Page 11 of 22

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.)

New Arch program at SDSU

Starting in fall 2010, South Dakota State University will begin offering a professional architectural degree program. Currently South Dakota is one of only a few states with no architecture degree program. The new program comes after two years of study by the university’s Architectural Feasibility Task Force, which was made up in part by architectural professionals from around the state. South Dakota firms have had trouble attracting younger architects without an in-state academic program. Additionally since South Dakota residents must go out of state for architecture, they face higher out-of-state tuition costs as well.

The new program, which will be apart of the College of Arts and Sciences, will include a four year Bachelor’s degree in architectural studies, and a six year Master’s of Architecture degree. Around 60 students are expected to enroll in prerequisite courses for fall 2010 semester, with about 30 to be admitted into the program the following year. Iowa State University typically admits 68 students each year, and North Dakota State has admitted 72 in recent years, so SDSU’s program will start out quite a bit smaller.

SDSU’s program structure follows a growing trend of providing a four year non-accredited B.S. or B.A. degrees in architectural studies, followed by a one or two year accredited Master of Architecture professional degree program. Iowa State currently offers a five year Bachelor of Architecture professional degree and a variety of Masters options. NDSU transitioned in 2005, from a five year Bachelors, to a five year Master of Architecture program that includes a pre-professional B.S. in Environmental Design degree after the fourth year.

It will be interesting to watch SDSU’s program develop over the next few years and see it’s affect on surrounding university’s programs.

> South Dakota State University: Regents approve first accredited architecture program

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.

Constructing the Interlock House

I was in Ames this past weekend where my friend Eric Berkson, IT Coordinator for the Iowa State Solar Decathlon team, gave me a tour of their solar powered house under construction. Called the Interlock House, it utilizes a NanaWall system on the south facade to create a versatile sunspace that can be closed as a solar-collecting greenhouse in winter, a recessed exterior porch for summer, or completely open for cross-ventilation. It is a very cool system. The 2009 Solar Decathlon competition will be held October 9 – 18, on the National Mall in Washington, DC, where the Interlock House and 19 other competing solar houses will be reconstructed and open to the public. The Interlock House website includes an interesting photo blog, which I borrowed the following photo from.

Iowa State's Interlock House for 2009 Solar Decathlon competition

> ISU Solar Decathlon 2009: Blog

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.

Biking Distance is Relative

I took a leisurely bike ride – about 20 or so blocks – to Noelridge Park tonight. I have never really considered Noelridge to be close to my house growing up and certainly wouldn’t call it a park serving my neighborhood, but the way there was pleasant and did not take long at all. It just goes to show that having a connecting grid of residential streets and more bike-friendly thoroughfares makes everything seem much closer together and accessible on a bike. Think of all the little trips that, by default, we just drive to when we could bike (or walk if close enough) to instead without taking a lot of additional time. Of course, it’s all relative to the type of street environment and how contiguous neighborhoods are. Recreational cycling is a good way to discover biking can also be a legitimate means of getting around.

Why CR Transit Needs System Overhaul

I started a summer job last week, only a little late in the season, at the Facilities office at Kirkwood Community College in SW Cedar Rapids. Living on the opposite side of town, I elected to ride to bus to and from work, through a combination of choice and necessity. I never had my own car in high school and have, so far not found the need, desire, or financial surplus to purchase my own during the past four years of college. I have also become quite an advocate of public transit over the past few years, and admittedly a little bit anti-car.

Living on the northeast side of town, my commute requires transferring routes downtown at the long-term temporary transfer site, Lot 44, at 12th Ave and 2nd Street SE. Before last year’s flood that claimed eight transit buses and extensive damage to the city bus garage, route departure times were at consistent intervals, and service headways were pretty much the same for every route. Generally all routes had half hour service during the moring and late afternoons, with hourly service during the midday and Saturdays. The only anomaly was the Route5’s (5N, 5S, 5B) which all run along 1st Avenue to Lindale Mall, then diverging along three different routes – serving north Marion, south Marion, and Hiawatha respectively. A 5 bus would depart downtown ever 30 minutes, but each individual route (5N, 5S, or 5B) would actually only leave every hour and a half.

