Evidence for better transportation and land-use decisions.

I help civic groups and institutions evaluate proposals, test their assumptions, and make a clear, sourced case for change.

I produce policy analysis, public-records research, data tools, and visual comparisons for transportation and land-use decisions.

Give residents a way to compare what could be built.

I translated development plans and resident priorities into visual alternatives for a contested public site in Middletown, Rhode Island.

The decision

Middletown was pursuing mixed-use development on roughly 15 acres of town-owned land at West Main Road and Coddington Highway. Residents were contesting the development footprint and the future of Pottsy Field and the recreation complex.

My contribution

As an independent civic visualization contributor, I turned two-dimensional planning material into aerial views, then developed alternative concepts informed by residents’ priorities.

I worked on building placement, parking, and open space so those choices could be discussed together. Residents supplied local priorities; I produced and revised the visual material.

Translate the development concept

Aerial visualization of the earlier, larger development concept, showing buildings, internal roads, and extensive parking across the site.
The earlier, larger development concept: buildings, circulation, and parking made visible in one aerial.

Explore a resident alternative

Exploratory resident alternative showing a retained ballfield and continuous public open space.
An exploratory open-space concept: retain the ballfield and show a different use of the surrounding land.

Concept illustrations from different stages and viewpoints; neither is an approved design. Open either image to inspect it.

The result: a comparison people could show.

This printed board pairs a hotel concept with resident alternatives and explicitly credits my resident concept.

It puts a concrete question in front of the viewer: how much of this public site should become buildings and parking, and how much should remain available for public use?

Inspect the presentation board
Photograph of a printed comparison board. The resident side is labeled Resident concept of what a Town Center should look like (from Liam Blank).
Printed presentation board comparing a hotel concept with resident alternatives. The hotel image is labeled as a resident-created interpretation.

What happened to the proposal

The town’s April 2026 amended agreement narrowed the development to a hotel on the approximately 3.24-acre corner parcel, citing public comments. On July 14, 2026, the Town Council rejected the comprehensive-plan and zoning amendments, ending that version of the project.

I contributed the visual work to a wider resident effort. The amended agreement and the later vote were decisions of the town.

See the full Middletown portfolio

Test the capacity claim before fixing the station design.

I examine how operating assumptions, through-running, and platform choices shape the case for investment in Penn Station.

The decision

Which changes could carry more trains through Penn Station, and which future options must the station redesign preserve?

My contribution

I compared the Federal Railroad Administration’s Phase I report, FAQ, and expanded Phase II scope, then published a capacity analysis and Study Watch. I distinguish modeled service levels from an ultimate capacity limit and identify the operating assumptions and design evidence that need scrutiny.

Published chart: peak-direction trans-Hudson service is 24 trains per hour in the base case; FRA modeled up to 30 in the evening and 32 in the morning. The prior planning benchmark is 48; Phase II will test a higher maximum, with no stated 48-train target.
Chart from my published analysis, September 2026. Capacity estimates are FRA’s findings; the comparison and interpretation are my work.

What the comparison establishes

FRA modeled an increase from 24 peak-direction trans-Hudson trains per hour to as many as 32 in the morning and 30 in the evening. Phase II will test a higher maximum across the regional rail system.

My analysis asks which limits come from station geometry and which come from train arrivals, yard movements, or the service plan. Study Watch identifies the model results and design drawings needed to evaluate the next decisions.

The published result

The analysis and Study Watch give readers a source-linked account of the findings, unresolved tests, and design commitments. The federal modeling and study program belong to FRA; my contribution is independent analysis and public scrutiny of that record.

Use Study Watch
Liam Blank

Liam Blank

I have worked on New York metropolitan transportation policy since 2014, including roles at ReThinkNYC, Tri-State Transportation Campaign, and PCAC to the MTA. I chair the City Club of New York’s Transportation & Infrastructure Committee.

I grew up in Rhode Island and live in New York City.

More about my experience

Have a public decision to work through?

I can help your group examine the records, test a proposal’s assumptions, and develop the analysis or visual material needed for a public meeting or institutional decision.

Send the decision you’re facing, the question you need answered, any relevant plans or records, and your deadline.

Discuss a project