10th anniversary post: Blizzards get you thinking

 

That was a blizzard (2015)

Ten years ago the weather was different than it is this week. A big pile of snow--11 inches, says my post--got dumped on Iowa as January 2015 turned into February. This year, we're in a stretch of unseasonably warm weather including a couple record high temperatures and a couple more near-records. 2024-25 been a warm dry winter, which could be random luck, but we should know better than that by now.

I produced my own blizzard, of questions, ten years ago. This anniversary post seemed a good time to revisit them.

1. Why are we still building sprawl?
2. Can downtown develop/be developed by a resilient transportation system?
3. How should I be rooting on the federal transportation bill?
4. How should we consider climate change in planning?
5. Why is the clearing of public sidewalks the responsibility of the homeowner, even though the clearing of public streets is undertaken by the government?

These questions are pretty central to how we design our cities, allowing that #5 was dropped on me by a work colleague while I was working on that post, so it got looped in. City design may strike a person more urgently during a blizzard than it does when the big-box store is a simple 20-minute drive away. My 2015 frustration at the pace of positive change, too, probably reflected fatigue from the hard work of snow removal. 

Never not contemplating urbanism

Surely people were going to grasp that local government finances are driven by the demands we place on it, not by waste, fraud and abuse? That cities won't be able forever to rely on federal and state money to make up whatever funding gaps result? That public transit unlike private vehicles is scalable in a way that supports intensive economic development? That climate change makes new demands on our capacity to be resilient?

However, "There's drudgery in social change, and glory for the few," sang Billy Bragg. Today the urgency of approaching urban design differently is, if possible, less apparent at all levels of government. I've gone from being mildly frustrated to totally appalled. Urbanist design comes recommended for all sorts of reasons related to our common life: environmental sustainability in the face of climate change, place attachment, exercise, inclusion, community-building, and financial resilience. 

Strong Towns has been saying for years that local governments rely too heavily on federal and state financial assistance, which makes big development projects and sprawl seem cost-free. (See Charles L. Marohn, Jr., Strong Towns: A Bottom-Up Revolution to Rebuild American Prosperity [Wiley, 2020] for the complete argument.) Twelve erratic years of federal government shutdowns and near-shutdowns haven't apparently changed the towns' short-term thinking. Maybe a freeze on federal grants--one was declared January 27, temporarily blocked by a judge the following day, and then rescinded (see Parker 2025)--would jolt localities into more productive approaches to development?

Ten years ago, Washington infighting was imperiling appropriations for the Department of Transportation, which funds state and local transportation projects. Eventually the bill got passed, but to what end? Though the Joe Biden administration nudged these projects in the direction of transit, transportation funding goes predominantly for roadway construction and expansion, which reinforces our already car-centric development. That's what prompted question #3 on my list. I followed up: If the federal government is the founder of this ridiculous feast, maybe if they cut off the allowance states and localities will be forced to be rational?... It would be at least interesting, because at least local choices would be clearer. 

Nor has an increasing pile of climate disasters catalyzed urbanism. Climate science is a key element of the "woke bullshit" President Trump feels he has a mandate to quash (For the risks inherent in Trump's aggressive climate change denial, see Flavelle 2025). Within 24 hours of Trump's inauguration, acting Environmental Protection Administration head James Payne fired all members of the Science Advisory Board and the Clean Air Advisory Board, and the U.S. withdrew from the international climate talks known as the Paris Accord. Trump is attempting to pause federal grants for clean-energy projects, slash or purge the federal workforce, and has appointed a pro-extraction, climate change-denying permanent EPA administrator who has little environmental experience (Davenport 2025). It's not clear that professional environmental staff will be gagged as health staff have been, but it seems likely they will be strongly discouraged from speaking openly about anything important.

In Iowa, we're not going to talk about the climate, either. Land in Iowa is plentiful and cheap, and we apparently trust the oil lobby to make sure we still have access to gasoline for our (ever larger) vehicles. So new K-12 science standards excise the term "climate change" (in favor of "climate trends"), along with the word "evolution." Reference to human impacts on the climate will also be removed from education (Luu 2025). If we don't talk about it, maybe it will all go away?

