All posts by mwolf

Final Research Paper, Infrastructure

Rebuilding and Reutilization: Revitalization of Portland Piers

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B2vvrbJ-N-zDUE5UQksxMFNXZUk&usp=sharing

 

 

Rebuilding and Reutilization: Revitalization of Portland Piers

Research Topic

This paper argues that one of the most crucial and feasible infrastructure projects for the City of Portland, Maine, is the rebuilding, repurposing, and ultimately the revitalization of piers in the Downtown or “Old Port” district. The utilization of the piers through the development of public green space (a “pier park”), and residential and commercial real estate would have the most direct economically and socially beneficial impact on the city, specifically the Old Port. I propose redeveloping the properties into multiple public and private spaces with the intention to alleviate the concerns of a lack of public space and underutilized valuable waterfront real estate. This paper argues that the implementation of technologically forward-thinking power systems as well as data collection and monitoring systems will push Portland into the “Smart City” era. Portland has recently revamped its rules and regulations regarding the existing piers, and several businesses have capitalized on the exclusive real estate, but much more needs to be done to complete the transformation of Portland’s Old Port piers.

 

Approach to the common good for the city

The piers of the Old Port are some of the most feasible locations to implement changes benefitting the common good, due to their current run-down condition and proximity to the highly trafficked and desirable commercial region of the Old Port. The proximity of the piers to the burgeoning and gentrifying neighborhoods of downtown Portland promises increased public demand and economic investment. The redesign of the piers as an extension of the existing waterfront park system, new housing development, and business and restaurant center would directly benefit the Common Good by encouraging physical wellness and economic development. The new pier park would be a resource for free physical (and subsequently emotional) wellness to all visitors. Office space, restaurants, and retail shops would build the local economy, due to the piers’ proximity to the downtown neighborhoods and business district of Portland. Currently, however, they offer no access, claim, change, or ownership to those of lower classes.[1] A seafood market, arguably pricey, and a high-end tote bag shop were noteworthy businesses currently inhabiting one pier. Another pier has only a few pricey apartments. My proposed plan would at least extend the rights of access and wellness for those less privileged.

 

Approach to the smart city

Sensors and networks of sensors are a “key requirement for the delivery of Smart Environments”, but they are disruptive to install on existing systems/buildings.[2] Powerwise Systems, a Maine business, was started specifically to produce the types of sensors and monitoring equipment able to be installed into pre-existing infrastructure. The systems provide “circuit-level electrical monitoring; remote HVAC and lighting controls; building environment monitoring; performance measurement for PV, solar thermal, heat pumps, energy-recovery ventilators (ERV/HRV); and a variety of flow, fluid level, water, and gas monitoring.”[3] Access to this knowledge would encourage less wasteful behavior, thereby creating a healthier environment and benefiting the common good. It seems obvious that, with these systems already designed and able to be easily installed, the City of Portland should invest in systems. The systems should be installed in City buildings; businesses can nail down machines, practices, or groups that are particularly inefficient; landlords can pinpoint wasteful renters, and even specific rooms that need work; and individual homeowners can control their living spaces from-away to minimize their effect on the environment and the strain on their wallet. The rapid progression of technology is now making it possible to control and monitor these systems from a mobile device, encouraging around-the-clock watchfulness and accountability. However, with a newly installed Powerwise monitoring system comes large-scale data collection and analysis. According to Crowley, Curry, and Breslin, data aggregation from separate existing public systems is a logistical nightmare.[4] In addition, data analysis of citywide, national, international, or global data sets is a monumental task requiring lots of time on specialized high-computing systems run by data and statistical specialists.[5],[6] Ultimately, this means that the tremendous amount of data produced by the system of sensors will need to monitored for specific measurements, trends, or anomalies, with the caveat that much of the generated data from these sensors will go unused for years before computing power rises to levels able to handle current and past data simultaneously.

 

Literature review

There has been much discussion around the topic of redeveloping and reutilizing existing infrastructure, a small selection of which I will touch on in this short proposal. In his essay “Traffic in Democracy”, Michael Sorkin describes the American growth ideal of “sprawl without end” as having “escaped rational management.”[7] The Downtown of Portland has a different problem, however; located on a peninsula, sprawl and outward growth are not possible. In this case it becomes crucial either to build up, as most large cities opt for, or to repurpose existing infrastructure. This paper points to the London Docklands and New York City’s Hudson River Park as two notable examples of rebuilding, reutilization, and, ultimately, revitalization.

In NYC it is clear that space limitations drove development up; but NYC was obsessed with “NEW, BETTER, DIFFERENT!” Portland and many other cities don’t have the capital, capabilities, or desire to follow that building plan, and should think instead about how to reuse existing infrastructure. Hudson River Park in NYC has been heralded as “the model for New York City parks to come” and “the most significant new public space since Central Park.”[8],[9] Built out of the failed Westway highway project, development of the park was started in 1998 and is approximately 70% complete today.[10] Transformed from decaying piers and parking lots, it is the second largest park in the city after Central Park, encompassing 550-acres and offering over thirty different activities.[11] It is also the largest waterfront park in the United States and hosts 17 million visitors annually.[12]

The Docklands in the outskirts of London were “the old spaces, liberated from their traditional activities and lying derelict and unwanted, [that needed to] be recycled to meet the needs of the new economic world.”[13] Slow abandonment after changes in shipping vessel size rendered the docks obsolete; it took tens of years, millions of dollars, and a bevy of government and public groups to rebuild and revitalize the Docklands. The region now houses the “engine-rooms of twenty-first century business.”[14] In fact, due to the many banks and other economically important businesses in the area, Canary Wharf now rivals London as a financial stronghold.[15],[16] The current economic importance of the Docklands, the region’s architectural transformation from rough industrial and manufacturing buildings to clean-cut skyscrapers of international business, and the discovery of the necessity of cooperation has made the 30-year development a case study of urban revitalization. Against all odds, the London Docklands “wasteland” has become a “Wall Street on Water.”[17]

