If you ever walked along a historic railroad and looked around, you might notice artifacts from an earlier time: abandoned telegraph poles, mechanical signals, and perhaps a watering station if you were lucky. Looking out further you see clusters of settlements, industries, and businesses that located next to the strategic iron highway. A walk along the railroad is an opportunity to perceive and understand our economic and social history through the built form. Some artifacts speak to our current setting: abandoned siding tracks, litter, and backwater houses.

Naomi Adiv, a doctoral student from U.C. Davis, is comprehensively documenting elements and their perceived meanings along the 170 mile Capitol Corridor from San Jose to Oakland, Sacramento, and Auburn, California for her dissertation. Reading just a little bit of her blog has resonated with my fascination of the railroad and formation on the landscape.

photo by compujeramey

Originally posted on the Adaptive Path Blog

In my mind, it seemed perfect: Technologists and transit-enthusiasts coming together to rethink the transit experience. A chance to bring the experience design gospel to an industry in need. Brimming with missionary zeal, my transportation planner husband and I headed off to the Bay Area TransitCamp.

I wasn’t prepared for the culture shock. My idealism was greeted by a ragtag bunch consisting of khaki-clad engineers, frumpy transit riders and suit-wearing transit officials. The engineers preached the possibilities of open-source data. White-haired transit riders screeched frustrations about their particular pet issues. And the transit officials defended cuts to bathroom-cleaning with the hard, cold facts of their bureaucratic reality.

Welcome to TransitCamp.

Could this possibly be the crowd that would transform transit? It felt like anarchy. “No complaints without solutions” was the only rule, and organizer Tara Hunt had to reiterate it again and again. Yet as idealism and realism collided, something impressive happened. We learned from one another. iPhone app developers learned that 40% of riders are below the poverty line. Cost-conscious officials learned that dozens of techies are eager to develop solutions–for free.

I realized that making a difference requires a humble and listening posture. Transit is an interdisciplinary problem that requires interdisciplinary understanding. While it produced interesting ideas, TransitCamp’s greatest triumph was fostering an atmosphere of learning and collaboration between unlikely bedfellows.

I just read about an interesting measure that’s been approved by the Norwich City Council to set parking fees based on the length of cars. The measure incentivizes generally more fuel efficient and less space-consuming cars:

While I think it seems like a great idea, I can’t help but think about the people who feel they don’t really have any other choice. As street parkers in a high demand area, there are lots of times we wish we had a SmartCar so we could fit it in the non-spaces… but we can’t just run out and buy a new car. The tiniest cars are way out of our price range right now. (Of course the constant nagging would probably factor into our decision when we do need a new car.) But even more without a choice are, as people against the measure cited, families with children for whom cramming everyone into a Mini isn’t possible.

Reading about teachers’ struggle to find parking at a San Francisco school made me think as well:

“Every recess - and sometimes in the middle of class - teachers at San Francisco’s Buena Vista Elementary School dash outside to move their cars before a parking ticket appears on their windshield. Up to six times a day, they forgo a chat with a student, a sip of coffee or a trip to the bathroom to play musical cars among the one-hour spots around the school.”

Planners generally say, “Driving is not a right. Just take transit.” But “teachers said that such options are often impossible or inconvenient with bags full of lesson plans, books, students’ homework and art supplies.”

It’s easy for young, mobile, urbanites to look down on those who commute an hour to work from the suburbs or drive a minivan. But understanding the forces that drive people to do so — financial, practical, social — is the key to providing realistic options for everyone.

Borders.

I’m fascinated with that political line in the sand that can separate cultures, ideologies, and people groups. Sometimes the borders make sense: large geographic features that have historically separated two people groups. Other times, as the case with Canada, it is just an arbitrary line in the earth separating an otherwise cohesive land mass and ecosystem. However, because that political line was drawn, two cultures emerge as distinct from one another. A person on one side of the ditch (shown below) might cry at the Star Spangled Banner and scenes of Rocky V and feel more entitled to personal liberty and privacy than his neighbor across the street. The neighbor quite possibly feels proud to be Canadian and is a diehard fan of Hockey Night Canada. Although the media markets overlap and border peoples might cross to the other side frequently, the hassle of crossing makes it difficult to intermix freely and thus create a hybrid, border culture.

