Category: Cedar Rapids (page 4 of 9)

Support Brian Fagan for One Great Cedar Rapids

Tomorrow citizens of Cedar Rapids will choose our next mayor and three council seats. I am supporting Brian Fagan for mayor, because he has the leadership, understanding, and passion Cedar Rapids needs.

Brian has exhibited strong leadership as an at-large council member the past four years. He stepped up during the flood, taking charge as the voice for Cedar Rapids, and has represented our city positively and professionally to visitors, national media, and dignitaries. As exhibited in his positive, articulate campaign, he stands by his decisions and has results to back them up.

Brian Fagan is the only candidate who has demonstrated to me a real understanding of the complexities at hand with the flood recovery and current city operations. This should be expected as he’s the only candidate currently on the council who has been involved with the city’s post-flood operations and decisions for moving forward. He understands the importance of quality of life (arts, culture, recreation, etc.) to job growth and retention. Brian has given a sensible, honest response to every contested issue brought to him by citizens and his opponents Ron Corbett and P.T. Larson.

One major issue of contention has been the city’s substantial use of “out-of-town consultants” since the flood. The firms with the largest pay out from the city have been New York-based Adjusters International, and Watertown, MA-based Sasaki Associates. (Gazette 9/20/09) Additionally, locally-based OPN Architects is now playing a major role in future city facilities planning.

Adjusters International was hired to assist the city with maximizing financial recovery from insurance claims and FEMA grants. So far an additional $75 million has been secured for rebuilding of city facilities. Sasaki Associates was actually hired one month before the flood to design a riverfront redevelopment plan for the city. Their task quickly changed to developing a redevelopment and reinvestment plan for flood-ravished areas, through an extensive public participation process. We now have a comprehensive action plan for redevelopment and community improvements over the next ten to fifteen years.

Finally Cedar Rapids, more than ever before, needs a leader who loves this city – one who’s engaged in its history and passionate for its future. Brian Fagan is that candidate. He is forward-thinking, enthusiastic, and “committed to building one great Cedar Rapids.” Please support Brian Fagan for mayor on November 3, for the future of Cedar Rapids.

Better Transit for Cedar Rapids

The second CR Transit Study open house was held on Tuesday, October 20. The study is being conducted by SRF Consulting Group and Bourne Transit Consulting to analyze the current system and propose route changes to improve service. Various route options were presented at this week’s open house. The consultant’s final recommendations will be presented at a third and final open house on November 24.

During the summer I took a stab at my own hypothetical plan for improving the CR Transit system, developing a nearly complete system of modified and new routes. While my plan was much more idealistic and simply based on my own general knowledge and assumptions of transit operations and Cedar Rapids, I ended up not completing it. My original intent was to create a new route system with multiple transfer hubs – downtown, Lindale, Westdale, and the AEGON area at Blairs Ferry and Edgewood Road NE. My incomplete proposal is seen below. Click the image for an interactive Google map.

Laying out the routes proved more difficult than I figured, because I attempted to maintain similar route distances between hubs so buses could realistically be scheduled to meet at the same time. Using the distance and schedule of CyRide’s main fixed routes (Red, Green, Blue, Brown) as a rule of thumb, I tried to keep each route at around 7.5 – 8.5 miles (in each direction) to correlate to about 35-40 minute of travel. I was also hesitant to remove much existing physical service, even though a big issue with the current system is routes that loop throughout residential streets simply to increase the physical transit coverage without adding addition routes, but at the expense of directness and travel time.

A route hierarchy system was something I tried initially, with a system of four to five high frequency cross-town routes between major hubs, complemented by shorter, less frequent “normal” routes. This was based on Metro Transit’s High-Frequency Network in Minneapolis, with twelve major crosstown routes that operate buses every 15 minutes or less throughout the day. I quickly discovered a hierarchical system would not really work in Cedar Rapids because of its relative compactness (compared to MSP) and low ridership. However, a higher frequency could make sense along certain corridors, such as First Avenue between downtown and Lindale, which is a consistently busy route section already.

Proposed Route Modifications
It was interesting to look at the consultant’s proposed route change options and see how they compared with my own ideas. Generally I agree with most of the proposals and think they will help the system function more smoothly and provide more opportunities for alternative transfer points and route connectivity later on. Each route was provided a minimal modification scenario and a moderate modification. I won’t go through all of them since I wasn’t actually at the open house, and Samantha Dahlby has already written an extensive review on several of the route modifications on her Bus Party blog. However, I would like to comment on Route 3 and the 5’s.

