oakland space academy

Park(ing) Day 2011

2011-09-15T13:51:00.000-07:00

Tomorrow is Park(ing) Day 2011. Oakland Living has a great writeup of the places and activities happening in Oakland. Be sure to check out the video by the Greenbelt Alliance at the end.

I only add that Park(ing) Day was founded in 2005 (image above) by ReBar, "an interdisciplinary studio working at the intersection of art, design and ecology." They have been kind enough to give it to the world.

Unfortunately, I have been on leave from the studio I work with for a number of months now, but it doesn't seem that the Coffee Container, which I hoped would debut tomorrow, has become a reality.

Architecture + The City 2011

2011-09-08T10:21:00.001-07:00

It is already a quarter over, but this month in San Francisco is the Architecture and the City festival, complete with film series, exhibitions, and lectures. Opening tonight at SwissNex is Switzerland's contribution to the 2010 Venice Bienalle, Teaching Architecture: 3 Positions Made in Switzerland. Next Thursday is a half-day symposium at SPUR on The Bay Area's Modern Landscape Legacy. The following week includes Oakland-based architects envelope A+D in a conversation about Flexible Urbanism, the film Revolutionary Wake: Unfinished Spaces about the creation of Cuba's National Art Schools by three young architects following Castro's takeover in 1961, and a panel on the under construction Transbay Transit Center entitled Grand Central of the West.

Temescal Street Fair Postponed

2011-06-03T10:21:00.001-07:00

Due to a delay in summer, the Temescal Street Fair has been postponed until July 10th.

SPUR @ OMCA

2011-06-02T13:03:00.000-07:00

This Friday night the Young Urbanists of the San Francisco Planning + Urban Research Association (SPUR), are coming to Oakland for a night at the Oakland Museum of California (OMCA), which nicely coincides with Art Murmur. If you don't know anything about it, SPUR is a good government organization with a strong emphasis on quality urban design. Although primarily San Francisco focused, it seems to me they have been traveling further afield more of late.

And if you don't know much about the OMCA, it was reopened about a year ago after being renovated by local architects Mark Cavagnero Associates. Originally designed by Kevin Roche John Dinkeloo and Associates, the OMCA was the first commission for the partnership. Kevin Roche won the Pritzker Prize, given yearly to an architect for a significant body of work and one of the profession's highest honors, in 1982. Kevin Roche has gained a renewed interest and following of late for his humanist approach to modernism, as evidenced by the current exhibit Kevin Roche: Architecture as Environment, which was recently reviewed at Design Observer.

Coffee Container

2011-04-12T21:46:00.000-07:00

Wednesday night the studio I work for, Arcsine Architecture, has the opening reception for Coffee Container, the design for the transformation of a shipping container into a mobile coffee bar for Modern Coffee. The hope is for the built reality to be completed in time for Parking Day 2011. Modern Coffee is located at 411 13th Street in the Oakland Tribune Tower. The reception is from 5:00 - 7:00 pm, see you there!

Pushing Buttons

2011-04-10T02:24:00.000-07:00

Why is it that in Oakland, that if you want to cross a street and you are driving you just pull up and wait, but if you are walking, you have to push a button?

Going Dutch

2011-01-12T18:51:00.000-08:00

Tomorrow at the San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association (SPUR) is a lunchtime forum entitled Going Dutch: Creating a Bicycle-Dependent City. Leah Shahum, the Executive Director of the San Francsico Bicycle Coalition, will share lessons learned from her 8-month sabbatical in Amsterdam. SPUR lunchtime forums begin at 12:30, are free to members or $5 for non-members, and are a great way to learn more about current projects and policy initiatives happening throughout the Bay Area.

Though San Francisco focused, SPUR more recently seems to be taking a greater interest in the larger region. I highly recommend joining for anyone interested in urban planning and municipal good governance issues. There are usually at least one or two lunchtime forums a week, wonderful special events and awards, and they have a great monthly newsletter, Urbanist.

So grab your lunch, get on your bike, and go Dutch!

Parking Design

2011-01-08T07:24:00.000-08:00

The amount that Oakland doesn't know about automobiles and their storage could fill blogs, and it has. Oakland doesn't know where to put drive-through lanes. Oakland doesn't know how to price parking. Oakland doesn't know that you shouldn't have surface parking lots downtown.

In fact, Oakland knows so little about automobiles and their storage that I often argue that, rather than try to improve it's thinking, maybe Oakland should just think about automobiles and their storage a whole lot less. Or maybe not. But one area I wish they would have thought more and better about is the design and installation of the newish parking kiosks.

Aside from the fact that most of the time they just sheared off the old meter heads to create thousands of 2" diameter trash cans that never get emptied, rather than cool bicycle parking. Or that you can't pay with paper money, so you have to use your credit card, carry around tons of change, or actually go into a bank every so often to get a roll of dollar coins. Or that when you are paying for a parking space, the kiosks don't tell how long you can park for, but what time you can park until, but don't tell you what time it is, forcing you to dig into your pocket or bag and find your phone.

Aside from all those things, the new parking kiosks are just plain ugly, with tons of different stickers and signs on them because it wasn't very well thought out in advance. But it doesn't have to be that way. San Francisco does it better, and solar powered too! So does Melbourne for their bike parking (image above). Max is right, Oakland can learn a lot from other cities, maybe even about automobiles and their storage.

Broadway Shuttle on NextBus

2010-11-18T10:37:00.000-08:00

Via ABO's twitter feed, I learned that finally the Broadway Shuttle is on NextBus. In a test run yesterday, I noticed similar problems with timing I found when NextBus first arrived, but those seem to have since worked themselves out, so I'm hopeful.

I'm amazed this service didn't launch with NextBus. A good deal of the FreeB's utility derives from the fact that one can take it on short hops during a lunch hour to save time and increase the range of accessible places. It helps not to have to wait 10 minutes on the front end of the trip.

Overall I love the Broadway Shuttle, and think it is a great addition to both AC Transit and downtown Oakland. I've been taking it once or twice a week since service began, and it appears to be well used. I have further thoughts that I've been meaning to write for months, which I hope to get to soon. Stay tuned.

Seeing Orange

2010-11-15T10:36:00.000-08:00

Across the Bay this week is Dutch Design Week SF, which "presents the best of the Dutch creative industries in all areas of design." As you can see from a few of my previous posts, I'm a bit of a Dutch designphile. The image above is of Wilo by Benthem Crouwel Architects, which was Daily Dose of Architecture #457.

Tonight is a lecture by Karen Van Den Brandt and Alex Clay of Lesley Moore. Afterwards, the results of a weekend workshop they held at the CCA will be presented. I'm hoping the workshop perhaps addressed the awful graphics of AC Transit.

On Wednesday will be a lecture by Caroline Bos on the Deep Planning of UNStudio. I'm a bit skeptical that there is all that much to it, so I'm looking forward to learning more. Regardless, from what I've seen their architectural and graphic work is beautiful, so if nothing else it should be a visually interesting lecture. See you in Orange!

Filming in Old Oakland

2010-10-27T18:27:00.000-07:00

This is way too late for a blog that is posted to so infrequently these days, so this is mostly for posterity, but I wanted to point out that tonight (all night) is the last day of shooting for a Lincoln car holiday commercial in Old Oakland. Like most movies and commercials, this is facilitated by the Oakland Film Office, who have a great name and a really cool logo - they really should be selling their t-shirts to the public, rather than only giving them away as a thank you to crews that film in Oakland.

Anyways, it is worth heading down to Old Oakland tonight, if only to see some vacant storefronts filled in with fake holiday window displays. It suggests an interesting strategy for down on their luck retail nodes to present a better face, at least until Oakland facilitates new establishments by deregulating the retail sector.

2010 Bike to Work Day

2010-05-13T06:25:00.000-07:00

Today is Bike to Work Day!

Park(ing) Day 2009

2009-09-18T09:36:00.000-07:00

Today is Parking Day!

Architecture + The City 2009

2009-09-12T11:16:00.000-07:00

It is nearly half over, but September is the Architecture + The City festival sponsored by the American Institute of Architects San Francisco chapter. The most intriguing event is the symposium California and The Netherlands: A New Alliance for Climate Change Adaptation , which unfortunately is already on a wait list. But there are still plenty of tours, lectures, and exhibitions to attend.

The most interesting among them was canceled. Gardens are for People: The Innovative Landscapes of Thomas Church at Park Merced was to explore the some of the gardens and courtyards of the site, as well as the larger, shared open spaces. Hopefully Docomomo, who would have lead the tour, will try again next year.

The Americans

2009-07-04T10:23:00.000-07:00

Though today I will be doing the typical 4th of July BBQ, if you are looking for something different and yet still uniquely patriotic, I highly recommend going to see the exhibit at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art on Robert Franks' book The Americans entitled Looking In. Though I've seen many of these photographs before, I've never seen the book itself, and this exhibit displays all 83 photographs in the order they appeared, along with artifacts from its development and examples of his earlier and later work.

Another reason to go today, or at least very soon, are two smaller exhibits that close on Tuesday. Patterns of Speculation shows the work of Berlin-based architecture studio J. Mayer H. using images of their work along with a site-built installation. Though the exhibit somewhat falsely claims the firm's unique approach (or at least doesn't explain enough what makes it so unique), it does provide an interesting example of one of the foremost trajectories in architectural thinking over the last decade, that of turning the invisible fields of information and data that surround us into built form.

Also closing Tuesday is Otl Aicher: Munchen 1972. This exhibit highlights the incredible graphic program of the '72 Olympic games. As someone who spends a lot of time complaining generally about signage in California, and specifically about the terrible graphics and design program of AC Transit, this exhibition is like a cool bay breeze on a hot summer day.

SFMoMA also has the newly-opened rooftop sculpture garden. It is summer in San Francisco though, so be sure to bring your winter jacket.

NorCalMod Lecture

2009-06-10T22:43:00.000-07:00

Thursday night, co-sponsored by the American Institute of Architects East Bay and the Oakland Heritgage Alliance, Pierluigi Serraino will give a lecture entitled Mid-Century Modern in your Backyard. Serraino comes highly recommended by a friend who had him as a studio instructor at UC-Berkeley. He is the author of NorCalMod: Icons of Northern California Modernism. The lecture is $10 for OHA or AIA members, $20 for non-members, and requires pre-registration. It begins at 5:30 at the AIA East Bay offices at 1405 Clay Street in beautiful downtown Oakland.

Idaho Stop

2009-04-25T09:44:00.000-07:00

Bicycles, Rolling Stops, and the Idaho Stop from Spencer Boomhower on Vimeo.

In a midday open thread earlier this week at dailyKos, I learned about the above video advocating adoption of the Idaho bicycle model, which allows bike riders to treat stop signs as yield signs. The video itself, in addition to being informative and instructive on the topic, is a nice piece of graphic design.

When I first began using my bike for transport in college, I was a fairly rigid follower of traffic laws. The theory being that the only way for cyclists to gain respect on the road was to follow the same laws as automobiles. So at 4-way stops in residential neighborhoods without a car in sight, I would actually come to nearly a complete stop. And that sucked!

A trip to Amsterdam several years ago where I experienced their amazing cycling culture began to change my views. I knew our transportation system was organized around the car, but there I saw how it might be different. The trip was lead by an architecture professor whose research interests included how people negotiate for urban space, and how certain types of negotiation make for a richer urban experience. And what the Idaho stop law does is essentially legalize greater negotiation between cyclists and others.

These days I am much less concerned with following all traffic laws while on my bike, though I still believe there is truth to the theory that drivers would give cyclists more respect if they better followed the rules of the road. Which is why it is so important to have good laws, and the Idaho stop law is one of them.

So I agree with Kos that all states should adopt the Idaho bicyle model. Besides being more efficient for cyclists, it makes for a more interesting city - one that fosters greater interaction and communication among us, even if only in the glance of recognition at a stop sign.

Oakonomist

2009-04-14T23:12:00.000-07:00

Sharing a page in The Economist with an article on a Prairie in the City of St. Louis is Killing for Respect, concerning crime in Oakland. It is always interesting to see how Oakland is portrayed in the national and international media. And while this article is fairly balanced, also pointing out a "flourishing urbanism", interesting architecture, a beautiful downtown, Lake Merritt and Oakland's amazing diversity, it has me considering canceling my (expensive) subscription, for two main reasons.

The first is the last paragraph, in which the correspondent tries to lay some blame for crime in Oakland at the feet of "liberal politicians" who don't even know how to talk about crime. The example they cite is that Mayor Dellums "had nothing to say at all" at the recent funeral of the four officers killed in the pursuit of Lovelle Mixon. Whatever you think about what happened (me: that Dellums handled it well and the fallen officers and their families demonstrated a lack of respect for the office of the Mayor), that is just not what happened. It may be technically true, but The Economist severely misled its readers in that last paragraph.

The second is that The Economist wrote nearly 2/3 of a page on crime in Oakland without once mentioning the size of the police force. The article simplistically dismisses poverty and racial tensions as factors, while suggesting a theory of a culture of chaos exacerbated by the large numbers of released prisoners, and the inability of our leaders to speak (and thus act) effectively about crime. I happen to think all of these are contributing factors, to a greater or lesser degree. But how can you write a column about crime in Oakland without even mentioning the size of the police force?