Recently, the European Union expanded their network of countries that citizens and visitors can cross without showing an ID card. It will be interesting to see if there are long term changes now that Poles and Germans can cross the border at will.

America to the left, Canadian subdivision on the right

Looking down 0th Avenue near Surrey, BC. America to the right Canadian houses on the left.

Top Borders I would like to visit and document:

1. N. Korea/S. Korea - families split apart by decades and a heavily militarized zone. A brother may be a senior manager for a multinational firm while the other worships the head of state and works in a coal mine.
2. Poland/Germany - The border between the two has become open. I’d love to document the change that may occur between border cities over time. Will historic prejudice become entrenched or will the cultures begin to fuse in ways?

3. Scotland/England - although part of the same country, this border was bitterly fought for years. Do the people who historically lived near the border consider themselves Scottish or English?

4. Islands Dually claimed by Russia and Japan - on Google maps they have names in both Russian and Japanese… who lives there/who historically lived there?

There are only three ways for an American to experience North Korea… two of them won’t result in imprisonment. One way is to go to Beijing to get a NK tourist visa and fly into Pyongyang. When you land, expect the complete treatment. A friendly tour guide will take you to the grand, wide boulevards and monuments while keeping an eye on what you photograph and who you talk to. Other tours exist to limited resorts and trade zones near the South Korean border.

The other is through satellite photography. OneFreeKorea posted an interesting article analyzing an alleged labor camp based on what we can see from space pieced together with interviews of ex-guards. I’m convinced. See the area for yourself.

Satellite photos are far from experiencing a place. But with the interactive features of current map websites and stand-alone programs, there is an element of feeling like you’re there. At least there’s empathy combined with imagination for what it must be like. When I hear about the lives of North Koreans consigned to brutal labor, I try to imagine what it would be like to navigate through those narrow rows of huts on my way to a shift in the coal mine. I wonder what chances they might get to run into the woods or find some other ways to escape.

In an entirely different purpose, I use photos to plan out trips or explore new areas in my own backyard. I like to get a sense of the landscape of a place before I go there so that I can do unscripted exploring. I mentally take note of how towns are laid out: where the downtown might be, how it might be possible to get to a remote area, or where a good vista might be found. My imagination of an area is never as full of an experience as actually going there, but it is one way to take yourself there.

Dan Harrelson gives a personal account about how the suburbs are a good place to live (here). He cites proximity to family, nature, and a friendly community as relative advantages to city life. I think there is much to be learned about what sorts of communities are desirable to live in. In other parts of the country, the advantages of living in the suburbs or the countryside go without saying (some of the reasons quoted above). In the Bay Area, it’s interesting to hear of these advantages in an environment in which we are barraged with the message of how it is better to live in the city. In the city areas are espoused for their close-knit, distinct neighborhoods anchored by locally-owned, eclectic shops. Of course we also constantly hear about it is more environmentally sustainable to live in the city because of public transportation and less personal consumption. But if we are to invite the masses to consider living in the cities again, more work is to be done on fostering stronger community bonds and creating quiet recreational areas.

I got into a friendly argument with a colleague about “appropriate” uses for churches. It started with an observation he made about how St. Bart’s in Midtown over-advertises its cafe - and why does a church have a cafe anyway? He advocates separation of uses, and deplored as an example, the proposal to turn a church into a nightclub. I believe instead that churches are gathering places - in a whole host of different ways, whether they are cafes, nursery schools, night clubs, or anything else.

Maybe I remember very clearly the packed jazz club in the basement of St. Giles Church, one of the oldest Episcopalian churches in London, where the priest tended the bar, and it was one of the few places you could get absinthe. I thought of it as the safest place you could try absinthe, not as a dangerous place.
The argument reminded me that I took pictures of a cemetery in the East Village - the New York Marble Cemetery, which operates like a park on the weekends. Chairs are put outside and people are encouraged to have picnics and visit the park/cemetery.