Above is the minimal and “moderate” route modification proposed for Route 3 that was presented at the open house this week. The green represents unchanged sections of the route, red is removed sections, and blue is for new sections. As you can see, the minimal modification is just that, only removing a few small loop sections, but the route stays essentially the same. These minor changes would reduce overall route distance slightly, allowing the bus to run a full trip within 60 minutes without having to fight the schedule. Next, the “moderate” modification is actually quite extreme – it removes the route all together. The justification is low ridership and that a few other routes serve the area close by, including 4, 6 and 5B. Personally I have issues with this because it is the route I’ve used the past three summers to get to work, because it runs right behind my house. The Route 5’s, which run along First Avenue East, is about a five blocks away, which isn’t bad, but it certainly wouldn’t be as convenient. Luckily, I don’t foresee this option being implemented, but we probably won’t be seeing any service frequency increases on Route 3 anytime soon.

Route 5 is currently made up of three separate routes: 5B, 5N, 5S. All three run along First Avenue East from downtown to Lindale Mall, which from there they split into three different routes. 5B serves northern Cedar Rapids and Hiawatha via Blairs Ferry and Boyson roads. 5N (5 North) continues into Marion and loops around the northern half of the city. 5S (5 South) runs through the southern half of Marion. One of the 5 buses departs downtown every 30 minutes, providing half-hour service along First Avenue between downtown and Lindale during all hours of service. But each individual bus only actually runs every 90 minutes, so beyond Lindale Mall, the 5’s only ever run at that frequency.

All of the consultant’s proposed modifications to the route 5’s are past Lindale. I don’t have much to comment on the changes specifically, but ultimately I think the areas served by the 5’s, particularly Marion, would be better served by making the segments beyond Lindale separate routes with individual identification. In my proposal, I had a route running along First Avenue between downtown and Lindale, then connecting routes would run into Marion and north Cedar Rapids. Since the heaviest ridership on the 5’s is along First Avenue between downtown and Lindale, it might be feasible to have a shorter route with an even higher frequency than the current 30 minute headway. Then Marion could be served by either one or two looping routes, providing more frequent (likely 30 minute) service within Marion, with connection to routes at Lindale to go toward downtown Cedar Rapids or elsewhere in the northern area of the metro. Separating the three 5 routes individual would also help avoid the confusion of having three separate routes all numbered 5.

Information and Marketing
Additionally, better information and marketing would help make the system easier to understand and potentially more attractive to “choice riders” – those riders who are not dependent on transit as their primary means of getting around. It is important to make transit information readily available in a variety of mediums: on board, in bus shelters, and online. The only information currently provided consists of individual route maps and schedules, displayed in the temporary waiting room trailer at Lot 44, in pamphlets on board buses, and on the CR Transit website. There is now a comprehensive system map available on the Corridor MPO website, but it is not available directly from the transit website, nor is it available to those without internet access. Graphically it is not very professional or legible. A professionally designed system map needs to be made to improve legibility, as well as public image of the system.

Service stops along bus routes are currently marked with generic bus stop signs that denote which route or routes serve that particular stop. Several stops around town have bus shelters, but they do not display any addition transit information than a stop with only a sign. These shelters would be a good opportunity to improve convenience / user-friendliness by displaying a system map and schedule information for the route or routes that service the particular stop.

Another information improvement would be to standardize and rename bus routes. Instead of just being numbered, each route name should also include the major destinations or endpoint of each route. It might also be helpful to specify the direction of a bus along a particular route when applicable. Another strategy to make routes more identifiable and easy to remember is to assign a particular color to each route. For example, CyRide identifies each route by number, color, direction, and endpoint destination, such as #1 Red East / Mall via Hospital. Since Cedar Rapids has 12 – 14 routes (depending on how you count the 5’s), that may be too many to effectively distinguish each route by color, but including major destinations and endpoint in route titles would be useful. Especially now that CR Transit has four new Gillig buses with programmable LED destination signs, with more coming, they need to be utilized. Right now they only display the route number, providing no information on where it is going or what you connect to from it. (There are a few exceptions – some of the old RTS buses have roller signs with some detail such as “Route 1 – Ellis.”)

Another key part of improving transit and attracting more riders, is to promote the system through branding and better marketing. I don’t mean advertising, but some simple steps to increase visibility and making the system more attractive and user-friendly. A new website, perhaps even with its own URL ( www.CRtransit.com instead of www.cedar-rapids.org/transit maybe?), with useful, easy-to-navigate schedules, detailed maps, and information on transferring between routes would be a helpful resource. Getting on Facebook and Twitter, too, could increase visibility even more, and be used to provide instant service information to riders. These would be relatively inexpensive, yet critical, ways to make transit more accessible and attractive to choice riders – those who are not dependent on transit. Additionally it would finally provide those dependent on the bus system the most basic of transit information.