Maybe the answers will come, not by restoring urbanism, but some wholly new design concept. Geographer Stephanie Wakefield raises that possibility in a piece for Next City that promotes her forthcoming book about the future of Miami:

Rather than an endless expanse of cities and urbanization processes with seemingly no terminus — the latter destined to be but fodder for ever greater resilience of the former — might the Anthropocene’s human and nonhuman dislocations produce other spaces, processes and imaginaries entirely? (quoted at Ionescu 2025)

I'm definitely curious about what these spaces and imaginaries might be, although I don't know how well I'll do with an entire book written in the manner of the sentence quoted above. Wakefield suggests localities will have additional design/form considerations beyond the urban-or-suburban dichotomy I'm used to. 

As it happens, later this month I'll be in St. Petersburg on the opposite side of the State of Florida. I'm looking forward to seeing what people are calling the large body of water between Florida and Texas, but also how they are dealing with likely climate threats. Here is a map of future sea level contingencies from Advantage Pinellas, the long-range transportation plan produced by Forward Pinellas, which is the St. Petersburg-area Metropolitan Planning Organization.

from Advantage Pinellas (2024, p. 41)

The first thing to notice is that's a fair chunk of land that's theoretically going to be under water. The second thing to notice is Metropolitan Planning Organizations, like Forward Pinellas and our own Corridor MPO, are funded by the U.S. government. That means our tax dollars are paying for this "woke bullshit!" How much longer will Advantage Pinellas remain online? I've downloaded it, just in case. For now, it's encouraging that people--at least those who staff MPOs--are thinking about resilient, inclusive, livable, prosperous futures. Bless them for it. Whether they will be allowed to keep doing so is at this point unanswerable. 

Strong Towns has always maintained a local focus, treating national politics as not-my-circus-not-my-monkeys. I'm not sure how valid this is anymore. At the state and national levels, powerful industry interests and Project 2025 ideologues are making the rules now, and if there's information that threatens them, they'll do their best to suppress it. Localities could try to figure things out on their own, but constitutionally they're limited by state action, and anyhow it's just easier to keep doing what we've been doing.

So, my answers to the questions I posed ten years ago: 

1. Why are we still building sprawl? Because it's the policy path of least resistance, residential and commercial developments can be large enough to be highly profitable, and localities get the property taxes without immediate needs for service.
2. Can downtown develop/be developed by a resilient transportation system? Probably not, because most cities don't have the political or financial independence for this to happen.
   
3. How should I be rooting on the federal transportation bill? Doesn't matter. Streets and highways will always get taken care of, however imperfectly they are maintained once their built.
4. How should we consider climate change in planning? Consider a range of possible outcomes for which we need to be prepared, and support rather than suppressing research.
5. Why is the clearing of public sidewalks the responsibility of the homeowner, even though the clearing of public streets is undertaken by the government? Street maintenance sucks up a lot of resources, so we get mandates on property owners instead.

I hope I'm still around in 2035 to admit how wrong I was back in 2025!

ORIGINAL POST: "Blizzards Get You Thinking," 1 February 2015

SEE ALSO: C40 Global Cities website: international intracity climate action networ. Hearing Helene Chartier from this organization speak on the Cities for Everyone webinar the morning after my post made me feel somewhat more hopeful.

Confessions of a sidewalk vigilante

Downtown Cedar Rapids: 300 block of 1st St SE, 1/17/2022

My city's new sidewalk snow removal policy has gotten some negative attention this year, and justifiably so, but its potential as a weapon against a perennial menace should not be overlooked. Where property owners used to have 48 hours after a snowfall to clear their sidewalks of snow, they now have a mere 24 hours. I imagine my next-door neighbor rushing out with a stopwatch as soon as they see the last flake descend. One of my work colleagues has already gotten the dreaded pink notice on her front door stating a complaint has been filed and she must clear her walks or the city will do it for an inflated price. 