What do you think of this use of the cemetery? Disrepectful? Or good management?
Much of our disagreement was wrapped up in our conception of these places and activity that is or is not perceived as illicit. I don’t thinking drinking and dancing or listening to music late at night, say at a night club, is such an illicit activity that needs physical separation from the observance of spirituality. However, my colleague thought that night club activity is immoral and church activity is moral. We agreed to disagree. I do think this discussion highlights some of the fundamental principles guiding people’s inherent reactions to the use of space. What do you think?

SoHo is clogged with streets and plenty of people lately, but people still find ways to enjoy a seat.

A trip to Los Angeles is always fun. New York and LA couldn’t be more different. I got a bird’s eye view from our office tower of some of the public spaces downtown.

I thought this plaza was the most indicative of the type of places…beautiful perhaps from the sky - not friendly at all on the ground.

However, Little Tokyo was really fun. Small-scale, filled with people making use of the little ledges. Sit, stand or lean, they offer a bit of respite.

Steve Portigal posted some pictures of the Embarcadero’s creative “anti-skateboard” devices. The principle is similar to those functional yet visually attractive pigeon deterrents posted about earlier. Says Steve…

It’s still ugly, but there’s an emotional component (”cute” - “fun” - “neat”) created by the whimsical shapes that counteracts that reaction quite strongly. I’m sure the original planners and architects are horrified, but it kinda mostly works.

Additionally, it feels less unwelcoming than spikes or other anti-sit devices in the same way those pigeon deterrents feel less intimidating — so maybe it also counteracts the negative feelings you might have about not being allowed so lie or skate there!

LINK: Anti-skateboard Devices on the Embarcadero
LINK: Another post about anti-skate devices and user experience

“What do you think of People’s Park?”. Most Berkeley residents will feel mildly tolerant of it, but would never advise anyone to visit. The grove of redwoods at the east end and the community gardens at the west shelter dozens of homeless residents and sometimes open drug activity. To most Berkeleyans, it is an area to be avoided. Some official maps still don’t acknowledge its existence. To others, it represents the triumph of the struggle of the “people” versus the Establishment. It is a place where someone can do most anything they want to do. It is a place of beautiful foliage, and for many it is home.

This sovereign piece of U.C. Berkeley property was slated to become a superblock of undergraduate residential dorms, administration buildings, and a parking lot in the 1960’s. But the protest of students, activists, and flower children kept the land tenuously free of such development for 38 years. People’s Park stands today as a stark example of a mild anarchy, free of much police interference, and governed only by loose values of tolerance and personal liberty. This contrasts other public spaces such as shopping malls or even city parks where security guards and police have greater powers to regulate a person’s right of occupation.

Now to be perfectly honest: I don’t like People’s Park. Nor do I think it should even exist. I live one block from the park and I pass it on my way to many places. It feels unsafe. Too much illicit activity is tolerated there. It’s not an appealing place to visit. The park is kept in a scruffy, disorderly, and in a “Berkeley-like” appearance. The park was illegally seized from the University and there is a perfectly good park two blocks south.

The very existence of People’s Park in such near proximity has been a continual, unwelcome reminder to me of our society’s chronic homeless and drug problems. Since I’ve lived here, I have had to deal with the tension of my more than sufficient life juxtaposed with the more meager lives of those down the street. My response has been to ignore this scene.

When at last I took up an opportunity to distribute bagged lunches to homeless residents in People’s Park, my perspective of this place changed completely. I met genuinely nice people, most of a sound mind. I met people who worked hard: collecting cans, tending community gardens. I met people who cared and looked out for others. But unfortunately most of all, I met vulnerable people: people exposed to the elements; exposed to predators and drug pushers; exposed to disease and rot. In most respects, I met people a lot like you and me.

People’s Park is not some abomination, a refuge of strange people, or catastrophic failure of government. People’s Park is a TRANSPARENT place. There are a lot of normal people living in a home without walls. We can see everything that goes on and we don’t like it. First, we don’t like the fact that there are people living such miserable lives in this age of wealth and technology. But second, we don’t like to see the common struggles of society, such as substance abuse, disease, and violence in such plain sight. These things happen to people in all walks of life - in nice neighborhoods as well as bad - and perhaps in more subtle ways. But is it any better to have abuse or violence happen behind the facade of a cozy bungalow? Do we prefer to pretend that the cute porches of a traditional neighborhood represent the harmonious and happy existence of our society?