Setha Low argues that the privatization and commercialization of public spaces is necessary to their future and points out that they induce an expected level of class in the public space.[18] By allowing more non-marine groups and providing economic incentives for businesses, Portland could also develop the piers into an exceptional extension of the already existing waterfront park system. While this privatization may seem to subvert the “right to the city” as Lefebrev puts it, or “the right to sleep unmolested in a city park”, as Mitchell suggests, I argue that the piers as they now stand offer even less right to the underprivileged.[19] In their current ramshackle state, the piers are targets for tighter scrutiny and do not allow public access, excepting the road, thereby making it difficult for the underprivileged to access the waterfront or stake any claim in the space. By creating a public green space and improving the overall conditions of the piers, Portland simultaneously will provide an opportunity for the “right to the city”.

Rebuilding infrastructure requires more than clever engineering as Michael Sorkin tells us in his essay “Traffic in Democracy”: “It has to be thought through politically… rather than approached as merely a set of technical problems.”[20] Since the 1980s when condominiums were built on Chandlers’ Wharf in the Old Port, city policy has restricted development and occupancy to a working waterfront. However, given recent policy changes allowing “up to 45 percent of the ground floor to… non-marine tenants”, the door is slightly more open for other offices and businesses to move into these prime waterfront locations.[21] These business opportunities should be quick to be filled, but the marine spaces remain available due to a deflating ecosystem and therefore decreasing numbers of fishermen and other traditional Maine marine business. Fortunately, there is business called the New England Ocean Cluster proposed on the neighboring Maine State Pier that would fit the marine requirement and greatly benefit the region.[22] While this business would be a great boon for the piers and the City, this is only one of many available marine spaces, and much more needs to be done to complete the transformation of the piers. Ultimately, the redevelopment of the piers as public green spaces, as well as business and housing options, is the most feasible and natural next step in the growth of Portland and will be supported by a history of similar projects around the world.

 

Methods

My methods of collecting data were threefold: First, data was collected on the revitalization of old buildings during a transect walk. Any structure that appeared to have an authentic skeleton or base, but with obvious new construction or renovations was marked on Map 1. Structures varied from residential-to-business converted properties to unintended utilization of old building space. I chose not to walk in the commercial section of the Old Port because this type of reutilized building structure (store or restaurant at ground level with apartments above) is very common. These streets have been distinguished on the map as generally well-repurposed and revitalized areas.

Second, every member of the Digital Image of the City class collected mental map data from Portland residents and commuters. The compiled mapping data provided a lens into the perceived needs of people of Portland as seen in Figure 1. The first part of the figure shows the distinct mentions of green space, waterfront access, economic incentives, art/music spaces, and the preservation of old buildings as a measure for possible resident interest in a proposed pier renovation and revitalization project. Additionally, the second part of the figure shows the prevalence of the geographic areas around the piers on mental maps.

Third, commercial real estate data and residential real estate data was scraped from loopnet.com and zillow.com, respectfully, to build a database of commercial and housing prices in the Downtown. Visualizing this data shows the economic benefit of a water view and real estate closer to the water, as evidenced in Map 2, and the lack of available residential real estate, as evidenced by Image 1. Additional geographic data on green space from the City of Portland allowed the creation of Map 3, which demonstrates the need for the continuation of the waterfront park system. The map displays the green spaces with a buffer zone of five hundred meters, or about one-third of a mile, a comfortable walking distance for any age.

 

Findings

There is a clear need for these developments, as evidenced by comments from two mental map participants; one participant suggested “Preservation of old buildings – redevelop for business and residency”, while another participant suggested “[Affordable] underground/young spaces for activism and art” and “public meeting spaces for groups/bands.”[23] I found that most of the spaces I saw on my transect walk were restaurants and businesses that necessitated redesigned spaces. I also found that many houses on the Eastern Prom have undergone repairs to make the expensive houses worth more as multiunit apartments or condos. In addition, the fact that the real estate data demonstrated an increasing cost of commercial spaces close to the water implies a desire for office and business spaces, just as the lack of available residential real estate suggests competitive desirability and the need for more spaces. Finally, the proximate green space allows one to visually understand the necessity for a waterfront recreation area, extending the existing park system along Back Bay and the Eastern Promenade.

 

Reflections/discussion

Portland is a city that likes to stick with its heritage and is restricted by space limitations, but yearns to progress into the future. Repurposing buildings is a fantastic and fascinating use of existing infrastructure because it requires fewer materials and creates less waste, while revitalizing the look (and often purpose) of the building. I propose transforming Portland Pier, Custom House Wharf, and 68 Commercial Street pier, three run-down, mostly dilapidated piers into public green space and commercial and residential real estate. In the beginning of Against the Smart City, Greenfield directly states that the way “city dwellers collectively understand, approach and use the environment around us” is rapidly changing.[24] Even though there have been issues in the past with new condos on the water, we now know the allure and value of those properties. Following the examples of the Hudson River Parkway in New York City and the

Map 1

London Docklands, we know the project is feasible.

 

As evidenced by Map 1, proximity to highly trafficked roads, retail and restaurant venues, and water views are large influencers of revitalization. It makes sense to continue the revitalization and reutilization of the Old Port on the piers because the underutilized space currently serves very few people and purposes, and provides very little economic benefit for the City, but has the potential for fantastic success, given the piers’ proximity to the commercial and restaurant district. Therefore, I propose the repurposing of commercial and residential buildings, and development of public green spaces, as a method for economic and infrastructure revitalization.