Like all across the country, more people in Cedar Rapids are looking to transit for an alternative to driving everywhere. Environmental concerns, a renewed interest in urban living, and most importantly, rising gas prices have created a renewed interest in transit and demand for more service all across the country. The Cedar Rapids Transit system has been lacking for years and is long overdue for improvements so it can be a more viable, efficient means of transportation. Now is the right time for us to be planning and implementing initial transit changes, just as we are planning for an even better Cedar Rapids as we rebuild following the flood. The increased public interest, particularly among younger, potential choice riders makes me optimistic for the future of transit in Cedar Rapids. The third and final transit open house will be held November 24, where final recommendations for route changes will be presented.

> CR Transit Study Open House 1 – System Analysis (9/22/09)
> CR Transit Study Open House 2 – Proposed Route Modifications (10/20/09)

The Value of a Friendly Bus Driver

Fellow Cedar Rapids Transit advocate, Samantha Dahlby wrote on her Bus Party blog about her appreciation for the friendly and helpful bus drivers. I would agree that an overwhelming majority of CR Transit drivers are friendly, but with both a driver’s and passenger’s perspective, I often find myself either critiquing drivers or considering ways to improve my own passenger relations.

At CyRide, providing value-added service to customers is number three of four core principles, just behind 1. safety, and 2. waving to other drivers. : ) I delight in providing friendly service to passengers and honestly consider it one the perks of my job. As a university student, interacting with so many different members of the community while driving a bus has really given me a sense of connection with the Ames community that a majority of students may not experience.

Samantha is a member of the Corridor Metro Planning Organization and organizes monthly “bus parties” to encourage those unfamiliar with the Cedar Rapids transit system to try it out. Increasing awareness is an important step among many to start improving transit in Cedar Rapids, which is currently lacking for a city of its size. Check out the Bus Party blog for more information and to read some commentary and ideas from another local transit advocate.

This is probably also a good time to once again plug the Corridor MPO’s CR Transit survey. Feedback will assist the consultants currently studying short term transit improvements and changes. The first of three open houses for the study will be held this Tuesday, Sept. 22, from 6pm – 7:30, at the Crowne Plaza Ballroom. Unfortunately I won’t be able to attend, but look forward to seeing what changes the consultants propose.

> Cedar Rapids Bus Party
> Cedar Rapids Transit Survey
> Corridor MPO

CR Transit Survey

The Corridor MPO has posted an online survey to provide initial feedback for the CR Transit study currently underway by SRF Consulting Group and Bourne Transit Consulting. If you are interested in seeing transit improvements in the Cedar Rapids area, please take a moment to take the survey.

> CR Transit Survey

CR Open House #2

The second of three open houses will be held this week to gather public input on the future of flooded city facilities and master planning for Parks & Recreation. This open house will be divided into two different times to be more convenient for more citizens to participate. Both at the Crowne Plaza ballroom, the first will be tomorrow, Tuesday, August 18, from 4p – 7pm, and the second will be on Wednesday from 11:30am – 1:30pm.

For more info visit Corridor Recovery.

Meeting for CR Transit Improvements

This afternoon I attended an Impact CR meeting with Joseph Kern of SRF Consulting Group, one of the transit consultants hired by the Corridor MPO to study route and schedule improvements for CR Transit. SRF and Bourne Transit Consulting have teamed up to do the study that is to be completed in November.

Today’s meeting, with about 10-15 in attendance, was for the consultant and planning staff to get an impression of what the young professional demographic hopes to see improved with the system. Pretty much all my ideas and concerns were raised during the meeting. It seemed to come down to a balance between routes serving greater area (heavy focus of the current routes) versus more direct routes that result in quicker service. Also, pretty much everyone agreed on prioritizing improvements that would help dependent over features to attract new choice riders. However, I hope we do not settle too easily for a dependent-majority ridership. More choice riders means more riders overall, and therefor potentially better service for everyone. I am not transit-dependent, but I’d like to be able to take transit for a variety of trips in town without sacrificing a lot of time or convenience. It should be noted that I was one of only two people there who regularly take the bus here.