These are difficult questions to face, and if you have been able to face them without jadedness, I applaud you. Personally, I am content to believe that attractive urban form has its place and represents our aspiration as humans to live in a rich, harmonious existence (i.e. a desire for heaven). Why should we aspire to live or see people live in a dwelling other than one that reflects each person’s own sense of dignity?

However, the redemptive quality of People’s Park is that we see our society for what it is: not without its struggles and flaws. It is better to see the truth, however uneasy to face, than to hide it. If we see our blights in plain sight, and face up to it, we can perhaps tackle a real problem. And if we look a little harder, we can see a whole lot of good things happening in a place where we least expect.

I went to West Midtown a couple weekends ago, looking for spots of refuge from the heavy avenue traffic. I’ve been apartment hunting so something that I look for in a neighborhood is whether there are informal or formal places to hang out outside of the apartment, which will inevitably be very small. I really like some of the buildings out there, and I really wanted to like this park, which was soaking some of the sun on the very cold day.

But something about it made me stop and not want to go in. This is the entrance.

It’s OK. I didn’t know that it was a Balsley Park, but there it is. The gesture is to have the doors wide open. However, the real eye-catching element as you approach the park is actually this concession stand:

This large green structure is what I saw first, and it threw me off. I think it was the fact that Italian Ice was the largest font, and it was such a cold day that it didn’t appeal to me. Also, the cold drinks. And that the color of the concession stand matches the color of the trash can and both are similar in shape. I didn’t want to buy anything from this stand..but then I saw the coffee and thought maybe. As I got closer to the park, it turns out the concession stand was closed, so I looked in:

Yikes, those gates, does it look like a drive-way entrance…

Cold seats that don’t allow the sitter to look at anything…

…except the on-ramp. Was it me or did it seem that this was not meant for people, but for small vehicles? There is that guy who found a spot in the sun.

I loved the look and sound of this park on the Thomas Balsley Associates web site:

The description of the park makes it a public space success: there was community consensus, the “right” string of programming to make the space successful, including food, activities and seating. But the park doesn’t work. At least on this day, it didn’t. The photos on the designer’s web site are taken from the opposite end of the park, so maybe I just approached it from the “wrong” spot. It was the dead of winter, and maybe the park was built several years ago and is starting to show signs of wear. However, there shouldn’t be a wrong way to get into the park. And enduring the tests of time and seasons are what make public spaces successful experiences for people.

It felt like we walked from one car-infested development to another in Brooklyn all day Saturday, so it was a pleasure to run into this experiment started last summer. Willoughby between Adam and Pearl Street in downtown Brooklyn is closed to cars and has been transformed into a mini public square with some moveable seating, some non-moveable seating, big planers and randomly (or strategically?) places trash cans. The purpose is to test the feasibility of closing it permanently to cars.

It was a cold and gray day, so no one was out on the metal furniture.

But a few people took advantage of the furniture to stop and adjust their bags…or maybe look for some spare change.

Though the square was mighty empty, there is an ancillary benefit to setting up people-oriented amenities within it, even in the middle of winter. It is a little island of brightness in the middle of many many streets and lanes of cars, buses and trucks. We looked lost all along our walk from Borough Hall to Adams Street, and it was in front of this friendly place that a woman stopped us to ask us if we needed directions. Lovely!

Hello This Place Is…readers! I’m excited to join Alexa and Seth in spreading the word about spaces…for people. (Thank you!)

I come from Bird to the North, where I have been blogging about how places are made. I believe that anyone can know when a certain place feels great and they can tell when a space is better than another; it’s time that we trust our intuition and senses!

Just so you know, a few things I love:
People-watching, of course! preferably with a well-worn seat or a just-right leaning table
Kindly offered directions when I am lost
Sharing sleds in Central Park after a big snowstorm
Curb-sitting with a coffee
Eating my way through a neighborhood by sampling all its street food
Public markets! Almost any kind

Enough about me, on to places!
–Shin-pei

Like Turn Here (amateur videos documenting places), Placeblogger is about celebrating the unique experiences that characterize places. By juxtaposing all of the blogs about a particular place, a real-time, real-life, word-of-mouth portrait of that place is created that could potentially capture a place in a way that major newspapers or travel guides can’t.