Figure 1 demonstrates the potential support for my proposal, as measured by residents’ specifically voiced concerns in interviews and noted locations on their mental maps. Fifteen of the one hundred residents specifically and uniquely pointed out one of the categories my proposed pier revitalization project would address, namely access to green spaces and the waterfront, economic incentives for businesses, spaces for art and music, and the preservation of old buildings. Exactly half of the residents interviewed chose to note the waterfront as an important feature of Portland on their mental map, while slightly more than one-fourth mentioned the Old Port/Downtown and/or the main waterfront street of the Downtown, Commercial Street. These responses indicate a strong level of interest and motivation by

Map 2

Portland residents to enhance the Downtown and waterfront areas.

As seen in Map 2, there is clear economic benefit of water views and lower Downtown real estate in Portland for office and retail spaces. This data suggests the potential economic benefit of new real estate development on the piers, with leasing prices upwards of $30 per square foot. A rough estimate of the area of the three piers is 280,000 square feet. Assuming one-quarter of the pier is used for commercial real estate, there are two floors in the building, and an average price of $30 per square foot yields a conservative estimate of $4.2 million in taxable leasing revenue per month. This figure does not even take into account the revenue generated by those businesses and their employees eating or shopping at other nearby businesses, a further

Image 1

infusion of hundreds of thousands of dollars into the local economy.

Source: Trulia.com

 

 

Image 1 expresses a lack of residential real estate in the Downtown, and shows that the rental prices are comparable to elsewhere in the city. As the city continues to gentrify and the price of housing continues to rise, there will be an increased demand for housing options, especially in close proximity to areas of employment. The piers provide an optimal opportunity to nip this situation in the bud. With their relative proximity to the majority of commercial and business jobs in the City, and available floor space for housing, the piers offer a solution to Portland’s expanding working population. An estimation of monthly taxable residential real estate (assuming one-quarter of the pier, two floors, at an average rental rate of $2,500 per month per 1,400 square feet) yields $250,000 in taxable revenue every month, and doesn’t take into account the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent locally in the Downtown by residents of the real estate.

Map 3

As evidenced by Map 3, there is a need for additional green space in the Downtown to allow access to the waterfront, provide pleasurable public space for visitors and citizens, and enhance the value of surrounding buildings. In pink is the Downtown area of Portland that is not within 500 meters of a public green space and the proposed revitalized docks are in yellow. While understanding that creating public space has no direct economic benefit for the City, there are clear correlations between access to open, natural space, including a pleasurable waterfront, and workplace productivity and community happiness and health.[25], [26], [27] Additionally, creating a new public space would require vacant land, not often available in the City, especially in residential neighborhoods. Therefore, it would benefit all local businesses, residents, and the common good of the City to continue the already existing and well-used bike path and public green space along the waterfront, while utilizing the currently vacant pier land.

With the assistance of the Portland City Council and public support, one may be able to make the case for a non-typical marine institution such as an aquarium or seafood restaurant, or a space capitalizing on the water and benefiting the common good such as a park and ice rink to inhabit the lesser-used marine 55 percent. This policy change may be a make-or-break factor in the reutilization of the piers, since the existing policy makes it very difficult for all the available land to be utilized to its full economic and common good potential.

 

Policy Recommendation

My policy recommendation for the city of Portland is threefold. First, amend the current 45-55% (general – marine) space use policy to include non-traditional marine uses over the entire pier system, instead of on individual piers or real estate blocks. Second, encourage economic investment in the physical infrastructure of the piers with tax incentives for repurposing the existing structure. And third, designate and mandate public green space on the piers to encourage residential and tourist interaction with the waterfront. By employing these policy recommendations, the City of Portland will create a new dimension of The Old Port filled with benefits for the local economy and common good.

 

Conclusion

The Old Port has a fantastic resource within its grasp. There is demonstrated optimistic public interest, positive economic value, a rich history of reutilization in the City, and public health and wellness benefits. In addition, there are a number of prominent success stories from other cities off which to base plans and gain knowledge. The City of Portland should redouble efforts to reutilize the Portland Pier, Custom House Wharf, and 68 Commercial Street pier as sites of residential and commercial real estate and public green space for the benefit of the local economy and common good

 

Bibliography

 

Bagli, Charles V., and Lisa W. Foderaro. “Times and Tides Weigh on Hudson River Park.” New York Times, January 28, 2012.

 

Bell, Tom. “Maine State Pier envisioned as site of incubator for marine businesses.” Portland Press Herald. Last modified October 17, 2014. http://www.pressherald.com/2014/10/17/maine-state-pier-envisioned-site-incubator-marine-businesses/.

 

Billings, Randy. “New Building on Maine Wharf Reflects Portland’s Changing Waterfront.” Portland Press Herald. Last modified August 7, 2014. http://www.pressherald.com/2014/08/07/new-building-other-progress-reshape-portlands-waterfront/.

 

“The Changing Face of London: London Docklands,” September 2012. http://bbc.com.

 

Crowley, David N., Edward Curry, and John G. Breslin. “Leveraging Social Media and IoT to Bootstrap Smart Environments.” In Big Data and Internet of Things: A Roadmap for Smart Environments, edited by Nik Bessis and Ciprian Dobre, 380-82. N.p.: Springer, 2014.

 

Frumkin, Howard, and Richard Louv. “The Powerful Link Between Conserving Land and Preserving Health.” Editorial. Children & Nature Network. Last modified July 1, 2007. http://www.childrenandnature.org/news/detail/the_powerful_link_between_conserving_land_and_preserving_health/.

 

Gillett, Rachel. “How to Stop Your Office From Zapping Your Productivity.” Fast Company. http://www.fastcompany.com/3029994/work-smart/how-to-stop-your-office-from-zapping-your-productivity.