This property (NOT my coworker's) has the pink notice AND one for water shutoff

I will never file such a complaint against a residence, even though I walk to work, and plan to continue walking when I'm elderly and frail. It's not just because I fear her wrath; I have serious reservations about the "narc on your neighbor" approach to code violations. It's a micro-version of an ugly national trend. As Frank Bruni points out in his latest New York Times newsletter about Virginia's e-mail system for reporting schoolteachers, Texas's law encouraging lawsuits against anyone involved with abortion, and West Virginia's call for tips on election suspcions:

Is the way to address Americans’ disagreements to transform citizens into snoops and have them turn on one another? Our leaders should point us toward common ground, not add whole new weapons to our battlegrounds. In Virginia and Texas, they added weapons. (Bruni 2022)

There are all sorts of good reasons one might not get their walks clear within 24 hours: frailty, injury, travel, preoccupation with child care, and so on. If there's a problem sidewalk in the neighborhood, neighbors could check in and help out. Call in the law only as a last resort, and maybe not even then.

Our neighborhoods have bigger problems than homes where the snow doesn't get shoveled in a timely fashion. The part of town where I live, work, and go to church has a problem with land speculation. "In a market like D.C.," explain the writers on Greater Greater Washington, "it's not uncommon for the land underneath a building to be more valuable than the structure itself... [A]ll forms of property management and land use have costs, and depending on the condition of the building and the land the costs of putting it to work might be greater than the potential rental income" (Loh and Rodriguez 2018). 

Land speculation exists even in Cedar Rapids, though we're certainly not a hot market like Washington, D.C. or Seattle or Boston. The owner might be a bank waiting for housing values to increase, an out-of-town investor hoping to cash in on the next big thing, or heirs of a homeowner who's died. And someone looking for a place to build a house or start a business will be glad to find a vacancy. The problem is that, as years pass, and then more years pass, and despite obvious needs houses aren't built and businesses aren't started, land speculation becomes a drag on the surrounding area (see Holland 2018). And it's these properties, more than two weeks after the last measurable snowfall, that still have impassable sidewalks.

13th St SE, 1/31/2022: The city might clear it more effectively if I reported it sooner

Until we get a land value tax, or someone willing to meet the speculators' asking prices, I think the best I can do is to annoy the property owners and bring the city's attention to the problems by filing snow removal complaints. The first one I filed, on the block across the street from the college where I teach, got results, in that what snow could be was removed, though I don't know if they'll be able to assess the Nevada-based trust that owns it. 

Last week I flagged a vacant property on 2nd Avenue SE (pictured above, on 1/31/2022)--listing an owner in nearby Marion--though it was complicated because I couldn't get the address from the (non-existent) building and had to look it up on the assessor's website. I plan to report these properties every time it snows. Maybe the owners will get so annoyed they'll do something with the properties--or at least take care of them. I admit I haven't yet brought about a revolution in land use, but it is vaguely satisfying to my sense of moral outrage.

Let it snow!

SEE ALSO

"We Need to Talk. About Snow," 3 February 2021 [piles of plowed snow block crosswalks]

"Where Are the Metro's Destinations Heading?" 28 July 2021 [tax bills for developed and undeveloped blocks] 

 

MyCR reporting tool: https://www.cedar-rapids.org/mycr/index.php

Credit for the phrase "narc on your neighbor" goes to Dennis Evans, who was my neighbor years ago. We did not narc on each other.

We need to talk. About snow

 

1st Ave and 13trh St SE

Snow and ice can mess up any way of getting around, but in most northern cities the streets are cleared pretty quickly. Sidewalks are up to the property owner, but most eventually get done. A huge, persistent problem, however, is the snow that street plows pile up by the sidewalk.

1st Av and 13th St SE

I'm not here to narc on my neighbors, or to hate on my city, just to point out that there needs to be a way for people to cross the street. These pictures were taken more than 72 hours after the most recent snowfall, but some of this snow has been here since the end of December. (This far north, snow once on the ground stays on the ground until spring, because the air rarely gets warm enough to melt it.)

2nd Avenue and 13th Street SE

I didn't have to work to find these pictures. I just walked home from work. All of these intersections are within one mile of each other. It's not special in any way... just a typical mile in a typical northern city whose development is typically sprawled.

2nd Avenue and 14th Street SE

Some of these intersections are not difficult for an able-bodied person, but would be a challenge for someone who is at all physically impaired, or pushing a stroller, or a small child.