“Placeblogs are about something broader than news alone. They’re about the lived experience of a place. That experience may be news, or it may simply be about that part of our lives that isn’t news but creates the texture of our daily lives: our commute, where we eat, conversations with our neighbors, the irritations and delights of living in a particular place among particular people.”

Naturally, my first impulse was to look up cities in which I’ve lived. Although right now most of the places are major metro areas, I was surprised to see at least one entry for a town near my hometown, Kittanning, PA. I don’t know how many blogs would actually be devoted to writing about a small town like Kittanning, however.

But another way to explore places via blogs, perhaps, would be to look up shared locations on Social Networking sites like Xanga. Although Xanga recommends that you only identify yourself with the larger Metro area, Seth managed to get a pretty decent metro going for Fredericktown, Ohio, the 2300-person town where he grew up… http://metros.xanga.com/metros/metro.aspx?id=7551

LINK: http://www.placeblogger.com/faq

Designing places that will work for ALL people…

“Universal design is a relatively new concept that seeks to go beyond those codes to make the built environment usable by all people without the need for adaptation. This might include kitchen islands with adjustable-height countertops, front-loading washers and dryers, roll-in showers, and no-step entrances, eliminating the need for ramps.

But the important point, according to universal design advocates, is that it looks and feels like a normal apartment building. Rather than relying on designs that can segregate people according to their disability (impaired vision versus low mobility, for example), the intent of universal design is to create products and environments usable by as many people as possible, including people with no disabilities at all.”

LINK: From the New York Times (read it before it’s archived!)

This might be old news for some of you in planning… but it’s interesting to think about it from a people-centered place design perspective. Several European cities are trying a new experiment…

Getting rid of all traffic signs results in… safer streets?

The premise is that by accommodating people’s natural interactions with each other and inherent behaviors (e.g. people’s tendency to be more cautious and courteous when they aren’t being forced to) instead of forcing them into an artificial construct of control, people will behave better naturally.

An interesting example of designing places around people’s natural behaviors, supporting and capitalizing on these behaviors rather than coercing them! And the more interesting part? It seems to work — resulting in less accidents.

“The many rules strip us of the most important thing: the ability to be considerate. We’re losing our capacity for socially responsible behavior,” says Dutch traffic guru Hans Monderman, one of the project’s co-founders. “The greater the number of prescriptions, the more people’s sense of personal responsibility dwindles.”

LINK: http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,448747,00.html

[via http://archinect.com/]

“Humans tend to avert eye gaze if they feel someone is standing too close. They retreat to corners, put distance between themselves and strangers, and sit or stand equidistant from one another like birds on a wire.”

According to new research highlighted in the New York times, the rules of “proxemics” are so strong that people even carry them into virtual words with their avatars in games such as Second Life.

This article discusses the study of these human interactions and highlights their relevance and importance to urban design and space design.

So bus manufacturers and landscape architects beware: don’t force others to violate my space!

LINK: In Certain Circles, Two is a Crowd

The AIGA (professional organization for graphic arts/design) started a project encouraging people to “document democracy” and particularly the “interiors, exteriors and other views that are part of your voting experience.”

The goal of the project is to document the good and bad aspects of the voting experience, to celebrate it and to consider how it could be improved.

I should have posted sooner when you could have submitted something, but here’s a link to check out the submissions. And you’re always welcome to post your thoughts here.

LINK: http://www.pollingplacephotoproject.org/

Food for Thought: What aspects of your voting environment affected your experience? Your sense of privacy? Your confidence that your vote went through?

“The increasing deployment of sensors and hand-held electronics in recent years is allowing a new approach to the study of the built environment. The way we describe and understand cities is being radically transformed - alongside the tools we use to design them and impact on their physical structure.

Studying these changes from a critical point of view and anticipating them is the goal of the SENSEable City Laboratory, a new research initiative at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.”

“[This] project (Real-Time Rome) aggregated data from cell phones, buses and taxis in Rome to better understand urban dynamics in real time. By revealing the pulse of the city, the project aims to show how technology can help individuals make more informed decisions about their environment.”