When transit service resumed after the flood, there was limited service – I believe all routes started with hourly service during the day – I imagine due to a combination of lost busses, new flood-related expense circumstances, as well as assumed temporary decreased demand. Since then some routes have increased service to 30 minute headways in the morning and afternoon, but not all routes, including Route 3, the one that I can conveniently catch right behind my house in NE Cedar Rapids and ride downtown in about fifteen minutes.

The way the bus routes are laid out in a “spoke and wheel” fashion, makes it generally easy and convenient to commute to and from downtown if you’re near a route, but mobility between different areas of town – especially if they are on the same side (east or west) of the river/downtown – is much more difficult. Every single route originates in downtown and extends outward, like spokes in a wheel. Some routes occasionally cross each other but there is no systematic coordination for transfers between any routes outside of downtown. It is probably possible in some cases (I haven’t studied the schedules close enough), but it would be up to the passenger to investigate ahead of time on their own.

In my case, I’m traveling from the NE side of town to the SW, so transferring routes in downtown is convenient and efficient. But I still have problems with differing service frequency among routes and the fact that it takes me 50 minutes to ride to work. My “home” bus stop is along Route 3 at Lindale Ave and Tiffany Drive NE. Route 3 continues to operate “hourly” (70 minutes in the afternoon) all day, since service reductions after the flood. To get to Kirkwood I take Route 7 from downtown. 7 has resumed half-hour “peak” service in the morning and afternoon. My general working hours are pretty standard, 8am – 5pm with an hour break for lunch. The times hourly Route 3 meets up with half-hourly Route 7 to transfer do not work very well with my given schedule.

Route 3
At Lindale Ave
Route 3
Arrive Lot 44
Route 7
Depart Lot 44
Route 7
Arrive Kwood
6:25am 6:40am 6:50am 7:15a
– – – – – – 7:20am 7:45a
7:25am 7:40am 7:50am 8:15a
– – – – – – 8:20am 8:45a
8:25am 8:40am 8:50am 9:15am
Route 7
Depart Kwood
Route 7
Arrive Lot 44
Route 3
Depart Lot 44
Route 3
At Lindale Ave
4:15pm 4:40pm – – – – – –
4:50pm 5:18pm 5:30pm 5:45pm
5:15pm 5:40pm – – – – – –
6:00pm 6:28pm 6:40pm 6:53pm

As you can see I am pretty limited to certain times I can go to work and what times I can leave. Fortunately my workplace is pretty flexible so I just come in early at 7:15 (taking the 6:25 number 3 bus), but I still must stay there longer than an eight hour day in order to take the 4:50 Route 7 bus in the afternoon that will connect me to Route 3 in a timely fashion. Additionally, taking 50 minutes to travel a mere 10 miles or so is also not very convenient for me. In the current route structure, many routes loop around and a number of different streets in effort to cover the most physical area in a single route. This makes getting to your actual destination very time consuming and extremely inefficient. Bus routes that serve major destinations such as Kirkwood or large employers like Aegon and Rockwell Collins need to have more direct routes.

I’ve come up with four main criteria to evaluate the CR transit system:

   1. Can I get to my destination on the bus routes?
   2. Can I do so at a time that works with my schedule?
   3. Can I travel by bus in a timely manner?
   4. Is the bus comfortable and attractive?

In my case, the answer to criteria one would be yes. I can catch the bus right behind my house and get off the bus right by the building I work in at Kirkwood. For criteria two, the answer would be “sort of” – it is possible to get to and from work reasonably within my required timeframe, but there is certainly no flexibility. Three, can I travel in a timely manner? Absolutely not. A more direct route from downtown, or wherever routes connect, to Kirkwood could decrease my travel time. And, finally criteria four – the current bus fleet of majority older buses does not make for the most pleasant ride, but even more so, gives the system a less than stellar public image.

Fortunately all these issues may start to improve. The fourth issue should be the most visible improvement to come. Four brand new buses have arrived this month and should go into service within a few weeks. Additional new buses will be purchased over the next few years to replace older vehicles.