2nd Avenue and 14th Street SE

2nd Avenue and 15th Street SE

Some of these mountains are a challenge to anyone no matter how fit.

2nd Avenue and 15th Street SE

2nd Avenue and Park Court SE

2nd Avenue and 16th Street SE

2nd Avenue and 16th Street SE

3rd Avenue, 17th Street, and Blake Boulevard SE

3rd Avenue and 19th Street SE

3rd Avenue and Nassau Street SE

I don't have an solution, but there needs to be one--for equity, for all the reasons walkable cities are desirable.

We're expecting more snow tomorrow.

SEE ALSO: Minnesota Department of Transportation, "Sidewalk Snow Clearing Guide" (May 2018), especially page 14. They have three suggestions for "snow windrows" as depicted here. [Thanks to John F. Thomas for alerting me to this.]

Talking about Walking (II)

Google Street View of Nesmith's childhood street crossing

I've been a pedestrian for a long time. When I was 5, I learned in kindergarten that one should "Cross [streets] only at corners." Since we lived on a corner, and being by quirk of personality an assiduous rule-follower, I assiduously followed that rule. Then, when I was in 1st grade, my family moved to a new house on a different street. Now our house was in the middle of a very long (nearly a quarter of a mile) block. It was over a tenth of a mile to the nearest corner, and another tenth back to where most of my playmates lived. I quickly decided that there was going to be no living with that rule, and jettisoned it.

Recently, New York Times health columnist Jane E. Brody ran a two-part series on pedestrians, which got me thinking about my own habits. As I walk to and from work, or downtown, or anyplace else, I realize that my paramount consideration is: Avoid cars wherever possible. That means never crossing an intersection in front of a car if there's an alternative, even if I have the right of way. After all, the driver might not stop, and then where would I be? And if I see an opportunity to cross a street mid-block, because no cars are coming in either direction, I do it. There is even an advantage to crossing mid-block--a fact also noted by Ms. Brody, "Although I know it's wrong"--namely that cars can appear from only two places: down the street on your right, and down the street on your left. Crossing at an intersection, you potentially have to deal with turning traffic as well, which doubles the number of directions from which cars might be coming. She also crosses against a red light if there are no cars on the street she's crossing.... yup, I do that, too, again because waiting for a green light can often mean dealing with turning traffic from several directions.

Intersection with crosswalks; swiped from U.S. Federal Highway Adm site

Ms. Brody is 73, and writes from the perspective of older walkers. She recommends reflective clothing, paying attention to the time countdown on crossing signals, and most of all a high level of caution as you watch out for cars. I nearly became a traffic statistic one night in late October as I crossed a Brooklyn street with the walk sign clearly in my favor. An overly aggressive driver gunned the accelerator to turn left ahead of coming traffic and came so close to hitting me that I could pound on the hood of his car. What do you think, reader? Do you think she verified through empirical testing whether she was close enough to pound on the hood? I'd like to think so, if only because I did pound on a car after jumping out of its path as I crossed Cedar Rapids's infamous 1st Avenue. I'd feel less of a hothead if other people were also doing it.

Even bicycles, pedestrians' political allies in the quest for complete streets and walkable cities, are sources of danger. Many on bikes, she observes, ride as if being chased by a mad dog.... [T]he reflexes of an older person may not be quick enough to avert a run-in. Duly noted.

In her second column she discusses a number of ways that streets could be designed to favor pedestrian safety. Most of these will be familiar to anyone who's read about walkable cities: pedestrian push buttons, street trees, traffic calming, and such. One of her comments that caught my eye recommended traffic lights: Traffic lights at popular street crossings are a lot safer than stop signs, which in turn are safer than hatched lines on the street to indicate a pedestrian crosswalk. This is interesting because Cedar Rapids, under the guidance of the prophet Jeff Speck, is replacing a number of its traffic lights downtown with four-way stops. There probably are some principles at work distinguishing which intersections get which traffic controls, but when walking I'd much rather cross with a light than at a four-way stop. Even as a relatively fit 55-year-old, I can't make it across two lanes--much less four--before it's the cross-traffic's turn to go.