Design Lectures 20090406

2009-04-05T21:42:00.000-07:00

Although I haven't yet made it to one as a result, I have really appreciated Becks putting together a weekly list of upcoming political and community events at Living in the O. In that spirit, I thought I'd point you to several interesting design lectures this week.

On Monday night, as part of the UC-Berkeley Department of Landscape Architecture lecture series, Kevin Congers of CMG Landscape Architecture will present a lecture entitled LOCALS: A Regional Practice Engages Communities in Conceptually-based Projects. Congers was project manager with Hargreaves Associates on Crissy Field (image above) in San Francisco. The lecture is at 7:00 pm in 112 Wurster Hall on campus.

At the same time and place on Wednesday night, another local landscape architect, Walter Hood, will speak as part of the UC-B Department of Architecture lecture series. Oakland residents may know his work on Splash Pad Park or Lafayette Square. If you haven't experienced his work, don't be too put off by the clunky website, his landscape work has much more finesse than is exhibited there, and the lecture is sure to be interesting and illuminating.

Finally on Thursday night, the Oakland Heritage Alliance continues its second Thursday lecture series with Chandler McCoy who is Associate Director of Planning at the Presidio Trust. McCoy will lecture on "Moderism Inside and Out," providing examples in and around Oakland that break down barries between architecture and landscape, inside and out. Note this is a change from the orignially scheduled lecture by Pierluigi Serraino, author of NorCal Mod: Icons of Northern California Modern Architecture, which has been rescheduled for June 11. The McCoy lecture is $8 for OHA members and $10 for the general public, and will be at 7:30 at the Julia Morgan-designed Chapel of the Chimes at 4499 Piedmont Avenue in Oakland.

Assume Good Faith

2009-04-03T20:15:00.001-07:00

In an interesting essay from last Sunday's NY Times writer Noam Cohen compares Wikipedia to cities, claiming it mimics their basic civility, trust, and capacity for self-organization. I especially liked his comparison of the dangers in more lightly tread neighborhoods and industrial districts to those Wiki entries with fewer readers where errors and ulterior motives take longer to root out. Cohen also points too one of the founding principles of Wikipedia, which I think is important for all urban dwellers to remember, "assume good faith."

Future Oakland on BART

2009-03-22T22:21:00.000-07:00

New work obligations have kept me from posting as much as I'd like of late, but I just wanted to flag this new post at Future Oakland on the problems with BART.

On the whole I like BART quite a bit, but that doesn't mean I'm not aware of it's problems. And FO outlines most of them, especially about the whole system being a tremendous subsidy for suburban commuters and therefore promoting increased suburban sprawl in the Bay Area. I'm amazed every time I look at a BART map and see all the studies underway for reaching the system even further out, rather than filling in with new lines (down the I-580 corridor for example). And I can't believe BART typically charges a dollar for parking at their lots, far below the market price, or wants to expand to the Oakland International Airport when ridership to SFO has been disappointing (though I love that service myself, and would take it to the OAK too).

I do have a quick qualm with what is a throw away line at the end when FO claims that "AC Transit is relentlessly criticized for buying nice busses," likely referring to the Van Hool debacle. FO, those buses suck! They are cheap, plastic concoctions that nearly everyone I talk to from drivers to riders hate, and especially the elderly, who have trouble navigating their 12 inch steps(!) up to the seats.

That minor issue aside, definitely go check out the new post at Future Oakland.

AIA SF 2009 Awards

2009-03-10T08:11:00.000-07:00

Today in Place, an architecture and urban design column appearing Tuesday in the San Francisco Chronicle, John King highlights the American Institute of Architects San Francisco 2009 Design Awards. Christ the Light Cathedral in Oakland, which I discussed briefly a few months back, received an honor award.

King also mentions an exhibit at UC-Berkeley's Wurster Hall on Benisch Architeten, whom he reports has begun work on new dorms for the campus. I haven't seen the exhibit, but there work is definitely worth checking out. The exhibition closes on March 20.

The Skin of the City

2009-02-27T12:41:00.000-08:00

Recently I came across Sergio Fajarda in an article in the alumni magazine of UW-Madison, which unfortunately I can't locate on line. From 2003-2007 Fajarda was the mayor of Medellin, Columbia, where he instituted a program of social transformation through city building. In the 1980s and 90s Medellin, the second largest city in Columbia, was known for drug trafficing and home to the eponymous cartel led by Pablo Escobar. At the height of the city's violence in 1991, there were 6,349 homicides, or 381 per 100k people.

In this excellent interview with Charlie Rose Fajarda describes his idea as an attempt to "change the skin of the city", a phrase which I love. His program was to decrease crime (largely through more policing) and immediately follow up with social interventions as a way of crystallizing (literally) the gains made in the reductions of violence. These interventions took the shape of increased transportation infrastructure and the building of "opportunity spaces" (park-libraries, schools, cultural centers) to better connect and bring additional services to the city's poor. In a 2007 feature in the New York Times Fajarda stated, "Our most beautiful buildings must be in our poorest areas."

And it worked. In 2006, the homicide rate was down to 29 per 100k residents, on par with Oakland today. Though obviously not all of these gains are attributable to Fajarda, what stikes me is how his program compares with that of Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums. Both have similar worldviews, their overriding goal being to reduce social inequality and provide a better life for their city's poorest residents. But in sharp contrast to Dellums, who's tired tropes of bringing people together and making a model city have resulted in few actual policy proposals, Fajardo's plans have done exactly that.

Which leaves us with the words of Medellin mechanic Jamie Quizeno, speaking to NY Times reporter Simon Romero on the Biblioteca de Espana (image above) designed by Giancarlo Mazzanti, "It looks like an enormous cloud when it is illuminated at night. Such a beautiful thing, right here with us, who would have imagined that?"

SHPR: Neldam's Bakery

2009-02-26T22:10:00.000-08:00

Neldam's Bakery will celebrate 80 years in business by hosting a party from 9 am to 1 pm on Friday. There will be free cake tastings (!) and a drawing for dontated prizes every half hour.

The bakery has been on the same block in Oakland since opening in 1929, the year the Great Depression began. Just a year ago it looked as if the bakery might close altogether, but selling the land and building has apparently allowed the company to continue its operations.

Neldam's is located at 34th and Telegraph Avenue at the bottom of Pill Hill. Stop by and get your kringle on.

Citywide Zoning Workshops

2009-02-26T11:17:00.000-08:00

Via Chris Kidd at the open thread comments section of ABO, I learned that tonight and Saturday are two community workshops on the citywide zoning update focused on commercial corridors and residential areas in the City of Oakland. I second his encouragement of bike/ped/transit /urbanist people to attend and offset the likely strong showing by the NIMBY crowd.

I have a more personal reason for attending. Recently I found out the house I bought a couple years back in East Lorin is completely illegal. Thus, I am going to try to get my house legalized. That and arguing for a greener, more urban conception of what Oakland could be.

The Experimental City

2009-02-24T23:53:00.000-08:00

In a great post on Monday, Crimson at Oakland Streets discussed the problems and opportunities with creating pedestrian zones in cities. In addition to some illuminating insight into the mechanics of Bay Street/Emeryville (which should give pause to those who think there is much there for Oakland to emulate), Crimson called for a more experimental approach to creating pedestrian zones, which I think is spot on.

As mentioned, some places like Telegraph Avenue (near the UC-Berkeley campus) just cry out for pedestrianization. Having spent over half a decade in Madison (image above), where the main commercial thoroughfare (State Street, connecting the campus to the Capitol) is restricted to buses and service vehicles, I can attest to how well this would work. In fact, everytime I go to Telegraph, I'm amazed it still carries traffic (one way, no less).

But with other places, a much more experimental attitude would be beneficial. Somehow, I don't feel as if permanently restricting vehicles in Chinatown would work. On a commercial basis, it absolutely could, but there is an appealing chaos there that might be lost. But to know, we'd have to try. For a place like 17th Street, I could see starting with a quarterly or monthly street closing on a weekend day, which might serve to highlight the street and create more energy upon it. After a while, you'd adjust the frequency (more or less often) and the days (Saturday, Sunday, or weekdays?), until you found a sweet spot, mindful that the sweet spot itself might be in flux, and would require continued experimentation.

Too often, cities seem locked into existing infrastructures, conventional wisdoms, and mindless habits: you can't build a 6-story building next to a bunch of 2-story buildings (or a modern one next to a traditional) because it would be "out of context", congestion is bad for a city, or prescribing traffic movement via signs and paint rather than through interaction ensures greater safety.

Something like closing a street to cars for a day is so easy and cheap, and the opportunities it provides for shaking citizens out of ingrained and cliched modes of living is so visceral. Oakland would do well to take Crimson's advice and walk it out.

Oakland City Green

2009-02-19T07:21:00.000-08:00

On Monday Becks had a post listing several ways to become engaged in politics this week. Though some day I hope to get to a Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee meeting, it will have to wait for another month. Because also tonight is a public hearing for the discussion of proposed green building requirements for private development in Oakland.

According to the flyer, Oakland is "considering mandatory Green Building requirements for private development. Green Building refers to a whole systems approach to the design, construction, and operation of buildings."

Now that sounds suspiciously like architecture to me. I'm hoping to learn more at the meeting, but my first reaction is one of skepticism. Aside from the fact that this may not be the right time to be ladling additional requirements onto an already decimated building sector, the system on which the proposal is based is cause for concern.

This system, known as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), was developed by the U.S. Green Building Council in 2000 and employs a checklist to determine if a project is green, with points awarded for each criterion satisfied. The problem with LEED is two-fold. First, it seems to be developing into a bureaucratic, rigid system which rewards rote thinking at the expense of innovative design. Second, and more importantly for Oakland, is that it is essentially anti-urban, or at the very least fairly urban indifferent. And as anybody who has been following along knows, if you want to be green you can't be urban indifferent.

For example in the Sustainable Sites section of LEED NC (New Construction) there is a credit known as Development Density & Community Connectivity. This can be met by the "construction or renovation of a building on a previously developed site AND in a community with a minimum density of 60,000 sq. ft. per acre net. (Note: density calculations must include the area of the project being built and is based on a typical two-story downtown development.)"

Now 60,000 sq. ft. per acre is almost laughably suburban, amounting to a floor-area ratio (FAR) of less than 1.5, which probably isn't quite dense enough for a typical residential corner lot in Oakland, let alone one in a commercial district or downtown.

Another example is the recently built Margarido House which is slated to be the first LEED H (Homes) platinum-certified custom home in Northern California. Certainly it is well-located close to Rockridge BART station and the shops along College Avenue, and the architect and builder have obviously thought quite a bit about ways to make it greener. But it is over 4600 sq. ft. for a single family, which is a distinctly suburban conception of spatial needs.

All the low-VOC paint in the world is not going to save our planet unless we make incursions in to the mindset that we need that much space. I am certainly not one to believe that we all must live at NYC densities to be green, and there is something to this post from a while back over at Oakland Streets. There is plenty of room for detached single-family homes in a green lifestyle, they just need to have a small apartment building at the corner of the block and some mixed-use buildings within a few minutes walk. Though the Margarido House is nearly located within such a place (though its Walkscore is only 49, hmm?), most people living in houses that big will not have that kind of urban, green lifestlye available to them.

I don't want to disparage LEED too much here, it certainly has done some great things in raising awareness, codifying progress and processes, and certifying what had been becoming simply a marketing phrase. And it is getting better, with the LEED ND (Neighborhood Design) pilot program begining to incorporate more urban, green ideas. But it is unfortunate that Oakland is looking to LEED, because as currently conceived it is just too suburban a model for a place like Oakland. There is space in the green certification "marketplace" for a more urban conception of what green building could be, and one I think Oakland would do well to exploit. Certainly this would be more expensive, but one I think could also reap huge benefits.

The meeting is tonight from 5:30 - 7:30 in Hearing Room 1 of City Hall.

Television

2009-02-12T06:19:00.000-08:00

Postings will remain light as I head out of town for Presidents' Day weekend, so this one is simply a way to have another beautiful image at the top of the blog. Pictured above is the Netherlands Institute of Sound and Vision, again by Neutlings Riedijk Architects. In it they have created one of the most important new buildings of the decade.

Forage Oakland

2009-02-04T22:39:00.000-08:00

The Monday edition of the SF Chronicle featured a piece on Oakland blogger Asiya Wadud, who writes Forage Oakland. Though I had discovered her blog shortly before, I really didn't start checking it out regularly until V Smoothe reminded me in a post a couple months back. If you happen to live in North Oakland or South Berkeley and have excess fruit, veggies, greens or herbs you can donate to Forage Oakland, and maybe even receive something in return.

The DIRT

2009-02-01T09:03:00.000-08:00

On Monday night as part of the UC-Berkeley Landscape Architecture & Environmental Planning 2008-09 Lecture Series, Julie Bargmann of DIRT Studio will give a lecture entitled No Sissy Landscapes. Over the last decade, Bargmann has been a leader in the research and development of regenerative landscapes in which natural processes are used to heal contaminated sites.

DIRT Studio's proposal for the Menomonee River Valley (image above) in Milwaukee was developed just a couple years after the studio I took with Aaron Betsky (more info in the previous post) focused on the same site. Unfortunately DIRT lost out to a far less innovative proposal. The lecture is on campus at 7:00 pm in 112 Wurster Hall.

