small businesses. Even with a new focus on localized businesses, they won’t be able to succeed if we don’t change the way people live and interact with their neighborhood.

The Return of Townhouses/ Row Houses/ Brownstones

One of the major reasons our neighborhood units began to break apart has been the emphasis on single family detached homes and the ever increasing size of the standard lot. While dense urban neighborhoods remain, they’ve become less and less common outside of major cities. Upstate New York cities have seen their populations decline and with it the population density. Even when new urban housing is built, they’re often apartments located either in the downtown neighborhoods or near local universities. Due to this, our housing options have dwindled to two primary housing types: single family detached homes or apartments. This leaves a lot to be desired, especially for people who would like to own a home but also want a more urban living style. This is why we must encourage the development of modern urban townhouses (or row houses or brownstones depending on your preferred terminology).

Row houses in Pittsburgh, PA. Source: PittsburghSkyline.com

Some cities have an excellent remaining stock of townhouses, with New York, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia coming to mind, but many mid-size cities no longer have a large housing stock in this style. If you’re looking for townhouses around Syracuse you’re often stuck looking in suburban developments that are poor in terms of walkability to run errands. We should be looking to correct this fact and provide opportunities for the development of urban townhouses. Right now it’s unclear whether or not townhouses are allowed under Syracuse’s zoning laws, or even the rezoning proposal. We should be more specific about how townhouses fit within our urban environment, and encourage their use near existing business corridors and proposed business corridors.

Now you may be asking why townhouses should be a part of our new urban development pattern. There are several reasons why townhouses should be an integral part of cities, but the main factor is that they provide home ownership opportunities at denser levels of development. A typical household in Syracuse has a lot around 40 ft. wide and 110 ft. deep. Townhouses typically have a lot only 25 ft. wide, allowing for nearly double the built density while still providing a decent amount of private outdoor space for residents. This increased density creates a more visually interesting and vibrant environment while still providing a significant amount of private space, but, more importantly, it makes a 15-20 minute neighborhood commute possible. At the current densities of most neighborhoods, there just isn’t enough people to provide the critical mass for businesses, other than corner stores, to survive from local commerce only.

As these densities increase, along with the amount of local commerce, we must ensure that there is plenty of space for residents to spread out and engage with their communities, even in times where social distancing is required.

A Network of Bike Boulevards and Mixed-Use Paths

One of the few promising developments happening during this pandemic is the new emphasis on expanding public spaces for people on foot. New York City has started a pilot program shutting down a number of blocks along Park Ave. so that residents can get out and walk while keeping extra space between one another. This builds off of the success of the 14th Street Busway also in NYC, and the Market Street Busway in San Francisco. We’re starting to see leaders acknowledge that we have plenty of public spaces within our cities, but we’ve given over too much of it to cars.

Screen Shot 2020-04-03 at 11.30.50 AM.png

Communities across the country are seeing an increase in the number of people walking around their community as a way to get out and get fresh air during this time, but many do not have safe spaces to do so. An article out of Cleveland noted that many suburban residents were heading into inner ring suburbs or the city to walk on sidewalks since their own communities don’t have any. A Guardian article notes that joggers and walkers are now competing for a finite amount of space available on a sidewalk. We can even look in our own communities where our neighborhood sidewalks are often, at their widest, maybe 5 ft. wide, making it difficult to walk next to someone and completely impossible to keep proper distance away from one another during this time where 6 ft. is considered the minimum. In more usual times, these sidewalks often discourage people from walking as they prevent us from socializing how we wish to, bring us too close to strangers, and often make us feel as though we’re invading private property even though we’re in a public space. Now that more people are looking for accessible public spaces and making use of our current infrastructure, there may be a new demand for better, more plentiful spaces.

Bike Boulevard in Lawrence, KS

Bike Boulevard Design

Bike Boulevard in Berkeley, CA

In this light we should consider remaking our neighborhood streets to emphasize pedestrians and cyclists and restrict the use of cars. This may sound crazy in a country that has been dominated by cars for almost a century, but there are many examples for us to build from. Barcelona, Spain has created a series of superblocks, routing traffic around the edges while only allowing local traffic to enter the blocks. Berlin, Germany has begun experimenting with new pedestrian malls that are essentially parks surrounded by storefronts.

We should explore creating a network of these spaces to provide plentiful amounts of open space for people to enjoy and interact with their communities, no matter the distance restrictions placed upon us. Bike boulevards, which are streets with quieting measures like speed pillows and small roundabouts, could be implemented on a small budget throughout cities to slow down traffic and provide safe spaces for people to walk and ride bikes. We may even wish to explore closing entire streets to traffic, which has already been done in Syracuse along Onondaga Creek. We should identify streets that are underused but provide helpful connections to convert into mixed-use paths that connect to bike boulevards, resulting in a vast network available to residents throughout the city.

The End Result

By combining mixed-use development, neighborhood business corridors, middle to high density housing, and more open space for pedestrians and cyclists, we can create a more sustainable city for the future, less reliant on cars and more resilient to health crises. Although I haven’t touched on public transit specifically, it should not be forgotten. Our public transit system is already vital to our economy, and should become even more integral moving forward. It’s been deemed an essential service and carries many of our essential employees to work throughout this crisis. We need to ensure that they are funded at a level worthy of an essential service.

Don’t be fooled into thinking that density is our enemy when it is in fact a solution to many of our modern problems. Countries far denser than the United States have proven that they can handle a crisis better than us; from South Korea to Singapore to Germany. It’s their policies and their sense of a common good that comes from living close to your neighbors that has helped them during the time of COVID-19. We should take time to learn from them and improve upon them to make an urban environment that truly works for people.