LINK: http://senseable.mit.edu/
RELATED POSTS: Personal Paths Through Cities

Hooray for cities that actually practice the people-centered place design process! The Nashville Civic Design Center recognizes that creating public gathering places that attract groups of people is essential to keeping a downtown alive.

Through surveys (to assess people’s perception of places), observation (including behavioral mapping of which parts of the park are used throughout the day and how), and pedestrian counts, they studied Church Street Park’s…

…sociability (are people seen in groups there? is it a good place to meet)

…access and linkages (does the park draw people in? does it have clear entrances?)

…activities (are there good gathering points? are there enough places to sit?)

…and image (how do people perceive this park?).

Check out their preliminary findings (6.6mb PDF, best to right click and download).
LINK: http://www.civicdesigncenter.org/projects-streetlife.html

“Community Planning Centers are customized websites designed by Project for Public Spaces whose purpose is to involve local people more directly and effectively in a public space project.”

These websites make information about planning projects publicly available and invite community participation and feedback. Their example sites…

Omaha by Design

Littleton Places

The principle is excellent, but I’d like to see sites like these take the interactive dimension even further, making it easier for people to share their experiences with places (and not just their feedback, which these sites seem to primarily solicit, because not everyone knows they even have opinions!)

Food for thought: How can a community website engage ordinary, busy, everyday residents? What engages YOU?

• Google’s gotten people to tag their images by turning it into an addicting and relatively mindless game (Google Image Labeler).
• The City of Pittsburgh’s Map Hub has gotten resident cyclists posting their bike accidents and bike resources on a collaborative map.
• An interesting enough flickr photo pool can get thousands of people to expose their habits under the guise of self-expression (while unwittingly providing valuable insights for designers!)

How can urban planners take advantage of collaborative web technologies to understand people’s experiences and needs and in turn create places that succeed?

LINK: About Community Planning Centers

Part of the vision behind “This Place Is…” is to encourage ordinary people (not just urbanists and planners) to think critically about the places around them. I haven’t seen a better resource for getting started than the excellent primers from the Project for Public Spaces:

Why Many Public Spaces Fail

William H. Whyte once said, “It is difficult to design a space that will not attract people - what is remarkable is how often this has been accomplished.” Today, many public spaces seem to be intentionally designed to be looked at but not touched. They are neat, clean, and empty - as if to say, “no people, no problem!” But to us, when a public space is empty, vandalized, or used chiefly by undesirables, this is generally an indication that something is very wrong with its design, or its management, or both.

The following pairs of photographs illustrate some of the most common problems of public spaces.

Lack of places to sit - Many public spaces don’t even provide a place to sit. So, in their protracted quest just to be comfortable, people are often forced to adapt to the situation in their own way. Sometimes they simply give up (below), or have to sit on briefcases (second image below).

A lack of good places to sit is an equally important issue. For example, a choice of seats in sun or shade can make all the difference in a place’s success, depending on its climate and location. Allowing people to sit near a playground or within view of other activities is also crucial.

Lack of gathering points - This includes features people want or need, such as playgrounds, or places where varying elements–bus stop, vending cart, outdoor seating–combine to create a gathering point. Food is often a critical component of a successful gathering point.

Paris’ Parc de la Villette (top) has seats that force people to sit in unsociable ways, and signs that ask them not to climb on the sculpture. Though located along a stretch of the Pacific Coast Highway, this park at Laguna Beach (near top) has loads of activities, food, and places to sit. It is a busy, healthy gathering place.

Poor entrances and visually inaccessible spaces - If a space is to be used, people need to see it and they need to be able to get to it.

A dark or narrow entrance such as those that used to be at New York City’s Bryant Park (top) keeps people out instead of inviting them in. The same entrance (near top), redesigned to be more inviting and open, has kiosks that sell coffee and sandwiches, and the interior of the park is visible from the street.

Dysfunctional features - Oftentimes features are designed simply to punctuate the space, serving a use more visual than functional, instead of encouraging activity to occur around them - as at this waterfront park in Barcelona, below.

Good features, such as the friendly gorilla at the Berlin Zoo (above), encourage activity to occur around them.