Betsky @ Mills

2009-01-31T10:31:00.000-08:00

Kicking off just before the Super Bowl is a lecture by Aaron Betsky entitled Blob Utopia: Digital Destiny or Aesthetic Escape?, part of the Art Lecture Series at Mills College. Betsky taught the visiting professor studio at UWM School of Architecture and Urban Planning (SARUP) I took back when he was the Curator of Architecture, Design and Digital Projects at SFMoMA. The studio was a refreshing change from the dominance of New Urbanist thinking prevalent within SARUP at the time. Betsky challenged us to view the suburban landscape of sprawl not as a spatial condition that needed re-form, but as the physical manifestation of modernity and the milieu to which architects must give meaning and coherence.

After SFMoMA, Betsky went on to head the Netherlands Architecture Institute in Rotterdam. A few years ago, he became director of the Cincinnatti Art Museum, likely in large part because of the opportunity to build a new museum. Since then, the museum sponsered an invited competition and hired Neutelings Ridijk Architects (Rotterdam Shipping and Transport College building pictured above) to design what will be their first U.S. building.

Betsky is also the author of numerous architectural monographs and books on design, the best of which is False Flat: Why Dutch Design is so Good. The lecture is at 3:00 pm on Sunday, in the Danforth Lecture Hall of the Art Building at Mills College.

Bay Model

2009-01-29T00:25:00.000-08:00

Every 6-10 months I come across the Bay Model and then forget about it before I have a chance to visit. For those who don't know, the Bay Model is a 1.5 acre working hydrological model of the Bay Area, which according to the website is "much smaller than the actual San Francisco Bay and Delta."

The Bay Model was built in 1957 and used by the Army Corps of Engineers to study the effects of interventions like dredging shipping channels and accidents such as oil spills. Though retired as a research tool in 2000 (presumably the Corps now uses computer models), the model continues to operate as a public education center.

The Bay Model Visitors Center is located in Sausalito at 2100 Bridgeway, and is open Tuesday through Saturday in winter and on Sundays as well in the summer. But this Saturday from 11:00 to noon, there is a special walking tour of the model entitled "Back in Time on the Bay", which explores changes (both natural and unnatural) to the Bay from pre-historic times to the present. If you (like me) can't make it this Saturday, the tour will be offered again on Saturday 21 February.

Solomon v Goliath

2009-01-18T22:27:00.000-08:00

My first urban design studio in architecture school was a beta test of a plan put together for the redevelopment of the Beerline B. This rail line along the Milwaukee River served the Blatz, Pabst, and Schlitz breweries, importing barley and hops and exporting beer to the nation as the industry consolidated heavily at the beginning of the 20th century. By the end of that century though, the line had been abandoned and the land surrounding it gone mostly fallow.

The original plan was put together by San Francisco based architect Dan Solomon, who had an op-ed piece in the San Francisco Chronicle on Friday discussing the possibilities and challenges in reorganizing our built environment for a post-petrol world.

Columbo Club History

2009-01-17T10:03:00.000-08:00

Today at the Temescal Library is an opening reception for the exhibit, Italian-Americans in Temescal: The History of the Columbo Club. I learned about this last month at the Temescal Library Reception from Giovanna Capone, who had put together a preview from the "archives" (a bunch of stuff in boxes in some back room) of the Columbo Club (careful, that link has music).

The event will feature a speech by Temescal historican Ray Rainieri, who also conducts a wonderful walking tour of the neighborhood through the Oakland Heritage Alliance. In addition to her work cataloging the Club's historical documents and photographs, Capone has assembled an oral history video of some of the its senior members.

The Columbo Club is the oldest Italian social club in Oakland, and one of the largest still in existence in the U.S. Founded in 1920 by 34 Piedmontese immigrants, it currently has a waiting list of several hundred. On Sunday mornings, the Club is open to allow patrons of the Temescal Farmers' Market to use its restrooms, which is something I highly recommend. The photos and memorabilia on the walls, as well as the general decor, is like stepping back decades.

The event today is from 3:00 to 5:00, and the exhibit will be open at least through the end of January. The Temescal Library is located at the corner of Telegraph Avenue and 52nd Street, where Claremont Avenue meets Telegraph.

Fourth Bore No More

2009-01-15T07:32:00.000-08:00

This morning the San Francisco Chronicle reports that funding has been halted for the fourth bore of the Caldecott Tunnel. Though, it is unfortunate California cannot start a massive public infrastructure project at the precise time when it both would get better deals on construction costs and our economy could use a boost, this is a terrible project. Anyone who wants to understand why California has such a huge budget problem, while having relatively high taxes and still continuing to educate its children trailers and postpone the repair of its crumbling infrastructure, need look no further than this project.

Leaving the environmental considerations aside (which we shouldn't), this project is just completely unnecessary. At nearly half a billion dollars, it is expensive in and of itself. But the larger problem is that a fourth bore would exacerbate the region's suburban sprawl, which is in itself a hugely inefficient enterprise, requiring massive expenditures on the duplication of infrastructure. If California ever wants to get its financial house in order, it will have to rethink the amount and focus of the money it spends on transport and infrastructure. Here's hoping that we begin that process during the upcoming economic downturn, and before the fourth bore is ever built.

SHPR: Blue Bottle Coffee

2009-01-10T09:51:00.000-08:00

Over the holidays, a real-life conversation with the folks who write two of my favorite local blogs, Living in the O and City Homestead, as well as recent posts at each site, reminded me of something I've wanted to do here at OSA for a while now - SHPR. Basically, SHPR will feature local businesses that I like, support and frequent, ones I think you should as well. Mostly these will be based in Oakland, but sometimes I'll venture further afield, to Berkeley, Emeryville, or San Francisco, and perhaps even occasionally the surrounding hinterlands.

And for the first SHPR, I've chosen a business that, though based in Oakland, has a much stronger identity in San Francisco, which frankly is a situation I'd like to see changed. Oaklanders in Greater Temescal may know Blue Bottle Coffee from their presence Sunday mornings at the Temescal Farmers Market, where a line often 20 deep waits for an individually-brewed cup of coffee. And apparently you can visit what I assume is their roasting facility in Oakland to pick up beans. But several years ago, they opened "an odd but convivial" kiosk in the Hayes Valley neighborhood of San Francisco. It is located at 315 Linden Street (essentially an alley) in a former garage (image above). And it combines several things I love: crisp, modern design; glutonous coffee; and the reuse of urban space previously dedicated solely to automobiles.

That is still a functional laneway you see above, with access for cars, but because of Blue Bottle, it is now so much more - it is a place. And this kind of place-based thinking is something I would like to see more of in Oakland. Though there are few areas of Oakland where this exact type of thing could occur (we unfortunately don't have many alleyways), there is lots to emulate here without copying directly. One could easily see a similar business on a side street adjacent to a commercial High Street (a British term I love) in Oakland, provided the local zoning would allow it (and if it wouldn't, why not?).

More recently, Blue Bottle opened a cafe at Mint Plaza in San Francisco. I haven't yet been to the cafe, but Mint Plaza on the whole is a weird place. The landscaping is fairly nice, but overall it has a festival marketplace feel similar to Jack London Square, though a touch more sophisticated and far better designed and executed. This weirdness is largely due to the anti-market nature of the surrounding buildings, most of which were redeveloped by a single organization, Martin Building Company. Its an odd choice, Blue Bottle locating at Mint Plaza, because it seems they would do better in a more market-like (what materialist philosopher Manuel De Landa would term a "meshwork") setting, where their competitiveness and creativity would shine. Which is why I'm hoping that, for their next venture, Blue Bottle Coffee will open a kiosk or small coffee house somewhere in Oakland, and why I've made them the first SHPR.

In some ways it would have made more sense to introduce SHPR before the holidays. But I imagine many of the businesses that will end up being featured aren't necessarily places you'd go to get a gift anyways. Many of them will just be little places I frequent, or odd shops I go into. I'm also open to suggestions, so feel free to email me a favorite place of yours. I'd love to check it out and do a write up if it fits the bill.

Originally I thought of this as sort of a weekly shopper but I don't want to commit to that level of frequency, especially since I'd like to better cover general development issues in Oakland while V Smoothe is away (there is a lot of slack to be picked up). But I plan to feature SHPR as often as possible. Unfortunately, there will likely be lots of local businesses closing this year, which makes it all the more important to keep supporting the places that help make Oakland special.

Finnish Paradise

2009-01-07T11:54:00.000-08:00

The chilliness of the last few weeks has me thinking of summer. And fortunately for those who love architecture, or those who need to learn about it, the American Institute of Architects San Francisco chapter has been thinking similarly. The current exhibit in their gallery, which closes this Friday, is My Paradise: A Hundred Years of Finnish Architects' Summer Homes. The gallery is located in the historic Hallidie Building just a few blocks from Montgomery Station, at 130 Sutter Street on the 6th floor, and is open from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm, again through Friday.

Oakland Cathedral

2008-12-24T12:27:00.000-08:00

Another building I've been meaning to write about is the new Cathedral of Christ the Light on Lake Merritt, which opened three months ago now. Paul Goldberger, the architecture critic for the New Yorker, put it on his ten best for 2008, which also includes the previously mentioned California Academy of Sciences.

I haven't yet been inside, but I find the exterior form-making and detailing wonderful. Some concerns have been expressed about the street wall facing Lake Merritt, but those are overblown. Cities can well accommodate the occasional spare street wall, and they are allowable when attached to significant cultural buildings. And here I find the base a serene mediator between the richness of the tower above and the activity on the adjacent streets, sidewalks and lake below.

I do have concerns about the effects of this building on the small churches (and thus on the neighborhoods) surrounding the new Cathedral, as outlined in this interesting article in the East Bay Express two and half years ago.

Life Without Buildings

2008-12-16T18:31:00.000-08:00

I couldn't imagine Life Without Buildings, fortunately Jimmy Stamp can (well, sort of). I met Jimmy last week at the CAMP panel discussion. During the day he works for exhibit host Mark Horton / Architecture. On the side he writes for the deliciously snarky Curbed SF, a real estate blog that occasionally turns its gaze across the Bay to Oakland. He also has his own blog, where he delivers "observations on the built environment, with a penchant for pop culture and postmoderism."

Though not specifically a place-based blog, the largest word in his tag cloud is San Francisco, so OSA readers should find something of local interest from time to time. Second is New Orleans, reflecting the home he left after Hurrican Katrina. I also learned from talking to him that he even has a little Milwaukee love.

I've checked out his blog from time to time for a while, and you can now find a link to it at right under Architecutre + Urbanism. A couple of my favorite local posts are one from a year ago on the closure of the Bay Bridge and another exploring the ruins of Sutro Baths. There is also his review of the My Bloody Valentine show at the San Francisco Design Center a couple months back, which makes me sorry to have missed it.

dKos and blogOaksphere

2008-12-16T01:07:00.000-08:00

Last week A Better Oakland gave a little love to local bloggers. I thought I had a decent handle on most of the blogoaksphere, but in that post V Smoothe turned me onto at least a few I hadn't even known about and reminded me of several more I hadn't really checked. Again I ask, how does she do it?

Then, just hours later Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, founder of dailyKos, gave several different local bloggers a little love of his own. And yesterday, lo and behold, more love.

I've been a reader of dKos for years and apparently he lives just a block into Berkeley and thus identifies with some of the issues Oakland faces. With politics at the national level largely on track, it probably won't be long before he gives up the whole thing and starts a blog called the Lorin Local, the Newbury News, or the Harmon Holla, depending on where exactly he lives.

Ashby Station Meeting 03

2008-12-15T23:47:00.000-08:00

Tuesday night is the third meeting on plans to modernize BART's Ashby Station. After the first meeting went so poorly, I told BART director Lynette Sweet that this was a small project and at most it should take a couple meetings and we seemed on track for half a dozen. You can find some of my thoughts on that first meeting here and here, but I was too depressed after the second meeting to even post my thoughts.

I am a huge fan of BART, and I think Sweet has is an engaged public advocate with good ideas, but I've lost a lot of respect for them in this process. Not only because of whom they choose to associate with, but also that there were numerous pleas months ago now to take steps to slow traffic on Adeline Street with the increased pedestrian traffic due to the construction of the Ed Roberts campus, and still nothing has been done.

I was expecting a documentary, but this process began as a drama, evolved into a comedy, and looks to become a farce. With Becks reminding me of the consequences that occur from a lack of pedestrian safety measures in our planning policies, one just hopes it doesn't end up a tragedy.

Archidose 273

2008-12-14T23:44:00.000-08:00

Last month I visited the new California Academy of Sciences building in San Francisco's Golden Gate Park. The building was recently featured on Daily Dose of Architecture (general link at right) as Archidose 273.

I haven't yet found the time to write more about it. So this post is mostly a way to have that gorgeous image at the top of my blog for a day or two.

CAMP v. Kitsch

2008-12-11T12:54:00.000-08:00

I honestly don't know enough about Gap founder Don Fisher's proposal, designed by Gluckman Mayner Architects, for the Contemporary Art Museum Presidio (CAMP) to comment with much intelligence on the merits of the proposed design or the seemingly ever-shifting site. But it is not for lack of dramatic coverage in local and national media. I'm certainly sympathetic to modern and contemporary buildings sited adjacent to traditional and historic ones, but CAMP's critics might be right in their claims that this proposal would overwhelm the historic main post, unnecessarily destroy an archeological site and some historic buildings, and be far from good public transport.