 

Greenfield, Adam. Against the Smart City. 1.3 ed. N.p.: Do Projects, n.d.

 

Hall, Peter. “The City of Capitalism Rampant.” In Cities in Civilization, 888-929. New York, NY: Pantheon Books, 1998.

 

Hannah, and Joyce. Interview by the author. Coffe By Design, India Street, Portland, ME. October 2014.

 

How We Built Britain. “The South: Dreams of Tomorrow.” BBC. November 2012 (originally aired July 2007).

 

Hudson River Park Trust. “About Us | Hudson River Park.” Hudson River Park. Accessed September 2014. http://www.hudsonriverpark.org/about-us.

 

———. “Explore The Park.” Hudson River Park. http://www.hudsonriverpark.org/explore-the-park.

 

———. “Hudson River Park Act.” Hudson River Park. http://www.hudsonriverpark.org/about-us/hrpt/hrp-act.

 

“InView Building Monitoring and Energy Management Solutions.” PowerWise Systems. http://www.powerwisesystems.com.

 

Ivy, Robert. “Waterborne City.” Abstract. Architectural Record, October 2009.

 

Low, Setha M. “Spaces of Reflection, Recovery, and Resistance: Reimagining the Postindustrial Plaza.” In After the World Trade Center: Rethinking New York City, edited by Michael Sorkin and Sharon Zukin, 164. New York, NY: Routledge, 2002.

 

MacLeod, Alexander. “Wall Street on Water: The Rebirth of London’s Historic Wharfs.” Christian Science Monitor, November 19, 1997.

 

Mayer-Schönberger, Viktor, and Kenneth Cukier. Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform How We Live, Work, and Think. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2013.

 

Mitchell, Don. “To Go Again to Hyde Park: Public Space, Rights, and Social Justice.” 2003. In The People, Place, and Space Reader, edited by Jen Jack Gieseking, 193-94. New York, NY: Routledge, 2014.

 

Price-Mitchell, Marilyn, Ph.D. “Does Nature Make Us Happy?” Psychology Today. Last modified March 27, 2014. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-moment-youth/201403/does-nature-make-us-happy.

 

Silver, Nate. The Signal and the Noise: Why so Many Predictions Fail–but Some

Don’t. New York, NY: Penguin, 2012.

 

Sorkin, Michael. “Traffic in Democracy.” 1999. In The People, Place, and Space Reader, edited by Jen Jack Gieseking, 411-15. New York, NY: Routledge, 2014.

 

 

[1]  “About Us | Hudson River Park,” Hudson River Park, accessed September 2014, http://www.hudsonriverpark.org/about-us.

[2] David N. Crowley, Edward Curry, and John G. Breslin, “Leveraging Social Media and IoT to Bootstrap Smart Environments,” in Big Data and Internet of Things: A Roadmap for Smart Environments, ed. Nik Bessis and Ciprian Dobre (n.p.: Springer, 2014), 380.

[3] “InView Building Monitoring and Energy Management Solutions,” PowerWise Systems, http://www.powerwisesystems.com.

[4] Crowley, Curry, and Breslin, “Leveraging Social Media and IoT to Bootstrap,” in Big Data and Internet, 382.

[5] Viktor Mayer-Schönberger and Kenneth Cukier, Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform How We Live, Work, and Think. (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2013).

[6] Nate Silver, The Signal and the Noise: Why so Many Predictions Fail–but Some Don’t (New York, NY: Penguin, 2012).

[7] Michael Sorkin, “Traffic in Democracy,” 1999, in The People, Place, and Space Reader, ed. Jen Jack Gieseking (New York, NY: Routledge, 2014), 412.

[8] Robert Ivy, “Waterborne City,” abstract, Architectural Record, October 2009, 25.

[9] Charles V. Bagli and Lisa W. Foderaro, “Times and Tides Weigh on Hudson River Park,” New York Times, January 28, 2012.

[10] “Hudson River Park Act,” Hudson River Park, http://www.hudsonriverpark.org/about-us/hrpt/hrp-act.

[11]  “Explore The Park,” Hudson River Park, http://www.hudsonriverpark.org/explore-the-park.

[12] “About Us | Hudson,” Hudson River Park.

[13] Peter Hall, “The City of Capitalism Rampant,” in Cities in Civilization (New York, NY: Pantheon Books, 1998).

[14] How We Built Britain, “The South: Dreams of Tomorrow,” BBC, November 2012 (originally aired July 2007).

[15] “The Changing Face of London: London Docklands,” September 2012, http://bbc.com.

[16] How We Built Britain, “The South: Dreams of Tomorrow.”

[17] Alexander MacLeod, “Wall Street on Water: The Rebirth of London’s Historic Wharfs,” Christian Science Monitor, November 19, 1997, 10.

[18] Setha M. Low, “Spaces of Reflection, Recovery, and Resistance: Reimagining the Postindustrial Plaza,” in After the World Trade Center: Rethinking New York City, ed. Michael Sorkin and Sharon Zukin (New York, NY: Routledge, 2002), 164.

[19] Don Mitchell, “To Go Again to Hyde Park: Public Space, Rights, and Social Justice,” 2003, in The People, Place, and Space Reader, ed. Jen Jack Gieseking (New York, NY: Routledge, 2014), 193-194.

[20] Sorkin, “Traffic in Democracy,” in The People, Place, and Space, 412.

[21] Randy Billings, “New Building on Maine Wharf Reflects Portland’s Changing Waterfront,” Portland Press Herald, last modified August 7, 2014, http://www.pressherald.com/2014/08/07/new-building-other-progress-reshape-portlands-waterfront/.