It sounds like the proposed routing changes will be relatively minor, but a good first step as CR slowly becomes more transit friendly. As Joseph Kern commented, if you can focus on improving service and amenities along a few specific, busy corridors, then that can help build more support and demand for further system changes. But of course, every system and city is a little bit different. Providing clear and ample information and marketing is certainly an important part of those changes.

For a few weeks now I’ve been working on my own CR Transit overhaul proposals – mostly for fun. My approach was more to start completely from scratch, but I soon realized that most of the current routes probably do work pretty well, it’s just a matter of adjusting them to interact better. After today’s meeting I have decided not to continue this effort as there really is no point to, and I’ve struggled to finish the remaining routes – particularly on the west side of town and in Marion. This route proposal was never intended to be scientific or taken literally, but more to represent bigger concepts to improve the system. Concepts such as adding transfer points besides downtown, implementing some crosstown routes, and increasing service frequencies on more heavily-used corridors, such as First Avenue between downtown and Lindale. Generally these ideas were all represented in today’s meeting so I’m sure some additional transfer points and better route syncing will be in the consultant’s final recommendations.

It’s clear any route and service improvements in the near future are not going to be drastic. Something that can be done more immediately, I believe, is better information and marketing. Availability and clarity of information was an expressed concern by many today. County Supervisor Ben Rogers claimed if his car broke down someday, he wouldn’t know how to get to work and back on the bus. I’m sure he could figure it out, but it’s no exaggeration that transit information is provided very minimally and poorly. Better marketing (knowledge of the system and service it provides) and a variety of information tools would benefit both dependent and choice riders.

You can view my incomplete CR Transit route proposal here. Note new transfer hubs at: downtown intermodal facility, Lindale Mall, Westdale Mall, corner of Edgewood and Blairs Ferry, and at Boyson Road and C Ave NE. I still intend to finish writing an extensive post about specific concepts and information tools I think could be implemented to provide better service for dependent riders and attract new choice riders as well. This will come sometime next week, as I’m going to DC tomorrow for a week, where I’ll be getting around predominantly by transit.

New Gilligs Now in Service

Two of CR Transit’s four new 35 ft. Gillig Lowfloor buses began their service life today on routes 1 and 2, in units 2092 and 2093, respectively. They were all supposed to be ready to go by today, but in the words of my afternoon bus driver, “you know how these things go…” These are the first brand new buses for Cedar Rapids in 15 years or so. Today is a good day for the future of CR Transit. Additional Gillig buses will be purchased over the next few years to further modernize the fleet.

Additional CR Transit bus photos on Flickr.

Mays Island no longer suitable for City Hall

A little over a week ago I had the opportunity to talk with a local architect about the flood recovery in Cedar Rapids and particularly the future of city buildings and downtown. As the City is working to decide what to do with its flooded facilities – essentially whether to return to former buildings or locate elsewhere – there are many issues that need to be considered. It is important city leaders and citizens do not jump to conclusions or base their decisions on short-term concerns alone. After having this discussion, I came to realize a lot that I hadn’t considered when forming my opinion about what to do with the Veterans Memorial Building, better known as City Hall.

The rebuilding of city and community facilities, businesses, and housing must be done in a way that will make Cedar Rapids a better, more resilient and sustainable community for the long range future. Despite the destruction and hardship for so many here, the flood has really presented Cedar Rapids with an incredible opportunity to rebuild better than ever, as to ensure the city’s well-being for generations to come.

In recent months I’ve been an advocate for returning City Hall to the Veterans Memorial Building. I argued this position in a few posts (here and here) on this blog and even wrote a letter to the editor (read here) that was published in the Gazette on the flood’s first year anniversary date back in June. I have a great deal of interest in this building after working there during the previous three summers with the building’s maintenance crew. I got to know the building well – and the veterans who are so adamant about it. I was one of the first and few people to go inside after the flood and spent a lot of time around there during the cleanup that ensued. My desire to see city offices return was mostly based on my concern for the urban context of the island and what I perceived as environmental and cultural sustainability. However, after discussing with this architect, I have changed my mind and think it’s important to explain why.

To argue that the current Veterans Memorial Building, even pre-flood, could provide ample and functionally efficient space for city offices, which I did, is admittedly short-sighted – especially when considering the constant risk of future flooding. This is not a matter of comfort or convenience for city administrators, but a critical matter of long-term viability of this building functioning as city hall. There are a lot of constraints with the building, especially post-flood, so it probably couldn’t be suitable for city offices much longer in to the future, if at all.