I do know Fisher's approach has been all wrong. He marched in, with the typical tone-deaf bluster of an executive accustomed to getting his way, site pre-selected and an architect's presentation-ready design in hand, and seemingly expected San Franciscans to say "thank you very much, Mr. Fisher, and may I get you a drink?"

And of course he has every right to do this. Fisher is set to exhibit an outstanding collection of contemporary art for the world to see and he is willing to pay for the building to house it. But not if he wants to actually see his museum built, especially in the Presidio.

A far better approach would have more closely resembled an interesting exhibit, CAMP: Reconsidered, that opened a few weeks ago and runs until December 23rd at gallery 3A. Mark Horton runs gallery 3A as a side project of his architectural studio. Located on South Park (think Colby Park, but with small workshops and a bistro) in San Francisco's SOMA neighborhood, gallery 3A focuses on bridging the world of architects with that of the general public, a mission I obviously share.

Tonight at 7:00 is a panel discussion on the exhibit, in which ten local architects were asked to run wild with ideas for a museum in the Presidio. Gallery 3A is about a fifteen minute walk from BART's Montgomery Station and should make for an interesting evening for anyone who likes architecture, galleries or beautiful small urban spaces.

Oakland Exodus

2008-12-10T19:22:00.000-08:00

The Oakland blogosphere is atwitter this week with discussion of the essay by Susan Gluss on why she moved from Oakland to Greenbrae, which I'd never heard of but is just south of San Rafael. Her words appear on page 2 of the Sunday San Francisco Chronicle's Insight section, opposite another column by Chip Johnson on page 3 detailing the impacts of crime in Oakland. The Insight section features a forboding cover photo with the words "Crime and Exodus | When a Lover of Oakland Can't Take it Anymore."

Whatever you think of her decision, it is hard not to sympathize with Gluss. In what seems like a matter of months (she doesn't quite say), her car was broken into twice, her home once, and her wallet stolen. But it is also hard not to notice how dumb she seems. Her wallet was taken out of her purse right in front of her at a local club. She apparently left her doors unlocked at home to allow a thief in without her knowing until she opened her (empty) jewelry box. Finally, her car was broken into after she left her purse inside in plain sight. A dweller of any urban area will tell you that these are all things you just don't do, whether you live in Cambridge, San Francisco, Oakland, or Kalamazoo. Or even Greenbrae.

But her worst offense is that she then goes on to equate these relatively minor, everyday urban cirmes with the stray bullet from an armed gas station robbery that hit a young boy practicing piano at a music studio across the street on Piedmont Avenue. She implies that it was this incident, as well as persuasion from "an eccentric old friend"(?) that finally prompted her move.

In a discussion on the open thread at A Better Oakland, Navigator begins by blaming the SF Chronicle for its anti-Oakland bias, Max Allstadt thinks the problem is the "it bleeds it leads" media mentality, while V Smoothe sympathizes with those who leave Oakland and sees these essays as admonishing the city to get its act together. I think all three of these views have merit, so I'd like to unpack them a bit. Overall, I think V Smoothe is right. The media focus on crime is on balance good for the city, by highlighting real problems it has. Crime in Oakland is higher than other places; it does us no good to look the other way or keep quiet about it.

But the points Max and Navigator make also have validity. The most interesting analysis of crime coverage in Oakland I've heard was a couple years ago by a spokesperson for Forest City Development discussing their Uptown project. She pointed out that when you hear about crime in Oakland, it happens in Oakland. Whereas when you here about crime in San Francisco, it is typically attributed to a specific neighborhood, usually Bayview-Hunter's Point or maybe the Tenderloin. Max makes a similar point in that the reputation of all of Oakland is bad, while those of us who live here know better - there are both good and bad places, but most fall somewhere inbetween.

I don't think this is so much a conspiracy as a function of distance, from which you always see less detail. It would be nice if the SF Chronicle and other news media reported crime in Oakland by neighborhood, but the reality is that a huge majority of people have no idea where Temescal or Dimond is, which is why at best you see Oakland organized into the three broad neighborhoods (which I hate) of North, East, and West. So Navigator is right to recognize the Bay Area media bias against Oakland, but wrong on its origins and thus, on solutions. The solution to this particular media bias is to practice and insist upon greater specificity, which is a good habit to be in anyways.

Certainly this is an uphill climb. I mentioned the cover of the Insight section, which featured the words "Crime and Exodus." Exodus, as commonly defined, involves a mass movement of people from an area. The whole Insight section references just two people, Susan Gluss and Marcus Alvarez, whom Chip Johnson mentions. Two people does not an exodus make. To argue the existence of an exodus from Oakland due to crime, in addition to the helpful but ultimately inadequate anecdotes, the SF Chronicle should offer statistics. Most major cities in the U.S. are holding or even slightly increasing their population, nearly everyone interested in cities knows this. And in approximately 75 seconds of research, I found out that according to the U.S. Census bureau, Oakland actually gained about 2,000 residents between the last official census in 2000 and its estimate for 2007 - hardly an exodus. This is what true lovers of Oakland are up against.

Which brings me to what I think is the best response I've seen to the Gluss essay. It was a letter to the editor that appeared in the SF Chronicle on Tuesday (you'll need to scroll down to the bottom to see it) written by Lori Fogarty, the director of the Oakland Museum of California. Fogarty points out that Gluss didn't seem to love Oakland enough to get involved and improve it, which "is required of citizens in any urban city." And that is the message we should take away from the media's frustratingly vague reporting of crime in Oakland. Big, diverse, vibrant cities like Oakland offer many things other places cannot, but they require something of their residents in return. As Fogarty encapsulates in the last line of her letter, Oakland is "a long way from Greenbrae, in more ways than the commute."

Temescal Library Reception

2008-12-08T22:51:00.000-08:00

The Oakland Tribune reminds me that on Wednesday night the Temescal Branch of the Oakland Public Library will be hosting a free reception from 6:00 to 8:00 to celebrate it's 90th anniversary. The library was dedicated on 1918 December 10, and built with funds from the Andrew Carnegie Foundation, which supported the construction of over 2,500 libraries during the late 1800s and early 1900s, now known as "Carnegie Libraries".

At the reception will be a display showing the impact of the Carnegie Libraries nationwide and an exhibit highlighting the historical changes in Temescal over the last ninety years, as well as artistic workshops.

So if you are interested in libraries, would like to learn more about the history of Temescal, or just want to rub elbows with some of the heppest cats around - librarians, head on over to the intersection of Telegraph, Claremont, and 52nd on Wednesday night.

To the East...

2008-12-06T09:41:00.000-08:00

Last night I had dinner at little Mexican place called El Huarache Azteca. My companions and I got there a little after the dinner rush, around 8:00 pm and I was amazed at the number of people out and about on International Boulevard. I get to neither that often, but to my eye Fruitvale rivals Chinatown for the most urban neighborhood in Oakland. Both always seem to have so many people on their sidewalks.

It reminded me of some recent comments on local blogs (one of which I can find and another I can't) regarding the lack of connections between many East Oakland neighborhoods and the rest of the City. I admit to knowing very little about these neighborhoods, especially those south and east of Frutivale and Redwood Heights.

So I consider this my project for the upcoming year, to spend more time in East Oakland neighborhoods (and learn their individual names), will you help? Comment or email me with your suggestions of places to go, things to do, and neighborhoods to check out.

Safeway or Work

2008-11-12T12:22:00.000-08:00

With different guests staying at my place for most of the last two weeks postings have been light, but Becks reminds me that tonight is the last stakeholders working group meeting for the expansion of the College Avenue Safeway. I went to the last meeting October 22 and had some thoughts I have yet to post (how does V Smoothe do it?), but hope to soon.

In that same post Becks mentions another event tonight, CRE8 at Swarm Gallery, for those more interested in art than planning and development. Another option for those interested in architecture (unfortunately Safeway seems not to offer much), is a lecture at UC-Berkeley by New York-based Work Architecture Company, who won the NYCMoMA / P.S. 1 Young Architects Program competition this year with their project Public Farm 1 (image above). The lecture is at 7:00 pm at 112 Wurster Hall on campus.

Tonight being my last guest's final night in town, I won't be making it to any of the events this evening. But Thursday I hope to make it down to the Mix It Up East Bay to hear V and meet some of the kids.

185 Post Street

2008-10-30T13:47:00.000-07:00

Though it is one of the most important metropolitan regions of the country, the Bay Area is still lucky to have an architecture and urban design critic writing for one of its daily papers. This type of position has been in decline for decades, with fewer big city newspapers maintaining staff to review and critique cultural production. And while I subscribe and enjoy reading it daily, the San Francisco Chronicle is no NYTimes, LATimes, or Chicago Tribune, whose home cities are large enough and their writing serious enough to find it unthinkable that they wouldn't comment on new buildings and projects.

It might just be because the Raiders and 49ers are so bad this year, but the SFChron sports pages are home to some of its most thoughtful and critical writing. But I find their constant rah-rah of Silicon Valley grating, and the cult of personality exhibited in the Food and Wine sections annoying. All of which is a roundabout way of introducing John King's excellent column Tuesday on 185 Post Street. I have my quibbles with his writing; too often he waxes poetic on the urban experience. But when he sinks his teeth into a straight-up architectural critique he can frame interesting issues I hadn't considered and illuminate ideas latent in the buildings and spaces surrounding us.

Working in San Francisco the last few years, I had the pleasure of watching 185 Post Street transform from a dull workaday building into a commercial jewel. Designed by Brand + Allen Architects, the taut glass facade contrasts with both the encased inner structure and the surrounding masonry buildings in a completely compelling way. As King alludes, it is a building begging to be viewed from numerous angles and at differing times of the day, especially at twilight, when its lighting and translucency interplay to remarkable effect.

King mentions a previous proposal on this site by Rem Koolhaas for a new building with a steel facade punched with 8,000 portholes, comparing favorably this work of locals with what might have been. And I couldn't agree more, this building is "every bit as good." He continues, "if not as a work of architectural theory, then as a fresh twist on the preservation" referring to Koolhaas' reputation for enlightening observations on contemporary cities and culture. But here King discounts this building, and at the same time inflates Koolhaas. This is an interesting work of architectural theory, including the theory of preservation. It also references the role of modernism in our post-modern age, and the possibilities for the modern (and post-modern) to co-habitate with and also transform the traditional in the contemporary city. As such, this truly is a theoretically challenging piece of post-modern architecture. Which of course is the kind of architecture also practiced by Koohaas.

Just because Koonshing Wong, the lead designer for the project at Brand + Allen, hasn't written a bunch of theoretical books doesn't make it any less a work of architectural theory. And the theory Koolhaas expounds has always been more about urbanism than the architectural anyways.

Though King laments the subversion of Wong's original idea to leave the brick facade of the existing building unpainted, this was a happy accident. It improved the architecture; the building wouldn't be nearly as "ethereal" with a rough brick facade behind the smooth glass wall. And had the brick been left unpainted, the idea may have been too literal, and thus worked less well on a theoretical level.

As it happened, the brick was first "encased" in a traditional material - paint, before being surrounded by glass, a modern material. Which added another level of reading to this building, strengthening the argument. And making it a joy to behold.

The Living

2008-10-27T00:07:00.000-07:00

If you were like most architects starting a practice and needing to call it something, you'd probably use your name and add "architects", "architecture", or maybe "studio" after to let the people know what you do. If you wanted to sound a bit more like an artisan, with a yeoman connection to the craftsmen who construct your designs, you might use your name but call it a building workshop. If later you added a couple of partners, became an office of some stability, and began to take on more corporate and institutional clients, maybe you'd be a three-letter firm. And if you wanted to project a cool, detached demeanor, sound more arty, and benefit from a calculated obscurity, you might choose a self-consciously generic name.

But if you wanted to transcend all that, and sound like you could be a German new wave punk rock band, or a 70's art and media group that drove a Cadillac through a wall of burning televisions, or a collective of cyborgs bent on assimilating the universe, you'd call yourself The Living.

And you'd be speaking tonight (Monday) at the California College of the Arts in San Francisco at 7 pm.

BRT Redundancy

2008-10-24T16:36:00.000-07:00

Partially in response to numerous comments on the original post (and perhaps my own post on the topic), a few days ago V Smoothe reiterated that AC Transit's BRT proposal does not mimic the BART Richmond-Fremont line. The most compelling argument being that while the proposed BRT route mirrors the BART line, the service does not. It is an important distinction, and also correct as far as it goes. The problem is, it doesn't go very far.

In that post, V Smoothe laid out arguments for why the first BRT line should go in the BART Richmond-Fremont corridor, mostly having to do with the huge percentage of Oaklanders who live within a half mile of the corridor and the fact that existing bus routes through the corridor make up a large percentage (though smaller, hmm...?) of AC Transit ridership. Additionally, V Smoothe points out that the East Bay's largest employment centers also lie in this corridor. All of which are great arguments for locating the first BRT route as AC Transit has, if the BART Richmond-Fremont line did not exist.