An important threshold for both bicyclists and pedestrians is the presence of enough of either that drivers not only notice them, but come to anticipate their presence. That's evident in the downtown areas of major cities. We're far from that in Cedar Rapids, but who knows what another generation will bring?

There's no defense against snow and ice, but a more compact city design might make managing them for pedestrian use more possible. Cedar Rapids crews did heroic work to clear the streets within hours of a major snowfall February 1, but plowed drifts still blocked sidewalks six days later.

Pardon the terrible photograph, but can you see the elderly gentleman trying to negotiate the drift with his cane?

When the parking lot is plowed, where does the snow go?

Unplowed walks are pounded into slush by walkers. When the slush re-freezes it is not only slippery but is looking for ankles to turn.

To transform our streets from exclusively auto-oriented design to routes that are safe to walk even for the elderly and the very young will be a long process. But, speaking as someone who aspires to be elderly some day, well worth the effort.

EARLIER POST: "Talking about Walking," 4 November 2013, http://brucefnesmith.blogspot.com/2013/11/talking-about-walking.html

OTHER SOURCES

Dave Alden, "Intro to Urbanism, Part Eight: Retasking Streets," Where Do We Go From Here?, 28 January 2015, http://northbaydesignkit.blogspot.com/2015/01/intro-to-urbanism-part-eight-retasking.html

Jane E. Brody,"Where Feet and Wheels Meet," New York Times, 6 January 2015, D6

Jane E. Brody, "Varied Routes to Safer Streets," New York Times, 13 January 2013, D5

Angie Schmitt, "Poll: The Hunt for the Worst Intersection in America Continues," Streetsblog USA, 31 January 2013, http://usa.streetsblog.org/2013/01/31/poll-the-hunt-for-the-worst-intersection-in-america-continues/

Jeff Speck, Walkable City: How Downtown Can Save America, One Step at a Time (New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2011)

Blizzards get you thinking

The view from my front door

Iowa got its first major storm of the year this weekend--nothing like what hit New England and upstate New York last week, but enough to impact life. Area grocery stores experienced heavy business Saturday as people prepared for the worst, which of course did not happen. What did happen was all-afternoon rain Saturday gradually changed to snow during the evening, so of course the bottom layer was ice, with slush on top of that. After several hours' pause, the snow resumed, dry and powdery this round, and continued all through Sunday. The current total is 11 inches.

Hy-Vee, Coralville IA
Photo by Dave Wilson; swiped from Facebook page of Mark Carlson KCRG

City snowplows have been at work all day clearing roads. Most area churches canceled services, and most people seemed to hunker down for a quiet day. Football fans, once they had cleared their walks, could give their attention to the Super Bowl pre-game coverage. Had this occurred on a weekday, the plows would probably have started earlier and used bigger crews. (I'm guessing the city has to pay overtime on weekends, though I don't know that for sure.) Schools would certainly be closed--it doesn't take nearly this much to trigger that around here--but some people would have gone to work. Maybe there would have been more auto accidents?

Days like today remind a person of how metropolitan sprawl makes every day a gamble. Of course, we're not going to have a blizzard every day, but in this climate we average a few per year, so they're hardly unexpected. Sprawl works if the weather's fine, AND the roads are unobstructed, AND gasoline is cheap, AND there's plenty of parking at every destination, AND you are willing to overlook the costs in infrastructure construction and maintenance, social cohesion, loss of green space, personal money and time spent in cars, vehicular and pedestrian traffic fatalities, and lack of exercise. Add in a blizzard, and all of a sudden nothing is accessible: the miles to work, school, church, and groceries are fraught with snow piles and icy patches.

So as I rest from my shoveling labors--and try to think of anything rather than confront the reality I'll need to go back out there in a while and do it again--some questions occur to me, along with some tentative and personally unsatisfying answers.

