Category Archives: Cities

Talking transit tech @ the MTAdev conf

Next Wednesday, I’ll be on a panel at the MTA Developers Unconference.  I’m very much looking forward to the event, because among other things, one of my fellow panelists will be the new MTA Chief, Jay Walder.  Here, I’ll give an overview of what I’m hoping to discuss on the panel; any feedback would  be greatly appreciated.

Before I get to that, though, I should note that it’s been an interesting journey working with MTA on its open data and developer relations policies over the past year.  In a nutshell, it’s gone from a highly contentious situation, to an atmosphere of open collaboration.

Almost exactly one year ago, here at OpenPlans we were beginning to experiment with the problem of tracking buses through the city.  That led us to dip our toes in the world of transit data — since you need to know the routes and schedules to do tracking and predicting — and introduced us to some of the challenges in getting accurate and up-to-date NYC bus schedule data.  Over the next 9 months, we engaged with the NYC transit developer community and the MTA to help work through the issues standing in the way of open MTA data.  We were very pleased when they announced in January that they’d be launching a developer outreach and open data program.

We believe that most of the credit for making this dramatic change happen goes to Chairman Walder and his conviction that open data would lead to innovation and ultimately better service for riders.  In his words at the time of the MTA dev center launch: “We need to get out of our own way and instead get out in front of the data sharing revolution” (via Second Avenue Sagas).

But I’d also like to personally thank Nick Bergson-Shilcock, David Turner, and the rest of the transit team here at OpenPlans for their hard and important work in helping to organize the NYC transit developer community, and in helping to identify and work through the sticking points regarding open data policy with the MTA.  Back in August 2009, I got an email from Nick to the effect of “This is going to be really big, and we need to step up and get involved.”  That prompted us to start the NY Transit Data Meetup, and develop a more serious and structured conversation about open data with the MTA and the developer community.  Thanks Nick; you were right (as usual), and I’m really happy that I listened to you (as usual).

Fast forward to today.  MTA has open data, a growing developer community, and is iterating.  From our perspective, they seem to be heading in the right direction.  So, that begs the question, what should they focus on next?  Here are a few things that I’ll be interested in hearing about & talking about on Wednesday:

  • Within MTA, which datasets would be the next easiest to expose? Of those, which would be the most interesting to developers?
  • What can we do to increase data sharing among other regional transit agencies? Last I checked, NJ Transit was the largest agency without open data according to City-Go-Round.
  • Let’s think beyond just transit data to transportation data. When it comes to planning trips, modes should be abstracted out of search.  What other datasets (outside of the ones in the MTA’s control) would be required to make some really interesting things possible?  (I’m thinking DOT for traffic, TLC for taxi data, paratransit, etc.)
  • Real-time. MTA has been piloting real-time bus location data on 34th street.  Would love to see the L train and 6 train in future pilots.
  • (Imaginary readers out there…) If you could ask Chairman Walder one question, what would it be?

That’s it.  Have a great weekend, and here’s to smart transportation and open, interoperable cities…

// Heart shaped subway map by ZEROPERZERO

April 30th, 2010

View Comments

Cities, transit

Interview on the Engadget Show is live

A few months ago, I did a short interview for the Engadget Show on the state of real-time bus information here in NYC.  The interview was for a video segment which led into a live interview with the reporter I worked with, Rick Karr.  The whole episode is now available online.  Before our section is an interview with Nicholas Negroponte, talking about OLPC and visions for the future.

35 min into the show is our part.  We’re standing right outside of Penn Station, checking out the real-time bus information that’s available now on 34th Street via dynamic signage.  We talk a bit about the current state of real-time on NYC buses and the challenges that the MTA has faced getting real-time implemented thus far.  In the live interview, Rick mentioned some of the work we’ve been doing at The Open Planning Project, including the iPhone-based OpenBusTracker experiment we did last summer, and our general belief that real-time can be implemented for less than you’d expect using commodity hardware and open source software.