V Smoothe uses an example to make the point, but one I think equally illustrates the potential of less costly means for achieving similar service. The example is one of traveling from downtown Oakland to 46th and Foothill on a weekday afternoon. On BART, the trip to Fruitvale takes 7 minutes. From Fruitvale station there are 3 existing bus routes (1, 14, 47) within 2 blocks of 46th and Foothill. Currently on a weekday afternoon, routes 1 & 14 have 15 minute headways and route 47 has a 30 minute headway. Given that, you'd expect to wait about 10 minutes for a bus at Fruitvale station, and the trip itself would likely take no more than 10 minutes. Which makes me wonder why V Smoothe would not take BART on this trip.

Looking more closley, the AC Transit online schedule tells us both routes 14 & 47 leave Fruitvale station (their origin) at 3:06, the exact time a BART train arrives from downtown Oakland. Perhaps someone interested in defending the decision making of AC Transit can explain why they don't leave at 3:10, as the BART headways for the line at this time are exactly 15 minutes as well. To me, this is inexplicable. The closest timepoint for AC Transit's 1 route puts it at 23rd and International (umm...why isn't the timepoint at 34th and International, essentially Fruitvale station?) at 3:02, which would put it at Frutivale station about 3:06 as well. And so now we understand why V Smoothe did not take BART for this trip. It is because AC Transit does not even bother to coordinate their schedules with BART.

And yet we are supposed to trust an organization that exhibits this kind of decision making (elaborated on in my previous post) with a capital-intensive improvement program that will reshape numerous neighborhoods along its route. Frankly, it hard for me to understand where the support for this BRT proposal is coming from, as AC Transit has been making such poor decisions of late.

Imagine if we could convince people in Washington D.C. (from where the BRT money is coming) that we know better how to spend this money. And so instead of spending it on the massive capital improvements this BRT proposal requires, we added buses, increased and expanded service feeding BART stations, and better coordinated transfers between AC Transit and BART. My guess is we could easily achieve the same level of service in the corridor, if not improve it with more and better routes perpendicular to it, and have enough money left over to better serve other routes and areas as well.

V Smoothe makes another point in support of this BRT proposal, mentioned briefly above, which I think can also be used to argue against it, the fact that this corridor contains the East Bay's largest employment centers. All are well served by BART stations. Which suggests the alternate proposal outlined above could work, because as V Smoothe rightly points out, most riders on the proposed BRT are going to/from work. And so these riders would only be required to make one transfer (at most), from a bus route near their home to/from a BART station. Now obviously it is better to have no transfers, but devising such a system is prohibitively costly. And it is the difference between one transfer and two where a transport system really begins to exhibit gross inefficiencies.

The example provided here is one of someone who now drives to MacArthur station to take BART to downtown Oakland, but might switch to BRT. But this hypothetical person only switches to BRT if they live along the BRT route and near another proposed BRT station. If instead s/he lives at 46th and Adeline, the proposed BRT doesn't much help. What would help is a feeder service that ran down Market and fed into MacArthur station or more frequent service down San Pablo on route 72 (which goes directly downtown Oakland), both of which would likely be possible if we didn't spend all this money on the capital improvements required by BRT. This is what I mean when I discuss the opportunity costs of BRT.

At the end of the day, I agree with supporters of BRT that transit service in this corridor should be vastly improved. In fact I believe transport funding in our country should be massively shifted in favor of transit (and the repair of existing streets and sidewalks) and away from the expansion and creation of new roads, where much of our spending now goes. What I disagree with is the most effective way to improve service in this corridor. Or rather, I am unsure what the most effective way of doing this is. And it is the responsibility of its supporters to explain why they think BRT is the most effective way of improving service in this corridor. As yet, I haven't seen that argument; I am still waiting.

Bus Rapid Transit 001

2008-10-17T09:49:00.000-07:00

Last Saturday there was a meeting regarding AC Transit's Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) proposals hosted by Jane Brunner. Despite being reminded by Future Oakland and Living in the O, I missed the meeting. This topic has interested me for a while, and is one I've been learning about and forming opinions on for some time, but I wanted to attend this meeting to make sure I wasn't missing something. Because the opinions I have been forming are dangerously similar to a typical Berkeley conservative nimby, and frankly I am not at all comfortable with that.

Fortunately, Living in the O provided a great rundown of the meeting the next day. And Wednesday a post at A Better Oakland moved me toward BRT like nothing I'd read yet. As I mentioned in comments at both blogs, I am skeptical. But I am also a huge supporter and user of public transport, and willing to be convinced I have it wrong. So consider this a snapshot of where my head is at right now.

My first exposure to AC Transit's BRT proposal was through graphic design. I noticed the bus signs for the Rapid service, probably on the 1 and 72 routes, because they are so dang ugly. On this you can't change my mind, no matter how many cupcakes you give me.

My second experience was much better. Several weeks ago, on a weekday late morning, I needed to go from Uptown Oakland to San Pablo Park in south Berkeley, located between San Pablo and Sacramento Streets just north of Ashby. Now this isn't a trip I normally make, so when I got to the Uptown Transit Center (UTC) I looked at the map and figured out I could take the 72. I didn't bother to check NextBus or the posted schedule, because I find neither seem to correspond with the other, and often around town the schedules posted at individual stops don't correspond with those online. Thus the only schedule-related thing I typically do with AC Transit is note the headway and pray I'm on the short end of it.

As luck would have it, the first bus to arrive was a 72R. It was wonderful. We flew down San Pablo, not once pulling over for someone just resting at a random bus stop. Now because the online schedule for the 72R does not list individual stops (arrgghhh!) I don't know how much time I saved, but for the 72 that trip is scheduled at 19 minutes, I'm guessing mine was more like 12 minutes. There are two ways to look at that, both valid. On the one hand I only saved 7 minutes, on the other, my transport time was reduced by 37%, though when you factor in my walk on either end and wait time for the bus, it was probably more like 15% (7-8 minutes on either end, with a 5 minute wait). But regardless, it was great.

There are so many aspects to the AC Transit BRT proposal it is hard to know where to start. So let me just begin with the route. It is redundant to the BART Richmond-Fremont line. Now at that link, you'll find some decent arguments for why it is not redundant, but regardless of your take, the redundancy issue is the reason why it was a mistake to make this the first route. I agree with those who argue that BRT can fill a need between BART and standard local bus service. The problem is that there are several major East Bay corridors (San Pablo, MacArthur/I-580) that don't have BART service. And so, if AC Transit was interested in vastly improving transit service in the EB, it would have located the first BRT line there. They didn't, and this goes to my next point.

AC Transit is simply not making good decisions right now. I've already discussed the choice of the first BRT route and the graphic design of the Rapid, and the Van Hool debacle has already been well documented, but there are others. Some people seem to disagree, but NextBus rarely works for me. I often take the 15 or 18 lines home from the downtown Oakland YMCA in the early evening, and on occasion I'll get there and it says the next bus will be 25 minutes out, even though the headways are supposed to be 15 minutes. Before, I would turn around and go to BART. For me the timing is about the same, but the bus shortens my walk, and I don't fear my safety so much as I'm lazy. But then one time after seeing 25 minutes or so on NextBus, the bus showed up as I was walking back to BART. And now, though I see 25 minutes or some crazy number that doesn't even correspond to the posted headway somewhat regularly I just wait, and sure enough, mostly a bus arrives in 5-10 minutes.

And AC Transit has schedule problems beyond NextBus as well. I used to take the F line into San Francisco fairly regularly during my morning commute. Again the timing is about the same as BART, but it is a lot nicer getting a seat and seeing the beautiful SF Bay in the morning, rather than standing in a tube at the bottom of it. But the schedule posted at the bus stop doesn't correspond to the schedule online. I've noticed this at other bus stops around town as well. Of course for the F line I quickly learned which one to believe (online), because I was a regular user of that line. But the schedules posted at bus stops aren't for regular users, they are for people find themselves needing to get someplace they may not ordinarily go from a place they may not ordinarily be in, and who may be trying transit for the first time. Having the wrong schedules posted at bus stops makes an awful impression.

I already mentioned the graphic design of the Rapid service, but the whole of AC Transit's design program is just awful. Take the new Translink cards, which I find to be generally useful, but the graphic design is terrible. Aside from the insipid green psuedo-futuristic image that looks like it was pulled off clipart, nothing about the card tells me it is for the Bay Area, and not Los Angeles, Denver, or Kolkata. Now for the most part, this card can be hidden away in your wallet or purse. But unfortunately the Uptown Transit Center (UTC) cannot.

And the UTC is dreadful. Certainly, as Becks mentioned in comments at A Better Oakland, it is safer than the alternative of waiting a few blocks away, but why does it have to be so ugly? Regardless of what you happen to think of the architectural style of the shelters (me, not much), why do they have to be painted in the same green as nearly every other municipal project built in the last two decades? Why do I have to approach each shelter to find out which buses stop there, instead of being able to read the whole with some bold graphic initiative? And why do I have to wait to board the bus to pay, instead of paying ahead of time at some cool shelter like they have in Curitiba (image above). The answer to all these questions, as it turns out, is that the UTC was designed by FMG Architects, the same people AC Transit has retained to work on BRT, BART is using for Ashby Station, and apparently designed (to be fair, I haven't confirmed this but they have lots of similar projects) that awful parking garage in Dublin that everyone rightfully hates.

So I'm not hopeful for the physical designs of the new BRT system. I've been to two meetings now on Ashby Station, and I am floored by how bad they have both been. Aside from FMG's design abilities, these guys have awful presentation skills. They are defensive and condescending when criticized, and are always pleading that their designs are still in progress, and so can't be judged by the images they present. I remember using a similar argument in my first architectural studio at graduate school; it didn't go over so well.

Now if you squint at the image at top, you can see the BRT bus shelters FMG is proposing (inasmuch as they are willing to propose anything) and to me these look like standard issue shelters from 1993. BRT is going to have a huge impact on the neighborhoods whose streets are going to be ripped up and reconfigured, I think it is incumbent upon AC Transit to do better by them. I am thinking of what Minneappolis did when they built light rail. I can't find a decent link, but basically they hired the best and brightest local talent to design their shelters. And mostly, they are gorgeous.

A bus shelter is the perfect size and scale for an unestablished architect to try their hand. This kind of thing is done all over Europe, where small commissions are awarded to young, creative firms as a way to build local talent and prevent the stultifying suburban sameness that seems to accompany nearly every municipal project in our country. And larger projects are awarded by open design competitions. Renzo Piano, who designed the wonderful new California Academy of Sciences, got his start this way, winning the competition (with Richard Rogers and Peter Rice) to design Le Centre Pompidou in Paris at the age of 33. Thirty-three. And yet here, in the Bay Area, one of the wealthiest regions of the world, we get FMG Architects designing what seems to be dozens of crummy parking garages, transit centers, and government administration buildings. And so I fear the shelters and stations for the entire BRT system will be the same off-the-shelf municipal designs, with no sense of place because all of them will be essentially identical. I mean, gag me with a spoon!

I realize many people don't care much about these design criticisms, and find them frivolous or tangental. But one of the things people who love Oakland should care about is the experience of being in Oakland. And these criticisms go to that. I am concerned that BRT will make the experience of being in Oakland worse.

In addition to all these design crimes, BRT significantly reduces street parking in commercial corridors. I am not familiar with the whole of the route and how much parking will be eliminated and where, so I am just going to focus on the situation in Temescal, which I think I know fairly well. It is my understanding that the basic BRT street section in Temescal will be two bus lanes down the middle, with a median on either side, separating a lane of traffic each way, and no street parking.

There are plenty of people who argue that eliminating parking will hurt businesses and that moving to one lane of traffic each direction will cause terrible congestion. I am not one of them. I think congestion is good for cities like Oakland, and anyplace worth its salt has a "parking problem". Think about a couple of the best places in Oakland, upper College Avenue near Safeway and Grand Lake on a Saturday afternoon. Both are completely congested and hard to park at. So let me just say that I think less parking and more congestion in Temescal would be a good thing. But eliminating street parking is a huge psychological change in the makeup of the street. Instead of a barrier of cars protecting pedestrians on the sidewalk, they will be directly exposed to a lane of traffic, and those drivers will be more aggressive and agitated because congestion will be somewhat increased. And not only that, but there appears to be little room for a dedicated bike lane, which wouldn't be terrible (bike lanes are overrated), except in that case there may not be enough room for a typical vehicle to comfortably pass a bicyclist either, further exacerbating the situation. All of which is to say that sitting outside having a chicken sandwich at Bakesale Betty or eggs at The Mixing Bowl will become a significantly worse experience. And I don't think that is something enough people appreciate.

BRT supporters like to claim it as a boon to pedestrians and bikers in addition to bus riders, but that clearly is not the case in all places at all times. In Temescal, the pedestrian and bike experience will be worse. I am happy to argue with those who think this is a legitimate tradeoff. I disagree, but it is a debatable point. But I think if we proceed this needs to be recognized and mitigated (through better design?), and not just swept away with the assumption that what is good for bus riders is automatically good for pedestrians and bikers.