[22] Tom Bell, “Maine State Pier envisioned as site of incubator for marine businesses,” Portland Press Herald, last modified October 17, 2014, http://www.pressherald.com/2014/10/17/maine-state-pier-envisioned-site-incubator-marine-businesses/.

[23] Hannah and Joyce, interview by the author, Coffe By Design, India Street, Portland, ME, October 2014.

[24] Adam Greenfield, Against the Smart City, 1.3 ed. (n.p.: Do Projects, n.d.)

[25] Rachel Gillett, “How to Stop Your Office From Zapping Your Productivity,” Fast Company, http://www.fastcompany.com/3029994/work-smart/how-to-stop-your-office-from-zapping-your-productivity.

[26] Marilyn Price-Mitchell, Ph.D., “Does Nature Make Us Happy?,” Psychology Today, last modified March 27, 2014, http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-moment-youth/201403/does-nature-make-us-happy.

[27] Howard Frumkin and Richard Louv, “The Powerful Link Between Conserving Land and Preserving Health,” editorial, Children & Nature Network, last modified July 1, 2007, http://www.childrenandnature.org/news/detail/the_powerful_link_between_conserving_land_and_preserving_health/.

Post #7: Individual Analysis of Transect Walk

Repurposing and Revitalizing in the East End

4 Comments

pin lat-long pin map

I looked into the revitalization of old buildings. Any structure that appeared to have an authentic skeleton or base, but with obviously new construction or renovations was marked on the map. I found that most of the spaces I saw on my transect walk were restaurants and businesses that necessitated redesigned spaces. I chose not to walk in the commercial section of the Old Port because this type of building structure (store at ground level with apartments above) is very common, but difficult to distinguish between new and original construction. I came upon this idea originally because of a real estate office off of Forest Street that had new construction within the original building. I think this is a fantastic and fascinating use of existing infrastructure because it requires less materials and waste, while revitalizing the look (and often purpose) of the building. I also found that many houses on the Eastern Prom have undergone repairs to make the expensive houses worth more. There was one in-progress right now at 130 Eastern Prom – a mere shell of the former structure, ready to be retrofit with new siding, insulation, etc. Although the direct purpose of the building as housing has not changed, many of the houses on the Eastern Prom have been split into multiple units. I foresee great possibilities for this repurposing and revitalizing in Portland, a city that tries to stick with its heritage, but yearns to progress into the future. I see parallels to many cities, my hometown of Moline, IL included, because of space limitations. In NYC we saw how space limitations drove development up; but NYC was obsessed with NEW, BETTER, DIFFERENT! Portland and many other cities don’t have the capital, capabilities, or desire to follow that building plan, and should think instead about how to reuse existing infrastructure. This idea is being used in a different context in NYC with the free Wi-Fi stemming from existing phone booths. The next step is larger infrastructure. Bowdoin College, in fact, has been following this plan for years; Studzinski Hall is repurposed from the old swimming pool, Smith Union is repurposed from the old track, the side of the Chapel houses the McKeen Center for the Common Good. From a purely financial view, repurposing old buildings costs less; but more than that it preserves the history of the space (a key reason Bowdoin likes the practice).

 

Post #6: Individual Analysis of Ethnography & Mental Maps

CBD India St. Maps and Ethnography

4 Comments

My interpretation of my café ethnography is that Coffee by Design on India Street is in a gentrified neighborhood. The vast majority of patrons I saw in the café were 50s/60s Caucasians, followed by 30s/40s Caucasians, mostly well dressed. Most people visiting the café were only stopping in – not staying for prolonged periods. I suspect India Street is a popular thruway for Portland residents coming home from the south, but it seems out of the way for anyone coming from I-295. It’s only two blocks from Congress Street, though.

The next closest coffee shop is Crema in Arabica Roasters, down the hill. It’s larger and more noticeable from Commercial St, but Coffee by Design seems to have a following. Many patrons had reward cards, indicating regular customers. Coffee by Design also has four stores in Portland, making it a citywide known brand. CBD also has one location in Freeport (besides selling beans to other coffee shops around Maine, for example Little Dog in Brunswick) expanding its brand across the state.

map2 post map3 post map4 post map1 post

Notes from Coffee By Design, India St. Oct 3rd, 4:30-6:30pm

4:30 – Two older (70s?) white gentlemen in line to buy coffee, products. Older, white couple sitting by door. One barista making/ serving drinks – short, pixie cut with blue earings/gages, tattoo on arm. Middle-aged couple sitting outside.

4:40 – Second barista joins, tattoos on arm, also. Complains about being annoyed by road construction (broken sewer line) outside. Two older gentlemen from earlier sitting separately by front, one has an eastern European accent. One middle aged white man, one 30s white woman came in – eclectic outfit. Older black woman joined older white man w/out accent.

4:50 – 30s/40s white couple came in. 50s, 60s business attire white man came in. 30s/40s woman and 20s/30s man, both white working class, came in together. A couple, middle aged, white. An older man, latte for here sitting by front. 30s woman w/ infant. 20s woman.

5:00 – Middle-aged, apparently gay man came in. Older woman 60s? with young child (grandson?), hanging out for a little. 20s/30s couple. Older latte man still here, doing work.

5:10 – 30s, working class man. Older latte man still here.

5:20 – Kinda quiet. 20s white man. Getting a mental map from 2nd barista. Two white teens/early 20s, one well-dressed (hipsterish), one normal dressed. 20s/30s white man. 40s/50s white woman.

5:30 – Quiet. Barista #1 cleaning while #2 works on mental map.

5:40 – Nobody new, latte guy still here.

5:50 – 30s white man with infant, staying, 20s/30s white woman, two 20s/30s white women together. 20/30s white woman in workout gear.

6:00 – 20s white man. 20s/30s white man. 50s/60s white man.