(1) Why are we still building sprawl? Cedar Rapids is cheering the state's gift (with mostly federal money) of a highway extension around the west edge of the city. We are upset with the state's unwillingness to pop for two more interchanges, and are going to spend $5 million of our money to build them ourselves, but with the anticipation the state will soon come to its senses and pony up. We anticipate commercial development, as well as a population increase of 30,000, and all the tax base that accompanies them. We aren't anticipating the additional infrastructure will pile additional burdens on the city budget and city workers, because we believe that the expansion will pay for itself. (But see the Strong Towns booklet, Curbside Chat, especially chapter 3, "The Growth Ponzi Scheme.") The stories we tell ourselves: [a] City streets would be in better shape if the government wasn't so inefficient. [b] We'd have enough money for street and highway repair if we didn't waste so much on <choose one: the military, administrative expenses, welfare, bike lanes>.

In their first "Politics Wednesday" show of the year (7 January 2015), Iowa Public Radio host Ben Kieffer invited listeners to list their goals for government in six words or less. The first response was: Cut my taxes, fix my roads. I'd like to think the listener was being ironic, but that may be hoping too much.

(2) Can downtown develop/be developed by a resilient transportation system? In Cedar Rapids in 2015 the vast majority of people get downtown by car. Some take our dogged but limited bus system. A few, like me--I live just under two miles away--can walk or bike, but that's not practical for most people or (blizzard tie-in) every weather. If we anticipate the number of people working and living downtown to increase, does that mean we need more auto parking? Jon Rouse of Park Cedar Rapids thinks not, at least for the next three years, but admits most people "want to see the front door" of their destination when they park (Chelsea Keenan, "Seeing Spots," Cedar Rapids Gazette, 1 February 2015, 1D, 2D). The trade-off between the number of parking spaces and downtown vitality (social as well as economic) is not as widely-known as it should be. And for now, driving is the only practical way to get downtown for people who don't already live there or are close by.

Speaking of transportation...

(3) How should I be rooting on the federal transportation bill? There is some uncertainty whether Washington can get its act together to pass an appropriations bill to fund the U.S. Department of Transportation, most of which is funneled through state departments of transportation to build and maintain highways. If the federal government is the founder of this ridiculous feast, maybe if they cut off the allowance states and localities will be forced to be rational? That's the Strong Towns argument anyway. Or maybe a state that funds tax incentives for business relocations and considers infrastructure exclusively in terms of highways and maybe airports, and a city that is spending $10.5 million of taxpayer money to remodel a mall on the edge of town, aren't in the business of acting rationally? Local governments are also vulnerable to manipulation by the powerful and well-connected. It would be at least interesting, because at least local choices would be clearer.

from Bernie Sanders Facebook page

Meanwhile, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont), who may be running for President, is promoting his own $1 trillion bill (see above) to fund infrastructure as a public works jobs bill, which is a dangerous way to think about the issue. Public works are notoriously inefficient means of creating jobs, and should only be used in extreme economic emergencies. We should fund transportation (or not) in the way that brings the greatest public benefit, and support employment by wise economic policies (which in most times means monetary policies).

(4) How should we consider climate change in planning? The Senate recently voted that the climate was changing, with only Senator Wicker of Mississippi in opposition. There remains disagreement as to whether humans' burning tons of carbon per person per year could have anything significant to do with it. Given that scientific research has moved past this question, perhaps it's time for government officials to do so as well. But in the meantime, one likely result of climate change is more severe weather events. Shouldn't resilience to severe weather be a factor in city planning? Why are we still building out like it's 1949?

(5) Why is the clearing of public sidewalks the responsibility of the homeowner, even though the clearing of public streets is undertaken by the government? This is hardly a burning issue of our common life, but my colleague Lynda Barrow--who owns a home on a pie-shaped lot with an extraordinarily long sidewalk--asked me and I didn't know.

I'll continue to ponder these questions as I head back out to shovel the rest of the snow. As the latest "snowmageddon" reminds us the development patterns of the last two generations are unsustainable, these questions are worth pondering. Let me know what you come up with.

As a reward for reading this far, here are two brilliant short videos by Gracen Johnson, one celebrating snow days and one assessing the advantages and disadvantages of walking in a snowstorm.

For analysis of President Obama's budget proposal for transportation, see Angie Schmitt, "Obama's New Transportation Budget: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly," Streetsblog USA, 2 February 2015, http://usa.streetsblog.org/2015/02/02/obamas-new-transportation-budget-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/