At the end of the day this all goes, to get a little teleological here, to what is the purpose of transit and what constitutes the good life as lived within cities. Many people argue for transit with the intention of increasing mobility, but a far better way to think about this is that we should be working on increasing access. For the last half century, our transport policies have unduly favored mobility, to the detriment of cities. Places like Oakland became mere pass-throughs, routes on the way to somewhere else. My fear is that BRT, rather than challenge this regime, reinforces it. In simple terms, perhaps it is time we begin to favor place over movement.

Though I've made some passionate arguments here, I want to reiterate that I am open to changing my mind. In fact I would like to do so, because as I mentioned, I am a huge supporter and user of public transport. But right now, as I currently understand it to be conceived, I think this AC Transit BRT proposal is a marginally bad idea. And not only for all the problems outlined above, but because there are huge opportunity costs to choosing it. As I mentioned in one of my earlier comments on A Better Oakland, what if we took this money ( I know, I know) and spent it instead on feeding better (way better) into the existing BART route. My guess is that it would go really, really far. Far enough (perhaps?) to provide a similar level of service as this BRT proposal with a lot left over for other transit improvements. I don't know, but I want to; tell me I am wrong.

Ashby Station Meeting 02

2008-10-13T22:53:00.000-07:00

Tuesday is the second meeting on plans to modernize Ashby Station. I posted some thoughts on that meeting here and here, but never got around to sharing what I think the priorities should be. In that first post I mentioned that Fight Blight had a good rundown of existing conditions and some recommended improvements. I hope to make it to the meeting tomorrow, and afterwards I'll post my thoughts and have some suggestions on how BART should proceed.

Oakland Logo

2008-10-09T09:44:00.000-07:00

A Better Oakland had a discussion last week on the City of Oakland logo. Apparently the new one (bottom) has replaced the old one (top). But in looking more closely this week, I've noticed the old one still in use on some city vehicles. I'm not sure whether this reflects a slower change over, or simply the use of multiple logos.

I agree with V Smoothe, the new logo is lame. Someone in the discussion said it looked like the logo for a golf course in Danville, which I think is about right. It also could be any number of other Oaklands throughout the country. The old logo was bold and distinctive, things you want in a logo, and it represented Oakland well.

Oakland Sidewalk Stamps

2008-10-01T09:15:00.000-07:00

I just discovered this blog that catalogs Oakland Sidewalk Stamps. It is a side project of Andrew Alden, better known as the blogger at Oakland Geology, whose tagline I love, "focused on, near and under Oakland, California." Sidewalk stamps, along with building cornerstones, are great reminders of the history of place.

Rockridge Out and About

2008-09-27T12:36:00.000-07:00

Oakbook reminds me Out and About in Rockridge is Sunday on College Avenue between Claremont and Manilla Avenues. Looks like there will be a fashion show, chef stage, wellness tent, and a green living expo, as well as food, arts and crafts, and a "tots town" for the kids. Interesting that the logo (image above) uses the same craftsman-style font used by the City of Berkeley; my cousin always refers to Rockridge as the "Berkeley part of Oakland."

For those who think Rockridge doesn't go far enough, there is the 13th annual How Berkeley Can You Be?

A Bridge To Star

2008-09-25T15:14:00.000-07:00

On Wednesday in the San Francisco Chronicle we learned the new eastern span of the San Francisco - Oakland Bay Bridge is quickly becoming a local icon. At least according to an ambitious politician who held local office at groundbreaking and the architect who designed it. No word yet from the bridge itself.

A Band on Vehicles

2008-09-24T18:53:00.000-07:00

A few weeks ago I noticed my neighbor's car, which had been stored at the back of the driveway between our houses since I'd moved in, was gone. It was a fairly nice car that I admit to coveting, if only because it sat there unused for so many months. When I next saw my neighbor, I inquired about it. The reply was the kind of vague answer neighbors often give.

Then several days ago, looking at the post on abandoned vehicles at We Fight Blight, one entry somehow caught my eye. There I found my neighbor's address and vehicle. The car had been determined abandoned and moved.

So I left a comment on the blog post. I was alarmed specifically about the removal of my neighbor's vehicle, and generally about removal of vehicles from private property.

Generally I support this program. A month ago, after learning of it from We Fight Blight, I called in an unfamiliar vehicle that had sat unmoved in front of my house for a week and a half. But I am vexed by the lack of distinction between vehicles parked on private drives versus public streets, and the seeming failure to account for the condition of the vehicle.

In response to my comment, We Fight Blight wrote that I did not identify the vehicle, so it was hard to know which one I was referring to, but that is part of the point. I am concerned our neighbor may now think I reported it (whom else would have?). And because I am aware of the program and the situation, I fear in discussing this with my neighbor I would only look more guilty. But that is truly a minor personal problem.

What bothers me is the attitude taken in the original posts and the response to my comment. It is one of self-righteous assurance, without a trace of doubt that what is being done is anything but completely correct. Given the nefarious purposes for which labeling something blight has been used in the past (see urban renewal, Robert Moses) I would expect more deference. After all, it is hard to imagine anyone interested in these issues to be unaware of the history of the term, and the awful things done to cities and their inhabitants by its abuse a half-century ago.

So I admit to having briefly cringed when I first saw the use of the word 'blight' in that blog. But I generally found it moderate, though the tone noted above did appear on occasion. I have no doubt the author has anything but the best of intentions for North Oakland neighborhoods, but in some of the language you hear the songs of the past: community standards, public health hazards, property values. I fear it begins to go beyond concern for neighborhood and into intolerance of difference.

And that frightens me. Because one of the great things about living in a diverse urban neighborhood is difference. And while sometimes I don't like living across the street from screaming kids, tire of the rubbish the neighbors down the block leave in the gutter, and wish some would take better care of their yards and bring in their trash cans, I understand that this is part of it. And I fear if those things were gone I would lose something else too.

I don't have the answers to all these questions. I certainly don't think cars should sit on public streets for weeks on end, but I also don't think people should be forced to move decent-looking cars from their own driveway, just because they aren't used on a regular basis. And, because of the subjectivity that would be necessary, it is probably difficult to write an abandoned vehicle ordinance that takes into account the condition of the car.

But my doubt about the correct response, as compared with the self-certainty exhibited by those who claim blight, is disconcerting. In the end, this seems a short road to approving a palate of acceptable paint colors for houses, banning laundry lines, or deciding a neighbor's proposed addition doesn't "fit in with the character" of the area. And then it would be no longer be a city neighborhood, nor one I would want to live in.

And because I'm not sure I even completely trust my own words here, I end this post with those of German filmmaker Wim Wenders,

"Every kind of urban planning, by definition, tends toward some kind of homogeneity. The city contradicts that. The city defines itself through oppositions; it wants to explode."

BART (Conservative) Pricing

2008-09-22T10:07:00.000-07:00

East Bay Conservative disagrees with my take on the new BART pricing proposal. I commented on EBC in response to the original post, but have been unable to do so again. You'll have to read that post and the subsequent comments for this to make sense, but the following is my response:

Jim M - We don't expect a flight to Paris to cost the same as one to Las Vegas. Why should we expect a ride to Pittsburg to cost the same as one to Lafayette?

Mark Ross makes some good points, correcting my term "market-oriented pricing" with the better "opportunity pricing." And of course he's right on BART's fare problem. But this is a problem with every transit agency and with state highway and federal freeway spending as well. But the losses he writes about are not fixed or constant; It is not like they lose $.75 (or some such amount) on each additional rider.

A large, capital-intensive transit agency like BART has a lot of fixed costs, but the marginal cost of adding another car onto an existing train is fairly negligible. And so it would be a good idea for BART to charge a bit less and run longer trains during off-peak hours, if the resulting higher revenue from fares was greater than the increased operating costs.

In the original post EBC laments BART discouraging use of public transit by increasing peak-hour fares. And I agree, this is not something BART should do. Instead it should raise fares at peak-hours just enough to push those more price-sensitive riders onto slightly earlier or later trains to better spread out the peak and maximize ridership. BART is approaching capacity during peak hours and, apart from some huge capital investments, will have trouble meeting the additional demand that rising gas prices, increasing population, more road congestion, and attention to greener lifestyles will bring.

Oakland Love 001

2008-09-21T22:08:00.000-07:00

Over the weekend Apartment Therapy discovered Oakland, linking to a guest post on decor8 titled Things I Love about Oakland, California. It features some of the places and people that make Oakland great. One of them is Oakland-based graphic designer Jason Munn of The Small Stakes. Since discovering his work about a year ago, I have been coveting this poster for Rainer Maria exhibiting some Wisconsin Love (image below). Unfortunately, it is sold out.

The guest post on decor8 is by Leah over at More Ways to Waste Time, who has a whole series of similar posts there under the label Things I Hella Love About Oakland.

Naval Congestion

2008-09-19T18:17:00.000-07:00

A post at Future Oakland from a while back reminded me that I wanted to comment on an article in the East Bay Express on the Alameda Naval Air Station redevelopment from a few weeks ago. The lede was that the development for somewhere between 4200 and 6000 housing units now proposed by SunCal would "either cost local taxpayers millions of dollars or snarl traffic throughout Alameda and downtown Oakland."

For the "costing taxpayers millions" option the article states how the traffic projections of the development are only slightly higher than for the originally proposed 1800 unit development. But those numbers factor in comprehensive BRT service and or even Personal Rapid Transit (PRT - think cars you can't steer!?!) that SunCal is unwilling to fund. At one point the article even suggests not enough Alameda residents will ride BRT and thus it will not be "cost-efficient," but when viewed this way, transit rarely is.

The end of the article says all the right things about dense urban development and lessening suburban sprawl and we just want the devlopers to level with us on the costs. But it suggests that these both (taxpayer millions or snarled traffic) are equivalently bad outcomes. And they're not, Alameda and downtown Oakland should be encouraging their traffic to become snarled.

Why? Because in the long run, snarled traffic leads to more transit use (BRT or not) and slower traffic. And more transit use leads to more people walking by Alameda and Oakland-based businesses on their way to transit. And slower traffic leads to more people looking out their windows at Alameda and Oakland-based businesses while sitting in traffic. And more people walking by and looking out at Alameda and Oakland-based businesses leads to... more business in Alameda and Oakland. And even if you hate business, for those of us who love cities, it is just more fun to have more people around.

This is called congestion. And congestion is supposed to be something all right thinking people want to avoid. But as Dutch architect and urbanist Rem Koolhaas theorized in his first book, cities should be "cultures of congestion," not the insipid malled, plazaed, parking-lotted and garaged, open-spaced places they have become due to those who fear and fight congestion.

Think about some of Alameda and Oakland's best places: Chinatown - congested, Alameda Marketplace - congested, Bakesale Betty in the early afternoon - congested, Grand Lake on a Saturday morning - utterly and hopelessly congested. It reminds of a quote attributed to Yogi Berra, "no one goes there anymore, it's too crowded."

Now, I don't know enough about the SunCal proposal to say whether it is a good idea or not. But it definitely won't be a bad idea just because it increases congestion.

Park(ing) Day 2008

2008-09-18T20:31:00.000-07:00

Just a reminder, Friday September 19 is Park(ing) Day. On the website you'll find a map with at least four Oakland locations. But according to their blog (different from the website), the Nomad Cafe is participating, and they aren't included on the Oakland map, so their may be others. If you know of any, share them in comments.

Meanwhile, it seems you can't swing a stick in central San Francisco without hitting some park(ing). You can find a description of the San Francisco highlights here. Unfortunately, the Oakland description is somewhat confusing.

If you are heading into the City, I highly recommend downloading (1.2 MB) the PDF map of the San Francisco park(ing) locations. It looks like the base is by the folks at Raven Maps, a company that makes maps so beautiful you could cry. If you like what you see, they also make large state maps and benchmark atlases.

Careful though, you may never settle for the graphically-challenged Google maps again. As far as free internet maps go, try Yahoo maps, which are a bit easier on the eyes, though they don't have that cool street view feature.

But I digress, just go park(ing), but don't forget to feed the meter.

STAND Best Picks

2008-09-16T20:17:00.000-07:00

In doing some research for another post, I came across the website of Standing Together for Accountable Neighborhood Development (STAND). I had seen their booth around town and always thought they were anti-development. It turns out I was wrong, they are anti-design. On their Best Picks page, they highlight three recent developments they like. None are good.

The first, Il Piedmonte (image above), on the corner of Pleasant Valley and Piedmont Avenues, is at least not terrible. From Piedmont Avenue it gives the impression of a decent courtyard building that was filled in badly at the height of the post-pop period, around 1983. From Pleasant Valley Avenue it resembles three separate buildings. I can only imagine that somewhere in design review it was suggested that the architects "break up the massing", thinking that would make a large building better; it rarely does. The scale seems about right, though it would benefit from adding one more floor and losing the pergola fronting Piedmont Avenue on the habitable roof deck. Were it a single coherent building and maybe a story higher, it could have been the kind of solid work-a-day corner building found at major intersections in great cities all over the world.

The two other developments are so bad they aren't worth explaining (I hope it is obvious), though I reserve a special hatred for the last (image at top), both because I walk by it several times a week, and it is just a block or so away from the lovely Nomad Cafe.