6:10 – 70s white woman/ 50s white woman together, staying. 30s/40s white couple. 60s white woman. Sudden surge: 20s white couple, staying. 50s white woman. 50s white couple. Teens/20s two white women, couple? 30s white man, staying.

6:20 – 20s white couple. 50s Indian(?) Woman. 60s white man. Young couple doing work, staying. Single 20s/30s man hanging out. 50s/70s women hanging out.

6:30 – Closing up shop, people still coming in. Two white 60s couples, 20s white woman.

 

10/21/14 2:30 – 3:30pm

2:30 – White, 60s man learning guitar; white, 40s business man on laptop; white, 30s man on laptop; white, 50/60s business man and 30/40s white business man talking about careers.

2:40 – guitar man talking to two 40s women; blue collar guys came in, all white, 20/30s.

2:50 – Guitar man left, as well as women talking to him; 50s white man; 20/30s white man in hoodie (left); 50/60s white man (left).

3:00 – 10/20s black(?) man and white woman together;

3:10 – Two 20s white women; white 50s mother with teen son; white 50s mother with teen daughter; 60s man and woman reading newspaper together.

3:20 – No one in line.

3:30 – Quieting down – 50/60s white man, 30s white woman, business men still here.

Post #5: Infrastructure Reflections, Uncategorized

Pessimism About Public Transit

            As Simon acknowledges, one usual aspect of infrastructure is the “positioning [of] its residents… where the energies of individuals can be most efficiently deployed…”1 I have so far collected two mental maps of Portland, and both have mentioned public transportation as a major concern and area for improvement. Therefore, I believe the addition of a commuter train and an overhaul of the public bus system should be recommended infrastructure projects for Portland. Both proposals would positively impact the environment and Common Good by reducing single-passenger vehicle travel, and would also allow greater safety and mobility for foot traffic by relieving congestion in the downtown area.

There are fundamental issues with this proposal that Sorkin probes in his article. Namely, there is the issue of Portland being an old, established city. I love this quote for its historical accuracy and ridiculousness: “Thomas Jefferson never imagined rush hour.”3 Portland was (finally and substantially) founded in the late 1800s and has survived two major fires, but would not be willing to “resurgam” a third time for a new commuter rail. The existing roadways and buildings would make the development of a raised or subterranean transit system very costly, time consuming, and problematic for current traffic. This brings up Sorkin’s concept of “conflict avoidance” by zoning of appropriate modes of transportation.4 Ultimately, Portland was not designed for commuter rail or busses, and the retooling of the city is not the top priority for people in power. Speaking of which; as we saw in our foray into the City Council meeting notes, everything is a political. Regardless of whether the project was financially or structurally feasible, it would need to be approved by many different branches of government, as well as business associations, housing authorities, etc. “It has to be thought through politically… rather than approached as merely a set of technical problems”, as Sorkin tells us.2

My personal pessimism aside, let’s look at examples of this type of project in NYC, arguably a more established city where construction and redevelopment cause much greater displacement of peoples and monies. I believe it is important to mention that two fundamental differences between Portland and NYC are that NYC requires, and has required for many years, mass public transit for the city to function, and that the people of NYC now expect (and sometimes demand) the upkeep, expansion, and inconvenience of subways and busses. For example, a quick search of the MTA’s service changes website for October 7th, 2014 reveals eleven station skips, renovations, re-routings, and cancellations.5 One of those particular renovations is the Pelham 6 line stations, at a total cost of $89 million over the course of four years.6 Clearly NYC is invested in its public transit as crucial infrastructure.

Citations:

1) Simone, AbdulMaliq. 2014 [2004]. “People as Infrastructure: Intersecting Fragments in Johannesburg.” In The People, Place and Space Reader, edited by Jen Jack Gieseking, et al, 241. New York: Routledge.

2) Sorkin, Michael. 2014 [1999]. “Traffic in Democracy.” In The People, Place and Space Reader, edited by Jen Jack Gieseking, et al, 412. New York: Routledge, 2014.

3) Sorkin, Michael. 2014 [1999]. “Traffic in Democracy.” In The People, Place and Space Reader, edited by Jen Jack Gieseking, et al, 414. New York: Routledge, 2014.

4) Sorkin, Michael. 2014 [1999]. “Traffic in Democracy.” In The People, Place and Space Reader, edited by Jen Jack Gieseking, et al, 411. New York: Routledge, 2014.

5) “Service Advisory.” MTA-NYCT, 07 Oct. 2014. Web. 7 Oct. 2014. <http%3A%2F%2Ftravel.mtanyct.info%2Fserviceadvisory%2FrouteStatusResult.aspx%3Ftag%3DALL%26date%3D10%2F7%2F2014%26time%3D%26method%3Dgetstatus4>.

6) “MTA Press Releases.” MTA. MTA- NYC, n.d. Web. 07 Oct. 2014. <http://www.mta.info/press-release/nyc-transit/pelham-6-line-station-renovation-project-enters-final-phase>.

Housing, Post #4: Housing Reflections

The Utilization of Sensors, Data, and Computing in Housing

As we discussed in class, I believe sensors should be an early logical step towards a smart city for the Common Good. Sensors and networks of sensors are a “key requirement for the delivery of Smart Environments” according to Crowley, Curry, and Breslin, but they are disruptive to install on existing systems/buildings.2 I have a family friend who co-founded a company, Powerwise Systems, specifically to produce these types of sensors and monitoring equipment. A Powerwise System can be installed into pre-existing housing for “circuit-level electrical monitoring; remote HVAC and lighting controls; building environment monitoring; performance measurement for PV, solar thermal, heat pumps, energy-recovery ventilators (ERV/HRV); and a variety of flow, fluid level, water, and gas monitoring.”1  Access to this knowledge would encourage less wasteful behavior, thereby creating a healthier environment and Common Good.

