Saturday, May 31, 2008

Who Knew Part 2: Buy Poor People Cars

This is what our buddy Wendell Cox said in an interview with the Pittsburgh Tribune. Wow. Read it for yourself:

Q: What would you do if you got to run the Port Authority?

A: If I were given dictatorial powers to go into a place like Pittsburgh and not have to deal with the feds and everything, I would propose that what we do is first offer a program of leased cars to our low-income riders and basically try to move all of our low-income drivers who can drive to cars. And by the way, the mathematics work very well.

Secondly, I would strengthen dial-a-ride (Access) programs to help those people we can't help with cars. And thirdly, I would provide whatever service can be provided by bus or rail profitably. That means that people who work downtown are going to have to start paying their share. Maybe that hurts downtown. But the fact is, there's no reason why a downtown employee should not be paying the full cost of his transit ride to downtown.

Wendell and other able bodied people don't really care about kids or older folks that can't drive. Those dial a ride programs are expensive and aren't very reliable. Imagine how much more expensive they would be if they were flushed with all the new traffic after bus routes were shut down. Basically buy people cars and provide taxis. Real good idea Wendell. Lets not get into "the math" either. You always forget to add in the taxpayer cost of local streets, health implications of higher pollution, cost of parking spaces, loss of property tax from highways not to mention the massive taxpayer cost of highway expansion that would have to take place to accommodate all those new cars you bought people.

There are a lot more gems of half truths and bs in this column, but I thought I would share more. I think its safe to say that Wendell just hates transit and loves cars. He loves the way of life that costs most Americans 19% of their income right off the bat.

Q: What's the best transit system in the United States -- or is there one?

A: Boy.... Oh, San Diego. I would not call it the best. I'd call it the least worst. San Diego has done some wonderful things. They started contracting out transit service in 1979. Their costs are much lower than other systems as a result. More than 40 percent of their system is contracted out now. They carry a huge increase in ridership compared to what they had in 1980 -- a ridership increase that's far greater than the population increase. Everybody likes to talk about the San Diego Trolley, the light rail line. It is, again, the least worst trolley in the country. It is less unsuccessful as a result of its first line that went to the Mexican border. For example, if those Port Authority tunnels under the Allegheny River in Pittsburgh were ending up at the Mexican border, they might make some sense. But in the early years, this San Diego line covered 90 percent of its operating cost; it never covered any capital. As the system has expanded, it's been decimated. There's no other destination like the Mexican border. When you talk about transit in the United States, you have to be talking about best prisoner awards. These systems are a scourge on taxpayers. There are some that do some wonderful things, but nobody does it all right.

There's a bit of race baiting in here mixed with some good ole misleading information. Nothing new from people like Wendell. First off, the San Diego Trolley is the most efficient light rail system in the United States. It operates at 20 cents per passenger mile. Give any other mode outside of bicycles and walking that operate at that low cost. This is saving taxpayers money. Don't give me this bs Wendell about decimation. Your twisted logic has led the United States into this mess we are in today with people dependent on the oil god. Consume all you want and pay later. Well that bill is going to come due soon and the tax payers are going to front it. That will be decimation. It would have been better off in the long run if you and your ilk weren't so busy promoting wasteful living arrangements and solutions that would create more carbon expulsion.

It also seems like Wendell also has a hate for downtowns. I'm not sure why. Perhaps he believes that people should be isolated from each other and knowledge agglomeration should be limited. It's funny to think that Randall and Wendell attack San Jose for its planning, when in reality its much of their thinking that has gone into what created that place. More roads, less downtown, more driving.

We'll get to those privatization arguments later when we have more time.

Thursday, May 29, 2008

Cargo Trams 2

Back in April of 07 we covered Cargo Trams, specifically the City Cargo operation in Amsterdam. Well there's an article on how it all works in Material Handling Magazine. It's a fascinating read about how the city uses streetcars to take deliveries into the city during the day and distribute it using small electric delivery vehicles. This allows for more deliveries during the day since Amsterdam is closed to delivery trucks during the day.

"The ultimate goal is Green sustainability, reduction of pollution and truck traffic," says Bonkenburg. "We wanted an approach that was efficient and effective for moving goods into the system for an indefinite period without having a negative impact on the environment. By reducing traffic congestion, you immediately reduce pollution, noise levels and have less damage to roads."

Using trams to carry goods into the city also provides awider window for deliveries, according to Bonkenburg. Amsterdam restricts truck traffic during certain hours, but with a tram and e-car combination, the system allows smaller deliveries throughout the day.

You can find a video here that shows how it works.

The Gasoline Conundrum

For every one of these stories...

When does the price of gasoline get so painful that drivers park their cars and look for the nearest bus stop or rail station? Many in North Texas say that time has arrived. And a new study of driver attitudes – plus increasingly crowded buses, trains and station parking lots – suggests they may be right.