I understand those who think recent development in Oakland is too dense. Generally I disagree, but change is difficult, and people typically don't like to share, whether it be their toys or their neighborhoods. I think Oakland would benefit from more people living here, especially along transit corridors and above shops. I like having a diversity of housing options, and think it great someone could live several floors above a store, a block away in a detached single-family house, or somewhere in between, depending on their preferences and station in life. But to hold these projects (especially the last two) up as some kind of design model is just beyond the pale.

BART Pricing

2008-09-15T22:13:00.001-07:00

On Friday we learned BART is considering using pricing to alleviate congestion during peak periods and at busy stations. Today we learned what the San Francisco Chronicle thought, along with the reaction of Oakland SF Chronicle reader Sarah Babcock.

The thing that struck me most was the poor framing exhibited by BART. Consider the opening sentence of the article on Friday,

"BART is becoming so popular during peak commute hours that agency officials are looking to charge patrons more to ride trains, park in its lots, and use certain stations when demand is highest."

Now if you reread the above statement, replacing the words "more" with "less" and "highest" with "lowest", you understand what I mean. And really this is how the issue should have been presented, that BART would discount fares of those who ride at off-peak times. Either way it is disconcerting that BART board president Gail Murray expressed her skepticism of the plan by saying, "when you have market rate pricing, that's essentially a fare increase." That is false - it is only a fare increase if revenue from fares increases.

You could devise a plan (as I think BART should) that would be revenue neutral, or even one that would lower overall revenue from fares slightly (which might not be a bad idea, since they've bungled the PR), by increasing the fares during peak times, and lowering them at all others. Ultimately, I think it would be good to have a three tier system, with highest fares for the peak hour of commuting, a slightly lower fare for the hour on either side of the peak, and a considerably lower off-peak fare.

Certainly I would generally like to see transit fares go down across the board because, as we saw with "spare the air" days, transit usage increases dramatically with lower pricing. And there are so many external benefits to transit, it really is something our government should be funding more. But the reality is that BART is more valuable as a commuting option for most people, and should be priced accordingly. And while I sympathize with Ms. Murray's concerns for social justice in relation to BART pricing, I'm not sure BART is the correct governmental agency to address income inequality, and besides there are other, better ways BART could mitigate the impact of higher peak fares on the poor.

Finally, I'm always amused by people like Maggie Frank (quoted in Friday's article) or writer Sarah Babcock, who both ask BART to contact their employers regarding their ability to start later. I wonder if their bosses would mind if they started earlier. And if, as Ms. Babcock suggests, a fare increase will not change the behavior of high demand hour patrons, then BART has been undercharging those customers for years, and we have all suffered for it through the less extensive routes and lines she bemoans.

Sunday Streets

2008-09-14T08:07:00.000-07:00

Today is the second and last Sunday Streets day in San Francisco this year. Four and half miles of street from Chinatown to Bayview are closed to cars and open to bikers, walkers, joggers, and rollerbladers. Along the route there will be yoga, dance, martial arts, health screenings and all around fun.

Unfortunately I had conflicts on both days this year, so I won't be there. I wanted to take my bike over on BART and ride from the ferry building (which I know fairly well) all the way to Bayview (of which I know little). If you go, let me know what you thought. Hopefully it will happen again next year. And how can we do something like this in Oakland?

Ashby Station 002

2008-09-12T19:06:00.000-07:00

Nearly a month ago now proposals were presented for the modernization of Ashby Station. Last week I posted some initial thoughts on the timing and structure of the meeting. But the actual presentation and plans deserve comment. The first part was presented by FMG Architects, who seem to do a lot of work for BART. After quickly going through a site analysis, they presented several major recommendations.

The first was to add a digital timetable at the entry outside. Basically it would take the real-time information already found at the platforms and put it on a large screen outside. This is a good idea that would make for a more civilized experience.

FMG also suggested reconfiguring the lighting. The idea was to hang a row lights from the ceiling along the length of the platforms, but it was unclear if this would replace, or merely enhance the existing lighting. Now it isn't saying much, but Ashby Station (image at top) is actually one of the better stations in the BART system. This stems from two main components: the natural light and visual connection it receives from the west entry and windows, and the vaulted, ribbed concrete ceiling that gives it an austere brutalist beauty. The proposal to drop lights from the ceiling would detract from these features.

The final major proposal was to add the word "ASHBY" in big building block-style letters above what looked to be shelters on the sidewalk on Adeline Street above. It is hard to describe, but if you took a typical bus shelter found at the Uptown Transit Center (image above), extended the spires up and placed large individual letters above each one, you'd have about what was proposed. The letters looked to be at least 10 feet square, and would have a huge negative visual impact in the neighborhood. Several commenters correctly noted how auto-oriented the sign was.

And it is, but aside from that, the identity problem with Ashby Station isn't that people driving over it don't know where the station is. The problem is, as SF Cityscape pointed out a while back, that people walking (and driving) in the immediate neighborhood a few blocks away might not know which direction the station is, or how to get there.

Unfortunately, SF Cityscape has been reconfigured, and the post on wayfinding near BART stations is no longer available. But I'd encourage you to click the link above anyways. If you do, you'll see some great maps produced pro bono, including one of a proposed downtown Oakland circulator. I'll save my thoughts on what should be done at Ashby Station for a future post, hopefully a bit sooner than the last.

Sustainable Communities

2008-09-09T22:46:00.000-07:00

This article from Newsweek (via Urbanism) sums up nearly perfectly my attitude toward green building. I especially like the line midway through the first paragraph:

"Grassy roofs? Swell! Recycled gray water to flush toilets? Excellent! But if 500 employees have to drive 40 miles a day to work in the place - well, how green is that?"

And although the author surprisingly fails to mention it, the U.S. Green Building Council has been working with the Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU) to add green neighborhood development certification to its Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) program, called LEED-ND.

Which is all a round about way of introducing an upcoming one-day conference called Sustainable Communities 2008, put on by the CNU. The conference features local green stalwarts such as Peter Calthorpe, Sim Van Der Ryn, and former Oakland Hizzoner Jerry Brown. Early registration ends in just over a week, and the conference is September 26 at the Westin St. Francis on Union Square in San Francisco.

Urban Policy Positions

2008-09-08T23:03:00.000-07:00

Agents of Urbanism did a nice rundown a few weeks back on the differences between Barack Obama's and John McCain's urban policy proposals. As you can tell from the available links, the biggest difference is that, well, John McCain doesn't seem to have any.

That said, a lot of Obama's urban policy prescriptions fall into either the "motherhood and apple pie" who could object category, like "support job creation" or aren't really specifically related to urban areas, such as, "provide a tax cut for working families".

"Establish 'Promise Neighborhoods' for Areas of Concentrated Poverty" sounds like it could be good for Oakland, as does "Increase the Supply of Affordable Housing throughout Metropolitan Regions". But "Control Superfund Sites and Data" sounds weirdly big brother. All in all, it is about what you'd expect - a lot of fluff and jargon, with a few interesting ideas, and the devil of all of them will be in the details.

The most disappointing aspect of Obama's plans is the lack of any ideas under a transportation heading. The single most important thing the federal government could do for cities would be to shift transport spending away from new roads and toward mass transportation and the repair of existing roads and sidewalks. As would using it's vast spending power to discourage over-regulation of the built environment by local governments, which keeps most communities less dense than they naturally would be with a freer market.

But, as with many issues, if the federal government won't lead, states must. It looks like this may be beginning in California. And this is a welcome change. The creation of buildings is the most regulated good produced in our country, with predictable results. Supply is severely restricted, which benefits the powerful (those already owning homes, who gain value from supply restrictions) at the expense of the less powerful (renters, who suffer higher rents from same). This is all the more unfortunate because the actual production of buildings is more market-like than almost any other good made, there are numerous producers relative to consumers, unlike, for example, cola.

In addition, all this regulation happens on an extremely local basis, which is done with almost no other good. It is no wonder housing costs are so high.

And while certainly both the federal and state governments should be dealing with this through the carrots and sticks of the budget, it may be time for the state to step in and directly coerce local communities to deregulate. California attempts to do this to some degree with the Regional Housing Needs Allocation, but in the previous housing cycle, the areas you'd want to meet the goal didn't, and those you wouldn't did - that is, if you love cities like Oakland. And it doesn't go far enough, by, say, mandating the relaxation of zoning barriers to micro homes, housing over shops, or small multi-family buildings adjacent to single-family homes, and so doesn't challenge the existing status quo.

So you better buy now, housing in Oakland will only get more and more expensive.

Ashby Station 001

2008-09-05T07:38:00.000-07:00

A little over two weeks ago was a meeting regarding improvements to BART's Ashby Station. Prior to the meeting Fight Blight posted a rundown of the existing conditions and some recommended improvements, which I think is a good starting point.

It began with the BART director apologizing for not including the public sooner. The meeting took place the day after the east parking lot was closed to begin construction on the Ed Roberts Campus. One of the first comments was from a young father. He and his brood have used Ashby Station as an underpass for the busy Adeline Street above on the way to and from school, and now with the closing of the east entrance, must cross it directly. He suggested adding flashing lights to the crosswalk, such as at Martin Luther King Jr. Street adjacent. It was a perfectly reasonable suggestion, and one the neighborhood deserves to have implemented to help mitigate the effects of building the Ed Roberts Campus. And it really isn't BART's responsibility, but the problem is that this meeting was taking place the day after the east parking lot closed, rather than 3 to 6 months before as it should have been, and that the City of Berkeley, who would be responsible for adding the suggested crossing lights, was attending the meeting, rather than hosting it along with BART.

This same problem cropped up in several other comments as well, where residents were there to complain or make suggestions concerning the surrounding neighborhood. Now anyone who has been to similar public meetings knows this is the case, it is to be expected, and therefore the relevant stakeholders should have been there to help host the meeting.

The reality is that this is a small project (the BART improvements, at about $3 million) that is taking place (rightly) in conjunction with a much larger project (the Ed Roberts Campus, at about $46.5 million), so you don't want to have numerous meetings on how to allocate the monies, two meetings should do it: one to present preliminary analysis, research and goals of the project and obtain community reaction and feedback, and another to present preliminary designs and obtain more reaction and feedback. And before these meetings even take place, the relevant stakeholders (BART, Ed Roberts, Berkeley, and probably the City of Oakland and AC Transit as well) should have met to coordinate all plans and projects for the area.

The meeting held a few weeks ago was more like what a second meeting should have been, except that the first meeting never took place, nor did the stakeholder coordination. The results were predictably bad. The designs presented were clunky and overwrought (think Oakland's Uptown Transit Center), and worse than that, it is not even clear they were meeting a community need. The problems were numerous, general as well as specific; I will post more detailed thoughts on them over the weekend.

Art Murmur - 2008 Sept

2008-09-03T17:58:00.000-07:00

This Friday is Oakland Art Murmur, the monthly art event occurring the first Friday of each month, when local galleries stay open until 9:00 or 10:00. The crowds are usually pretty thick, and with the warmer weather expected to continue through the weekend, will probably be even more so. Even if you hate art, Oakland Art Murmur is worth checking out because it activates Oakland, making it feel like a denser, livelier place - it is a kind of becoming.

From Oakbook via Future Oakland, I learned that Esteban Sabar Gallery has closed. I met Esteban and his husband Marty about a year ago at Art Murmur, and was immediately impressed by the dedication and enthusiasm both exhibited for Oakland and the local art scene. I haven't spoken with them recently, but I wish them well farming and painting in the Philippines, and hope they return before too long.

I'll be checking out Johansson Projects and Mercury 20, among others, as well as the Rock Paper Scissors collective, located in what is probably my favorite building in downtown Oakland.

Also on Friday from 7:00 to 9:30 is a benefit at the Nomad Cafe which was robbed in the recent crime wave in Oakland. Proceeds will be used to fund security enhancements as well as provide the employees who suffered through the takeover-style robbery some gift certificates to a spa or some such to rehabilitate their spirits. Don't know if I'll be able to make it, but I get over their often enough - it is my favorite building in the neighborhood.

Recent History in Oakland

2008-09-02T22:38:00.000-07:00

If you've had trouble keeping up with all the shenanigans in Oakland this summer, V Smoothe offers a brief history of our "banner summer" - depressing stuff. Most of it you may be familiar with, but V's last link to the Trib editorial by Mayor Dellums new Public Safety Director Arnold Perkins just blew me away. I still cannot believe we sent all of our Council members back for another term in June.

Architecture + The City

2008-09-01T22:52:00.000-07:00

The fifth annual Architecture + The City Festival started on Friday and runs the whole month of September. All this month there are tours, lectures, exhibitions, and a film series. Although most of the events are focused on San Francisco, there is a tour of Margarido House in Oakland, which is slated for LEED-H platinum certification. And don't forget to mark your calenders for Park(ing) Day on Friday Septermber 19.

West Oakland Farms

2008-08-29T19:56:00.000-07:00

Just wanted to pass along this article from a few days ago in the Wall Street Journal regarding urban farming in West Oakland. There was not much in the article I didn't already know, but it's nice to see some positive news about Oakland in a national publication.

All Aboard

2008-08-28T23:07:00.000-07:00

Speaking of Amtrak, it appears the Democrats' VP candidate, Joe Biden, is a daily commuter and big supporter of our country's passenger rail system. Given rising gas prices and all the problems with the airline industry, it really makes sense for us to fund and promote passenger rail much more than we have the last few decades. Amtrak should be a sterling alternative to the airlines for trips under 500 miles, especially because, unlike most airports, trains take you directly into the center of the region.