Firstly, FEMA prohibits any functions to return to the basement, mezzanine, or first floor, whenever the building is finally repaired. Limiting the refinishing and future use of the basement and mezz is understandable, but not being able to use the first floor is a significant issue – not only with more limits on usable space, but also accessibility. I’m not sure what the specific restrictions would be for the first floor, but obviously there would need to be finished entrances and circulation space to access upper floors. This unusual situation of occupied upper floors with vacant street levels would not only be awkward, but create even more way-finding and circulation issues than what existed even before the flood.

Additionally, regardless of future use, mechanical and electrical equipment will need to be relocated to the second floor, taking away even more available office space. The building’s historical status adds another layer of functional limitations, by restricting extensive interior space alterations, so City Hall would have to make-do with whatever types of space arrangements currently exist.

And lastly, something I really hadn’t considered enough before – in the event of another significant flood, the future levee / flood wall system would only intensify the risk to Mays Island, which will have no added protection. This is certainly not where we want our city government in another such event – we learned this the hard way already. Even in more minor future floods, the island would likely be inaccessible, walled off by the removable flood wall sections put into place downtown. Considering this on top of all the other functional setbacks, returning City Hall to the Veterans Memorial Building simply would not be the best long term option for the city.

Right now Cedar Rapids has the incredible opportunity to invest in new and improved facilities that can serve the city for the next 100 years, as Veterans Memorial and other buildings have done so over the course of the last century. Instead of dwelling on the immediate monetary costs, we need to be thinking about how long our chosen facilities will last – physically, functionally, environmentally, and economically. If we pass up the opportunity we have at hand, giving in to the “no frills, no thrills” banter, it will be much more difficult to build new facilities in the future when needed. City and government budgets are getting tighter and tighter, so available funds for these types of projects are likely to be even more scarce in the future. Planning for facilities that will function well and sustain for the next century is in the best interest of Cedar Rapids.

Now, if Cedar Rapids does build a new city hall and other community facilities (which seems likely), we must build them to last and not go with the cheapest, plainest designs. It is important for us to be proud of our new public buildings, something that’s not possible through fiscal frugality alone. Considering the amount of detail, care, and pride that went into our civic architecture of the past, don’t we owe it to ourselves and to future Cedar Rapidians to carry on this important tradition?

Below is a wonderful photograph I found on Flickr from user derAmialtebloede, of the Mays Island extension underway in 1926 in preparation for construction of the Veterans Memorial Building. What an incredible undertaking this must have been – Cedar Rapids certainly didn’t skip any stops on its last City Hall. (Click photo to view larger size. Take note of the old Smulekoffs building in the middle of the island, as well as the current US Bank Building under construction in the background in downtown.)

Good Noise for Downtown

The sound of piles being driven into the ground resonated through downtown this afternoon from the site of the new federal courthouse that is finally under construction after years of numerous delays. As other federal buildings had jumped ahead in priority over the years, last year’s flood put Cedar Rapids’ back on top. The new courthouse will be an incredible addition to the downtown skyline at a scale not seen for decades. The most recent significant addition to downtown was the Great America Building in 1998, just a block away from the new courthouse.

CR Library picks new director from Castle Rock, CO

The Cedar Rapids library board has chosen Robert Pasicznyuk for the director position of the Cedar Rapids Public Library. Pasicznyuk is currently the associate director at Douglas County Libraries in Castle Rock, CO. His expertise and experience will be instrumental in the rebuilding and recovery of the Cedar Rapids library. According to the Gazette, “At Douglas County Libraries, Pasicznyuk spearheaded a transition to self-service checkout stations and automated returns, which helped the library keep pace during tremendous growth. Activity there has nearly doubled in the past four years, and circulation now runs around 8 million items per year.”

Douglas County LibrariesCastle Rock happens to be where my brother and his family now reside so I have actually been to Douglas County’s Philip S. Miller Library location in Castle Rock. Interesting it is actually in a retrofitted former grocery store. This is noteworthy since some in the community have argued for relocating the library and other city facilities into former big box stores (such as Econofoods, Big Lots) or in Westdale Mall. The Castle Rock facility was done very well and besides the low-rise profile, it is hard to tell it was once a store. However the difference between these two CR’s, is that the Castle Rock library is located right next to the town’s traditional downtown, whereas none of the locations suggested in Cedar Rapids are anywhere near walkable or centralized. Also the urban layouts of the once, small mountain town and the industrial midwestern city of Cedar Rapids, are fundamentally different. Pasicznyuk is certainly smart enough to understand this and I look forward to his direction of the library’s future recovery and expansion.

Older posts Newer posts

© 2022 URBAN THINKING

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