There is one of these...
High gas prices are pushing more people onto buses and subways, straining transit agencies trying to meet the demand.

Like other consumers, the agencies are also paying more for fuel — 44% more this year than last, according to a survey of 96 transit agencies to be released Friday by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA).That double hit means bus and train operators are raising fares, cutting services and delaying improvements. Almost half of bus operators and more than two-thirds of rail operators have increased fares. About a fifth are cutting service.

These aren't choices we should have to make and its unfortunate that our the majority of our transportation system is tied up in oil. It'll be interesting to see how resources shift as prices go up. Will fund transit with higher fares as some have already started to or will it come out of a budget for new roads. The paradigms are shifting, but perhaps not that much.

For the future, when the grid starts to get changed into alternative energy like solar, part of the capital program for smaller cities might include provisions for electrification of heavier ridership bus lines. Now that oil and diesel prices are so high, it's possible to pay off some of the capital cost over time of this incremental improvement. Since this would include some smaller cities, it would be a great opportunity to include more areas into capital funding programs. It certainly would make more lawmakers happy that they are serving their constituents and make available funding from a carbon economy.

No Transportation Blogs at the Democratic Convention

Not gonna lie, I was a bit disappointed when I got the email today saying that TOW would not be blogging from the democratic national convention. We made it past the first round and I was looking forward to being able to get questions from you all to ask party leaders and get some answers on transportation issues.

Alas it wasn't to be. So we'll have to get some info from other transportation blogs that will be... oh wait. There aren't any transportation blogs credentialed at the convention. However there is a Silver Lining. I imagine David Roberts and Crew at Gristmill will cover some of these issues. So we'll be living vicariously through them during the convention. Congrats guys, and ask some good questions!

Update: We'll also be living vicariously through Robert who writes at CAHSR and Calitics. :)

Denver Bill Could Allow Public Bonds and Joint Development

The Denver Transit Stop has a post up alerting folks to a new bill passed by a house committee in the Colorado legislature that would allow the Regional Transit District to sell tax exempt bonds and loan the money to contractors building PPPs.

Another twist is that the bill would allow the private entities to use the money to develop at the stations. I'm not sure if this includes eminent domain but it does allow joint development which would be a way to offset some of the costs of the overall project.

The bill language states:
...political subdivision may, in connection with a mass transportation system project financed by private activity or exempt facility bonds issued by the district, lend or grant money or any other form of real, personal, or mixed property directly to a private business developing or operating the project or indirectly to such a private business through the district and may enter into contracts to make such loans and grants, all upon terms and conditions the district or private business and the state, state agency, county, municipality, (etc)...
Very interesting.

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

Worried About Aesthetics?

Now this is a doozy. The University of Minnesota continued its obstructionism today by being the lone no vote on the alignment decision. After being given an extra week and much deference, they continued to play the opposition. However it seems that its possible that it could be something other than the well being of students or worries about damaging medical equipment.

Hausman described the U's continued opposition as the "ultimate in carelessness and possibly arrogance." She went on to say the U might face ramifications at the Capitol when seeking funding from lawmakers in the future. "The sense of many is the U is simply accustomed to getting their own way," she said.

She related a conversation with University President Robert Bruininks in which he expressed concerns about the "aesthetics" of the light rail line through campus.

"It's an insult to Minneapolis and St. Paul to assume only the university cares about aesthetics," Hausman said.

Wow. After all that and even now hiring a $500,000 a year lobbyist I hope they come up with a better reason than aesthetics to oppose it. I can kind of understand the sensitive equipment argument, but I think its grasping at straws since they haven't really given anything specific. The Portland Aerial Tram had to be cantilevered off of the cliff side because of the sensitive microsurgeries that take place at OHSU.

But then again, Houston's light rail runs straight through the largest medical center in the world. And I'm sure subways in Boston and New York as well as transit around the world runs by similarly sensitive equipment. In Oakland people and heavy buses drive about 40 feet away from the MRI machine located in a trailer. In any event, it seems like blatant obstructionism. But it also seems like its about to come to an end.

A Bad Day in Rail Transit

Update 10:28pm PT: Unfortunate news, the Green Line Operator Injured in the accident has died. My thoughts are with the family.

I'm not gonna sugar coat the day today, it was just bad all around. First there was a horrific crash of two Green Line Streetcars in Boston. Switchback has the coverage along with the AP.

A two-car train slammed into the back of another two-car train approaching Woodland Station, said Pesaturo, adding that the trains were probably packed with commuters. "The first one was stopped at a red signal and was ready to proceed to the station when it was struck," he said.

In Chicago, an EL train derailed due to operator error, injuring passengers.