Paths that don’t go where people want to go

Paths that lead to nowhere are useless, as demonstrated at this Phoenix, Arizona park (top). The Luxembourg Gardens in Paris, however (near top), show the art of making a path that pulls people along it, or allows them to stop and relax.

Domination of a space by vehicles - There may be a lack of crosswalks, or streets that are too wide, or lacking sidewalks.

A main street is not a highway. One should not fear crossing the street so much that the activity needs to occur in groups, as on George Street in Sydney, Australia (top). Crossing the street should be an easy, comfortable activity. Even if you have to wait (near top, Paris, France)

Blank walls or dead zones around the edges of a place - The area around a space is as important to its success as the design and management of the space itself.

The blank wall (near top) contributes nothing to the activity of the street. In fact, it doesn’t even seem real.

Inconveniently located transit stops - Bus or train stops located in places where no one wants to use them are a good recipe for failure.

A transit stop located in a busy, active place can not only make that place better, but also increase transit use.

From the Project for Public Spaces’ article, Why Many Public Spaces Fail

So do you know of any places that make these mistakes (or that do these things well)? We’d love to see (and post!) your snapshots on This Place Is!

Ready for more? Now that you’ve thought about what makes a place fail…

• learn some questions you can ask to evaluate What Makes a Place Great
• try your hand at reviewing a place for the PPS’ Great Places Gallery or Hall of Shame (but send a link our way if you do!)
  
• or just check out a few of the excellent (and shameful) examples there.

The Project for Public Spaces is at the forefront of people-centered place design. The PPS is a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting a people-centric rather than project-centric approach to creating places. Their website is rich in resources for those interested in this subject. We’ll be posting other highlights soon.

Is it a coincidence that millions more Americans travel by car and plane than bus or train? “The very word ‘lost’ in our language means much more than simple geographic uncertainty,” wrote Kevin Lynch, who cleared a path for the modern art and science of wayfinding in his landmark work, The Image of the City. “[I]t carries overtones of utter disaster.” Getting lost on public transportation may not be disastrous for passengers, but when tourists are turned off by the experience, it’s a disaster for cities; when new users aren’t turned into repeat customers, it’s a disaster for transit agencies and for society; and even regular riders sometimes require reinforcement.

We all know that being lost is a bad experience. Wayfinding design, for those unfamiliar with it, is about creating creating comforting experiences through designing understandable spaces that make people feel in control of their surroundings and choices.

For many, unfortunately, public transportation represents the opposite of a comforting experience.

Thus, I’m excited about San Francisco’s Wayfinding Project and the steps they’re taking towards enhancing the wayfinding experience of transportation users. Their recommendations are simple but practical, and include….

Recommendations for Busses and Streetcars:

• Include Transfer Information on Signs
• Add Signs Featuring Destination Information
• Improve Shelters and Provide Basic Information at All Stops
• Simplify Destination Descriptions

Recommendations for Subways and Commuter Rails:

• Color-Code BART Lines
• Remove Outdated, Damaged and Non-Standard Maps and Signs
• Clearly Differentiate BART and Muni Entrances
• Streamline and Enhance Station- and Platform-Identification Signs
• Add and Upgrade Directional Signage
• List and Give Directions to Destinations Near BART
• Add Signs Along Pedestrian Pathways to BART
• Clearly Designate Pathways to Connecting Transit

Food for thought… What have your public transportation experiences been like? Do you have any suggestions for ways that your local transportation system’s wayfinding experience could be improved?

LINK: The San Francisco Wayfinding Project [via Adventures in Urban Living]
RELATED: Rethinking the Library Experience

The author calls his collection of panoramas, “suburban sprawl and other calamities,” but I’m curious whether everyone looking at these photos would see “calamity” captured therein.

I’ll admit — my first reaction was that some of these look like beautiful, safe places to live (some people who live there must have thought so) — and that it’s got to be debatable how bad all of this is.

To tie this back into the purpose of this site… I’ll pose the question, exactly what are the effects of sprawl from a user experience perspective? Do people choose to live there because there’s something positive about the experience, or do they see living there as a necessary evil? (And does it even matter if it’s not sustainable?)

LINK: Suburban Sprawl Panoramas (left side)
LINK: East Bay Sprawl Panoramas

Thanks for the link, Jess!