Of course, it’s tough to watch yourself on video, and it’s even tougher to hear your own edited answers.  Note to self: work on snappier soundbites!  But it was really fun doing the interview, and great to get the real-time transit discussion out there to a wider audience.

March 26th, 2010

View Comments

Cities, Open Source, transit

Making cities easier to use

I always have a hard time explaining what we do at The Open Planning Project.  The front page of our website reads: “TOPP is a catalyst.  We empower civil society through software, media, and smart urban policy.”  While this makes sense if you think about it for a while, when I first say it to people I’m usually met with blank stares.  I don’t mean to dig on TOPP — a lot of effort went into writing that tagline, and believe me, earlier versions were more abstract and less punchy.

Prior to this current version, we had a different tagline: “Virtual tools for real-world change.”  That’s what our t-shirts still say on them, and I don’t mind it.  It has a skyline above it, implying a connection with cities, which I like.

But still, I don’t think we have a compelling enough elevator pitch — a description that doesn’t take five minutes and a walk-through of our org chart to explain.

So recently, I’ve been trying out something new.  I’m experimenting with the following explanation:

(standard disclaimer)  “We’re a non-profit software company; yeah, it’s a bit strange, I know.”

“We build software that makes cities easier to use.  You know, like, making it easier to get around, to interface with your government, and to connect with your neighbors.”

This morning, I tried this on a friend at the gym, and I got an “Oh, cool!  You mean like public transportation?  My friend in Seattle was telling me about GPS on buses there — how come we don’t have that in NYC?”  Bingo.

So, I’m going to test this out a little more.  Making cities easier to use.  I like it.  I just updated my twitter description with that; we’ll see if anyone notices.

To get a little more specific, here are some of the questions I think we’re trying to answer that fall under this larger goal:

How can we make it easier to…

  • get around? (ideally by foot, bike, or transit)
  • interface with government? (who reps me? who supports me?  how can I help?  how can I be heard?)
  • connect with neighbors? (who lives on my block?  what do we have in common?  how can we help each other?)
  • be involved in shaping the future? (combining the two above: connecting with neighbors and interfacing with gov)

Of course, there are plenty of other ways to make a city easier to use, that lots of creative projects (many of them NYC-based startups) are already addressing:

How can we make it easier to…

Given all of these questions and more, it’s highly likely that Making cities easier to use is still too broad; but there’s no question that it’s easier to explain, which is a start.

And for those of you struggling with similar issues of tagline-choosing, see Seb‘s brand-spanking-new conjoint.py decision-making tool, which OpenGeo has been using recently during its own tagline discussion.

// Photo of crumpled city map by Emanuele Pizzolorusso via MoCo loco

January 15th, 2010

View Comments

Cities, Strategy, Vision

Transit: uniter or divider?

Today’s post on Infrastructurist about the D-Train Murder had a line that caught my eye:

Cramming the population of a city like New York into a maze of underground cars creates a forced melting pot that’s a perfect breeding ground for class and race divisions.

There’s no question that the NYC subway is a forced melting pot — but it’s the assertion that it’s a breeding ground for class and race divisions that I take issue with.  In fact, I’ll say it’s the exact opposite.  Most (all?) of the above-ground city is actually divided by race and class.  It’s the subway where we all come together each day; the subway is perhaps the only place where people from all races, classes, and neighborhoods really mix.  In my experience, that is not cause for further division; rather, it’s a uniting force that gives us shared experiences on a human level.

One of the commenters on the Infrastructurist post summed it up nicely:

I think the necessity of sharing space with strangers is what makes cities the diverse, creative, wealth-producing places that they are. Far from being a necessary evil, it is the most distinctive feature of urban life. The elimination of this feature was one aspect of modernist city planning, but we reject that now. So we want mass transit for the type of civic interaction it creates, not just for sustainability and practicality.

Well said.

(Photo my moriza on Flickr)

November 24th, 2009

View Comments

Cities, transit