Regarding the first three issues, the Corridor Metro Planning Organization has issued a request for proposal to consultants for a fixed-route system analysis and recommendations for system improvements including changes to routes and schedule. According to the RFP, “The proposed routing options should focus on reducing travel times, increase the service area and increase the transit ridership. The analysis should include specific routing options, service schedules, expected ridership and driver scheduling.” A consultant is to be selected by July 17, and work is expected to be completed by mid November. The study, partially prompted by criticism of the system during the Neighborhood Planning Process earlier this year, will include three public open houses.

There are obviously many improvements – large and small – that could make CR Transit a much more effective system. In a future post I plan to further explore improvements and specific changes I believe will be necessary to bring Cedar Rapids’ transit system up to par. It is critical that Cedar Rapids becomes a more transit-friendly city.

Parking replaces 100-year old houses on First Ave

A new 10,000 square foot, two-story professional office building is currently under construction at 1815 First Avenue SE in Cedar Rapids. The development is replacing four former residential properties at 1815, 1821, 1827, and 1833 First Ave SE, all built between 1900 and 1921. According to the Cedar Rapids Assessor’s records, these houses had all been converted into multi-tenant. None of these houses were in the best condition and understandably this area of First Avenue is very marketable for commercial use, so I’m not going to argue against the destruction of these century old homes, but the new use of the site is unfortunate.

Rendering of development at 1815 First Ave SE

Above is a rendering of the finished building. It is fairly suburban looking, but two-stories is nice and the scale is appropriate. The building is set back from the sidewalk about the same distance as existing older houses and commercial buildings nearby. My only real problem with this development is how much of the site fronting the sidewalk has been used for parking. The site is approximately 250 feet long (along First Avenue) and maybe 150 feet deep. The building was constructed on one end of the site with the rest left open for a parking lot.

If this type of new commercial development cannot survive without minimizing it’s parking requirement, or situating it more appropriately on the site, then perhaps this use does not belong here. I welcome reinvestment in this older part of the city – and especially diversification of uses, but it must be done respectfully and not diminish the urban quality that remains. 150 feet of parking lot along the sidewalk and the street is not progress, it is a gouge out of the former street edge that made this block pleasant to walk or drive down.

Below are the four houses that were torn down for this development, not to mention tree fatalities. The images are arranged in the same order of the former houses. How long will this kind of auto-centric redevelopment go unquestioned?

1833 1st Ave SE1827 1st Ave SE1821 1st Ave SE1815 1st Ave SE

1833 – built 1910, two story frame, three family conversion / 60 ft wide lot
1827 – built 1910, two story frame, four family conversion / 60 ft wide lot
1821 – built 1900, 1-1/2 story frame, three family conversion / 60 ft wide lot
1815 – built 1921, one story frame, two-family conversion / 60 ft wide lot

Finally, Brand New Buses in Cedar Rapids

The four brand new 35 foot, 2009 Gillig Lowfloor buses for CR Transit have arrived. They are not out in service just yet, but I was able to get a few preliminary photos of the new buses from fellow transit enthusiast James Roach. In these photos, a few details remain to be added (like the CR Transit lettering, 5 season tree logo, etc). Also the front of the bus below the windshield is green like the sides, it’s just still covered up with wrapping in the photos.

The exterior color scheme follows a new “CR Transit” branding that’s already in place on the eight used TMC RTS buses purchased earlier this year for flood replacement. The system officially dropped it’s former “EAGL” moniker and became known as CR Transit / Cedar Rapids Transit over a year ago. The existing older buses – old RTS’s and the Thomas Dennis SLF lowfloors – were not repainted but “EAGL” has been removed and replaced with the stylized “CR Transit” lettering.

This arrival is a pretty big deal, being the first brand new buses Cedar Rapids has seen in 10-15 years. Bill Hoekstra, head of the former combined transit and parking department, was an advocate of purchasing refurbished used buses instead of buying new. This saved the city some money but has done little for the bus system’s image. CR Transit will be purchasing additional Gilligs over the next few years to finally modernize the fleet. The new buses, units 2091-2094 (2 is the city dept. code, and 09 refers to year of manufacture). They should be in service within the next couple of weeks.

Check back frequently for new photo updates and other CR Transit news.

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2022 URBAN THINKING

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