I grew up in a small town about 20 miles north of Milwaukee, and I always say that, were I in Italy, I would have been able to take a train back home during college and my years in Milwaukee afterwards. And Italy is a much poorer country than the United States. When it comes to transport, we truly do live in a third world country.

As a bonus, better funding and promotion of passenger rail would help Oakland. San Francisco has no direct Amtrak service, it is only through shuttles from the East Bay that passengers can get there. So any increases in the service and performance of Amtrak would directly benefit Oakland, since for Amtrak, it is the center of the region.

Big Fun

2008-08-27T22:41:00.000-07:00

For those who like their food a little faster, this is the last weekend of the California State Fair. It's no big gig, but it is big fun. In addition to the animals, there are interesting garden displays, information on various counties in California, and, of course, beer, wine and every type of fast food imaginable.

If you go, I highly recommend taking Amtrak. The Capitol Corridor route takes you up along the San Francisco and San Pablo Bays before heading into the Central Valley to downtown Sacramento. It is a great way to see the back side of cities such as Oakland, Emeryville, Berkeley and Richmond, as well as some beautiful vistas of the bays and the wide open spaces in the interior of California.

After you get to Sacramento, a short walk through the downtown leads you to the Sacramento Regional Transit blue line train, where there are free shuttles from the Arden/Del Paso station. The trip takes a little longer by rail, but is far more interesting.

Of if you'd just as soon stick around Oakland this weekend, there is always Art & Soul.

Slow

2008-08-26T21:33:00.001-07:00

You've probably heard about the Slow Food Nation festival being held in San Francisco this weekend. But what you might not know about is the festival's design program, which has brought together many of the region's top architects to produce various pavillions. Unfortunately, there appears to be only one Oakland firm, envelope A+D, best known for the Mission restaurant Delfina and their winning scheme in the Octavia Boulevard competition for the San Francisco Prize a few years back.

The main complaint I have is that some of the firms are too established for this type of work. A small commission like this is the perfect opportunity for young firms to gain some work and experience, and it is too bad the likes of SMWM, BCV, and Roma Design Group are involved. And actually calling it a commission is incorrect, the architects and designers are working pro bono, which is perhaps why even the younger, smaller firms tapped are somewhat established; they are probably just using it as a marketing tool.

Still, it is hard to complain about good architecture, and all of the firms tapped are capable of producing it. It should be interesting to see. I am a bit concerned that many of the pavillions will be inaccessible, however, because it appears they have been sold out. I'll be checking into this tomorrow and let you know what I find out.

UPDATE: The taste pavillions have been sold out, and I was told there no access to those without tickets at any other times. Still, there is some work at the Civic Center that will be accessible the entire event. You can find a good run down of the architects and designers, and the focus and location of their work here.

Building Blog

2008-08-21T13:11:00.000-07:00

Do you like architectural conjecture? Urban speculation? Landscape futures?

Then you'll love BLDGBLOG. Approaching the physical world with a scientist's inquisitiveness, an architect's understanding of the built environment, an explorer's intrepidation, and most importantly, a child's wonder, Geoff Manaugh covers archeology and anthropology, geography and geology, theology and pathology, architecture and engineering, and landscape and urbanism, revealing the odd and the everyday with a creative, fresh perspective.

Manaugh relocated to San Francisco about a year ago to become a senior editor at Dwell magazine. How he finds time to do that and long, thoroughly researched posts almost daily, I may never know. But I see something cool or learn something interesting nearly everytime I have a look, which is often.

Care and Repair

2008-08-19T21:37:00.000-07:00

It seems that Chip Johnson reads V Smoothe; we know the reverse is true. And while I agree with the general thrust of their arguments, it is important to note the research on the relationship between crime and economics is inconclusive, perhaps leaning slightly toward some sort of relationship, though of course it depends on how and what you measure.

Now it's true that Dellums words in this situation were, at best, tone deaf:

"The desperation of these crimes speaks to the broader issue of where we are in terms of this economy. When people become this desperate, they take desperate acts and we have to do everything we can to get to the root causes of crime and violence."

But it's not as if Johnson's source in the article, Frank Zimring, a professor at UC-Berkeley, smacks him down:

"I would be enormously doubtful if that were the case. Robbery is a dreadful way of making money and suggests things that are clearly not cyclical to employment opportunities."

Robbery is a dreadful way of making money, if you are a professor at UC-Berkeley. If, on the other hand, you have few job skills and are surrounded by lots of disorder, well, maybe not so much. Sure the pay is low and the working conditions are difficult, but the hours are pretty good.

And while Zimring cites national crime statistics as not corresponding to the economy, we aren't talking about national crime, we are talking about crime in Oakland. Frankly, I don't care about crime in Kalamazoo. I would think a professor at UC-Berkeley could get his hands on some crime data from Oakland and compare it to economic data in Oakland.

To me, intuitively, it makes sense that crime increases during a recession. Zimring also says, "robbery makes no economic sense, but there is an emotional and recreational reward of dominating people. It's about power." And while the later is likely true, the former is simply silly.

The proper way to think about this, I think, is that right now, in Oakland, the costs of robbery are low relative to the benefits - there are not enough police and the likelihood of getting caught and punished is small, and in addition to getting cash and other fabulous prizes, you get the respect of your peers and the sympathy of the mayor.

This calculus must be changed. But the problem, as I see it and have said before, is that Dellums simply doesn't get cities. He thinks the same sorts of policies that might work at a state and national level will work at the level of a city, and he is wrong. Cities are not just governmental units that are smaller than counties, states, and nations, they are distinctly different. Cities are, much more so than even counties, physical objects, and as such they require care and repair. And because of the way we've organized metropolitan governance in our country, they are also in direct competition with nearby cities. And so, for example, many of the benefits of any jobs created in Oakland would accrue to nearby cities like Alameda, Berkeley, or San Leandro.

Now some of the ways you care for and repair a city is by keeping your streets and parks clean, your infrastructure in good working condition, and by having responsible adults like the police (and, though they freak me out too, the Guardian Angels) around regularly.

And thus you change the calculus. The costs of crime increase, and if you have a mayor that understands that cities are physical objects in addition to collections of people, and demands people treat the city with respect, the benefits will decrease. Behavior once considered acceptable will become less so.

Now mostly this will push the problem into another city. But unfortunately, that is the best a mayor can do. If I could change the way our metro governments are set up I would - heck I'd prefer something closer to city-states, or more precisely, region-states. Certainly I'd like there to be less income inequality, more education and skills training, and more affordable housing options. And I think government can and should play a role in all these goals, and it is currently failing us big time. But if you want to address them go to Sacramento or Washington. Cities need the attitude of an artisan and the embodied knowledge of a craftsman. Cities such as Oakland, need care and repair.

Celebrity and Anonymity

2008-08-19T12:42:00.000-07:00

This is interesting. I wonder how many folks around here know that the Beijing National Stadium, better known as the Bird's Nest, was designed by the same architects as the de Young Museum in San Francisco's Golden Gate Park.

I admit to having a somewhat conflicted view on the topic. On the one hand, it would be good to acknowledge architects more (the better to praise or skewer them), but it also contributes to the celebrity culture in general, and the individual as hero ethic that permeates architecture. And while there is definitely something to starchitecture, I wonder how much of it is the reverberation of the echo chamber that architects often find themselves in.

The reality is that architecture is built by many people, from design architects to drafters, as well as engineers, government officials, and builders. But still, it is architects who develop the artistic vision. My compromise is that the name of the firm be used, such that, for the Bird's Nest Jacque Herzog & Pierre de Meuron get credited using the name of their firm, Herzog & de Meuron Architekten. Whereas, for Cathedral of Christ the Light on Lake Merritt (opening in about a month), the design would be credited to SOM, rather than Craig Hartman (looking there like a character in Mad Men), who is a design partner, and often credited individually for designs from their San Francisco office.

Thus, anonymity is the price you pay for working for a large, three-letter firm, or choosing an obsure, arty name for your own.

Walk Oakland

2008-08-17T22:21:00.000-07:00

On Friday, Brooklyn Avenue posted about the public staircases and pedestrian walkways in Oakland. I second the recomendation, at the bottom, of the Walk Oakland! map. When I moved to Oakland nearly three years ago now, I stopped in at Bibliomania on Telegraph & 18th, and walked out with my very own free copy of Walk Oakland!, courtesy of owner Jean Van Fleet.

For those interested, I highly recommend the tour put on by the Oakland Heritage Alliance called "Oakland Walkway and Streetcar Heritage" led by Jason Patton, who created the Walk Oakland! map. From downtown, you take an AC transit bus along an old streetcar route up to the Glenview neighborhood. You then take public staircases, sidewalks, and walkways through Trestle Glen and down to Grand Lake, where the tour ends. I went two years ago, and it is scheduled this year for Saturday, September 28.

In fact, I recommend all the walking tours put on each summer by OHA, now in their 28th year. I've been on 4 now and all were wonderful. A couple of weeks ago, I learned about Eichlers in Oakland from Michael Crowe, and last summer I toured Temescal with Ray Rainieri and Philbrick's Boatworks with owner Russ Donovon (coming up this Saturday). There are still 10 tours left this year, so have a look, and get walking.

Finally, consider joining OHA. Membership starts at only $20-$40, and gets you a newsletter and discounts on events and tours, in addition to supporting the preservation of Oakland's heritage.

Fair Ball

2008-08-15T22:32:00.000-07:00

Crimson was right a few weeks ago regarding the taxpayer financing of sports stadiums, but I've got to take issue with a couple of points made. Stadiums don't "require massive parking lots" and the "challenge of dealing with 60,000 sports fans in one place at a time" is something that dense urban environments deal with particularly well, especially if they are designed to do so. For more on that topic, I point you to a slim volume called City Baseball Magic by Chicago architect Phillip Bess. It's a quick read, but fans of places like Wrigley Field, Fenway Park, Camden Yards, and Pacific Park (my term, I can't keep track of the name changes) as well as those who simply love cities, will really enjoy it. A shorter article on the topic by Bess appears here.

Unlike Crimson, I happen to think Jerry Brown's lack of support for a downtown A's ballpark was one of the biggest mistakes he made as Hizzoner. But the return of Robert Bobb has me a bit more optimistic than V Smoothe, but only a bit. After all, Bobb is here to fix our city finances, not keep the A's in town. But maybe because Dellums is so inept as mayor AND quite simply doesn't get cities, Bobb can reposition himself atop the Oakland power structure. Though the basic problem is that Lew Wolff doesn't want a ballpark, he wants a real estate development. And after the Forest City Uptown boondogle (hurts my eyes just thinking about it), there just aren't many sites in downtown Oakland for a large real estate development. Nor would you want it.

The benefit of having a ballpark downtown is in the spillover effects to the surrounding area. But this requires numerous property owners, with, you know, like markets and competition and stuff. Give one entity control of the whole thing and you get Fruitvale Village, Bay Street, or... well, Uptown.

I still love the triangle-shaped site at 27th & Broadway proposed by Marine Layer a while back. The site is just a little too small, which of course makes it perfect, and it is close to BART, but not too close. If only Wolff wanted to be a baseball team owner with a cool urban stadium, rather than a crummy suburban real estate developer.

UPDATE: Marine Layer found the images of the proposal for 27th & Broadway, so retry that link above.

Chillin'

2008-08-15T08:25:00.000-07:00

This is the last weekend to check out Birth of the Cool at the Oakland Museum of California. Fans of mid-century modernism will recognize many of the objects and photographs, but it is well worth a visit to see the more obscure furniture and images of the period, as well as abstract paintings and graphic design.

If you go, plan on extra time to wander around the museum, truly one of Oakland's architectural treausures. Designed by Kevin Roche and John Dinkeloo, it features tiered rooftop terraces holding gardens, pools, and sculpture. It doesn't get the attention it deserves, in part because it is an experiential building rather than an iconic one that wows you from the street. But it anticipated current trends such as green roofs and buildings-as-landscape by decades. In fact, Kevin Roche won architecture's top honor, the Pritzker Prize in 1982.

The OMCA is in the process of a renovation and expansion by local architect Mark Cavagnero and has been trying attract the hip kids of late, by staying open during Art Murmur and bringing on new staff. The changes seem headed in the right direction. But now their website could use some work, though their transformation/capital campaign page looks promising.

Colby Park

2008-08-12T20:16:00.000-07:00

Tucked between Telegraph and Claremont Avenues on 61st Street is one of my favorite places in Oakland - Colby Park. Here 61st Street opens up for half a block to a provide an oblong shaped court with grass, trees, and shrubs. Colby Park is remarkably small - looking at a satellite view, you barely realize it is there. Its presence, however, is far larger than the space it inhabits. Having grown up on a 1950's version of a court park (in a neighborhood full of them), I can attest to how big an impact a small park such as this can make. It becomes a neighborhood gathering place, especially for kids. But it also serves as a place to get away from the house. The grove of trees at the eastern edge of Colby Park provide just enough privacy to be able to while away an hour with a nap or a good book.

Apparently, there has been some dispute of late regarding communal toys left in the park. I have some thoughts, but I'll keep them to myself for now, and just encourage you to walk by, if you find yourself in the neighborhood.