A Powerwise System flow chart

It seems obvious that, with these systems already designed and installable, the City of Portland could invest in one for its larger public buildings; businesses can nail down machines, practices, or groups that are particularly inefficient; landlords can pinpoint wasteful renters, and even specific rooms that need work; and individual homeowners can control their living spaces from-away to minimize their effect on the environment and the strain on their wallet. The rapid progression of technology is now also making it possible to control and monitor these systems from a mobile device, encouraging around-the-clock watchfulness and accountability. That progression is also leading to new methods of encouragement for environmental-minded behavior. One such example is “calling out” or in some views “public shaming” via social media. (See image from Crowley, Curry, Breslin)6. This strategy has the benefit of actually getting results, with the distinct disadvantage of causing uncomfortable public situations. My understanding of this tactic suggests that people would be unlikely to install such a system in a place that would affect them personally. Conversely, businesses, landlords, and cities would be very excited to use the tactic for monetary and environmental savings.

Notification system through Twitter
Notification system through Twitter

A parallel problem we also should deal with sooner than later is large-scale data collection and analysis. According to Crowley, Curry, and Breslin, data aggregation from separate existing public systems is a logistical nightmare.3 From a scientific background, I completely understand this complication. Transferring data from a machine to a computing system, then to a data visualization software, then to a publication source is even a computer savvy teenager’s most frustrating nightmare, as I found out the summer after my first year at Bowdoin. My project was to calibrate an x-ray fluorescent spectroscopy machine and I struggled even with very specialized software to transfer my data within the computing system. Trying to send my data to another program would have been maddening, and now, even after four years of experiments, the amount of data aggregation is nowhere near the volume of data immediately available in our environments. Yet, people are obsessed with the idea of data aggregation because of its vast potential. Therefore, I propose (and this may have already unknowingly happened) that all cellular devices act as data collection devices. They already relay vast quantities of data to users, and apparently to the NSA, so why not the Transportation Administration for traffic analysis, the National Weather Authority for precise and accurate temperature and humidity, etc? Again, this brings up the issue of how to effectively analyze this data. As I learned from two books, Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform How We Live, Work, and Think and The Signal and the Noise: Why so Many Predictions Fail–but Some Don’t, data analysis of city-wide, national, international, or global data sets is a monumental task requiring lots of time on specialized high-computing systems run by data and statistical specialists.4,5 Both books also realize the importance of this new discipline. Ultimately, this ties back to using sensors in housing with the caveat that much of the possible data from these sensors will go unused for years before computing power rises to levels able to handle current and past data simultaneously.

Citations:

1) “InView Building Monitoring and Energy Management Solutions.” Energy Management and Building Intelligence Monitoring Technologies from PowerWise. PowerWise, 2014. Web. 03 Oct. 2014. <http://www.powerwisesystems.com/>.

2) Crowley, David N., Edward Curry, and John G. Breslin. 2014. “Leveraging Social Media and IoT to Bootstrap Smart Environments.” In Big Data and Internet of Things: A Roadmap for Smart Environments, edited by Nik Bessis and Ciprian Dobre, 380. Springer.

3) Crowley, David N., Edward Curry, and John G. Breslin. 2014. “Leveraging Social Media and IoT to Bootstrap Smart Environments.” In Big Data and Internet of Things: A Roadmap for Smart Environments, edited by Nik Bessis and Ciprian Dobre, 382. Springer.

4) Mayer-Schönberger, Viktor, and Kenneth Cukier. Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform How We Live, Work, and Think. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2013. Print.

5) Silver, Nate. The Signal and the Noise: Why so Many Predictions Fail–but Some Don’t. New York: Penguin, 2012. Print.

6) Crowley, David N., Edward Curry, and John G. Breslin. 2014. “Leveraging Social Media and IoT to Bootstrap Smart Environments.” In Big Data and Internet of Things: A Roadmap for Smart Environments, edited by Nik Bessis and Ciprian Dobre, 391. Springer.

 

Post #3: Public Space Reflections

Economic and Common Good Gain from the Development of New Public Space

Bowdoin’s McKeen Center for the Common Good defines the Common Good simply as something that Bowdoin citizens can use their individual “talents, passions and academic pursuits… for the benefit of society.”¹

My previous blog post argued for the revitalization of the waterfront, specifically piers. I still believe that area of Portland is one of the most feasible locations for change, due to its current run-down condition and proximity to the highly-trafficked and -desirable Old Port. The redesign of this area as a health- and fitness-based park system and new housing development would directly benefit the Common Good by encouraging physical wellness and economic development.

Is it a boon or hindrance that a public park (with appropriate seating, of course2) could provide sanctuary and location to the homeless population? On my trips to Portland I have almost always seen the homeless population utilizing the otherwise rarely attended Deering Oaks Park green, right off the Forest Avenue exit. Is this a use of space for the Common Good? Or would it provide more “Good” as the baseball fields and tennis courts in the park located along I-295? Would the pier parks I am suggesting be “uncontrolled… anarchical” spaces filled with the homeless as Mitchell suggests?3

Deering Oaks Park

     I believe my proposed pier parks would contribute to the Common Good by providing access to free physical (and subsequently emotional, though a beautiful park on the ocean may alone provide emotional) wellness to all. Due to its proximity to the wealthier neighborhoods and business district of Portland, I do not foresee a shift in the homeless population away from Deering Oaks Park, an area close to the lower-class neighborhoods, shelter, and Preble Street sanctuary. Regardless, my additional proposal to construct middle- and high-class housing, as part of the greater pier system, would further deter a homeless migration. Low argues that the privatization and commercialization of public spaces is necessary to their future and points out that they induce an expected level of class in the public space.4 While this may seem to subvert the “right to the city” as Lefebrev puts it, or “the right to sleep unmolested in a city park”, as Mitchell suggests, I argue that the piers as they now stand offer even less right to the underprivileged.5 Currently, they offer no access, claim, change, or ownership to the homeless or those of lower classes.6 A seafood market, arguably pricey, and a high-end tote bag shop were noteworthy businesses currently inhabiting one pier. My proposed plan would at least extend the rights of access, change, and (temporary inhabitation) ownership for those less privileged.

One small section of Hudson River Park

Looking back at my previous blog post, I mentioned one noteworthy example of a pier that underwent a similar transformation in Philadelphia, Race Street Pier. Looking now to NYC, I would like to point to the success of the Hudson River Park; a public-private redevelopment of “decaying piers and parking lots” that attracts “17 million visitors annually” and boasts attracting $3 billion in new construction in surrounding neighborhoods.6 With these examples from larger cities as our role model, Portland should see the economic and Common Good boon currently hidden by boarded-up, trash-heaped piers.

 

1) “McKeen Center Mission Statement.” Mission Mission. Bowdoin College, n.d. Web. 30 Sept. 2014. <http://www.bowdoin.edu/mckeen-center/about/>.

2) Whyte, William H. 1980. The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Washington, DC: The Conservation Foundation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6G4B9Z27yA

3) Mitchell, Don. 2014 [2003]. “To Go Again to Hyde Park: Public Space, Rights, and Social Justice.” In The People, Place and Space Reader, edited by Jen Jack Gieseking, et al, 192. New York: Routledge, 2014.

4)Low, Setha M. 2002. “Spaces of Reflection, Recovery, and Resistance: Reimagining the Postindustrial Plaza.” In After the World Trade Center: Rethinking New York City, edited by Michael Sorkin and Sharon Zukin, 164. New York: Routledge.

5) Mitchell, Don. 2014 [2003]. “To Go Again to Hyde Park: Public Space, Rights, and Social Justice.” In The People, Place and Space Reader, edited by Jen Jack Gieseking, et al, 193-194. New York: Routledge, 2014.

6) “About Us | Hudson River Park.” Hudson River Park. Hudson River Park Trust, 2014. Web. 30 Sept. 2014. <http://www.hudsonriverpark.org/about-us>.

 

Infrastructure, Post #2: From Policy to Recommendation

Peers for Portland Piers: Public Parks, Palatable Provisions, and Private Pads

Image 6 Comments
  1. Traffic schedule amendments (More bus pickups)
  2. Waterfront access (Pier parks)
  3. Traffic schedule amendments (More public parking/vertical garages)
  4. Public  drinking water/restrooms
  5. Utilization of piers

While I believe public restrooms and drinking water would be beneficial to Old Port (I don’t believe they are necessary in less-touristy neighborhoods), I think retooling traffic assignments and increasing pleasurable waterfront access are more important to the City of Portland. Looking at these changes in terms of excitement factor (because, let’s be honest, who doesn’t get giddy about traffic schedule amendments) I would argue that utilization of the piers by the development of public recreation areas (similar to a park, but with outdoor exercise equipment, physical challenges, etc), private housing (similar to the condos already present on the piers), and  restaurants/entertainment venues (similar to DiMillos) would have the most direct impact on the city, specifically the Old Port. I am imagining transforming one, or preferably several, of the run-down, seemingly abandoned piers into a greenspace intended to allow access to the waterfront, provide pleasurable public space for visitors and citizens, and enhance the value of surrounding buildings. This project has already been tested in small scale in Portland at Moontide Park, beside the new Ocean Gateway Pier near Hancock and Thames Streets. I experienced this park this summer at the Shipyard Half-Marathon after-party, where there was a concert, beer garden, and other great activities in the pleasant greenspace. A second, larger scale example is Race Street Pier in Philadephia, PA. (http://www.visitphilly.com/museums-attractions/philadelphia/race-street-pier/)

Race Street Pier

Doesn’t that look like an inviting greenspace?! Now, imagine adding outdoor exercise equipment, in an effort similar to one from Ben Butterworth Parkway in my hometown of Moline, Illinois. Check out: http://www.genesishealth.com/healthinfo/healthbeat/ , the hospital system sponsoring the exercise program in my town.

Upon investigating the City Council’s minutes, I have found nothing discussing the development of the seemingly abandoned piers we walked through on our field trip. I did find an interesting change to the Traffic Schedule that amended a “Bus Zone” and “No Parking” zone to a “Two Hour Metered Parking” and “Bus Zone”.¹ I suppose that translates into additional parking spots for the city, but there was probably a reason the no parking zone was necessary (reasons aren’t mentioned in the document). Not surprisingly, the motion was passed unanimously, as most of the topics in the City Council meeting are.² (It seems the only divisive topics are protection of existing parks and the school system. Perhaps the development of new parks may also be highly contested?)

In the beginning of Against the Smart City, Greenfield directly states that the way “city dwellers collectively understand, approach and use the environment around us” is rapidly changing.³ Why don’t we embrace this sentiment and advocate for the redevelopment of the piers? Even though there have been issues in the past with new condos on the water, we now know the allure and value of those properties. Following the examples of Race Street Pier, Moon Tide park, and Ben Butterworth Parkway, we know the project is feasible. Next, we should investigate the legal, financial, and governmental blockades. Ultimately, I believe it is worthwhile to investigate the development of the piers as public greenspaces, as well as food, entertainment, and housing options.

 

 

¹http://me-portland.civicplus.com/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Item/647?fileID=2766

²http://portlandmaine.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/06162014-438

³Greenfield, Adam. 2013. Selections from Against the Smart City. 1.3 edition. Do projects.