In Chicago, authorities said a train operator apparently made two key errors in quick succession to cause a derailment that left passengers perched more than 20 feet above the ground and sent several to hospitals. The operator failed to heed a red signal ordering him to stop, Chicago Transit Authority spokeswoman Noelle Gaffney said. After the four-car train went through the signal, it automatically activated a trip, which stopped the train.

But the operator moved the train forward again at a spot where the tracks split before they were switched into proper position, causing the rear end of the front car and the second car to derail but remain standing, with the other two cars still on the tracks, Gaffney said.

And lastly, in Mississippi, an Amtrak train hit a garbage truck causing serious injuries to some passengers. This all points to the importance of safety in operations as well as from bystanders along the tracks. It was a scary day. Hopefully no one has been seriously injured.

Tuesday, May 27, 2008

Mayor Funk Releases KC Transit Plan

After looking at the map, I'm very underwhelmed. It might be because I'm not from the region and don't quite have a handle on the topography or geography but it seems to be overly serving of regional car commuters at the expense of the core. At first glance it reminds me a bit of San Jose.

Much of the express bus mileage seems to be on freeways which won't affect or change development paradigms in the region and the light rail seems cut short. I don't quite understand the streetcar either. Is it supposed to be a loop? Is it only a feeder? Where is the central city circulation? The commuter rail looks good though, connecting what looks like a few job centers from the road patterns. I'm sure KC Light Rail will have more. But for the moment, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me from an outsiders perspective. Anyone else have some insight on this one?


KC Regional Transit System

WiFi on the Thalys

Awesome. Transport Information has the scoop:
Thalys, the train service operated by both the French national railway company SNCF and the Belgium national railway company SNCB inaugurated May 14, 2008 its new on-board service: Wi-Fi internet is now available while running at 320 kph between Paris, Brussels, Köln, and Amsterdam. At the same time, Thalys inaugurated the portal associated to the Wi-Fi access: Thalysnet.
Man what I wouldn't give for some sweet WiFi on a 2 hour train to Bakersfield for Thanksgiving.

Obama Video: Learn From Portland



Yup. H/T Carfree USA

Monday, May 26, 2008

Transit Space Race 202: Who's On Top?

Every once in a while we have to review where the TSR is going. Today let's take a short look at the leader board. Previous TSR update for the whole race can be found here. Keep in mind legacy cities are expanding transit as well, but the cities in the TSR are those which have pushed off transit until recently and are trying to bring it back.

The leaders are far ahead of the other cities, many of which are either just building as funds come available or still in the initial stage of denial. That doesn't mean there's not time to catch up, but these leading cities are still the reason I started covering the space race. Because they were accelerating expansion far beyond the line at a time doctrine and capturing the hope that things can change and people are ready for it.

Denver - Fastracks is still the granddaddy of expansion. The West Corridor has begun construction and the 119 new miles of rail are expected to be completed by 2016. That seems so soon, so awesomely soon in fact that folks are starting to look at the next round of possibilities.

Houston - While not as publicized as much as the Fastracks expansion, the Metro Solutions expansion was actually voted on before Fastracks. However it wasn't seen as such a big deal until it was looked at in the context of all these other expansions. It's more of a central city circulation system but works with existing HOV bus lanes to allow people in the dense core of Houston to get around. I wonder what the weighted Density is inside the loop. AC?

Salt Lake City - Fast on the heels of Denver and Houston, Salt Lake City passed a sales tax measure to expand on the initial success of their first line, which opened in 1999. The expansion is called Front Lines and will build 70 miles worth of rail in 7 years.

Minneapolis - While there isn't a plan in place for expansion like the other cities, there are lines that will get the money when it comes. The DFL party in Minnesota passed a sales tax expansion for capital transit expansion and overrode a veto by vice presidential hopeful Gov. Pawlenty. This doesn't include a possible center city streetcar network under discussion.

These four cities are in the fast lane. Other cities are building network expansions but at a slower pace. Charlotte passed a half cent sales tax in 1998 but is expanding their 5 line system slowly. There are considerations for further tax increases for expansion in other cities as well including Seattle, Phoenix, Los Angeles, Dallas and Sacramento among others. We will be watching as gas prices goes up and the call for expansion increases. It wouldn't hurt either to have a more friendly administration in the White House.

Oh, and let's not forget the godfather, Portland. 4 lines and a streetcar exist. Two lines are under construction while three other lines are in waiting with a center city streetcar network looking more likely. They are still the leaders and set the standard but the next generation is gaining.

Transit Space Race Update: Dallas

Gas prices up, the Space Race is hopping. An editorial in the Dallas Morning News is pushing local leaders to get on the ball. Recently they've been discussing in addition to the light rail network a feeder commuter rail network from the outer reaches of the Metroplex. Every city in the United States is dragging their feet yet cities like Dallas and Portland keep building line by line. This would be a valuable addition to the network and when combined with Fort Worth's planned rail lines, light and commuter, it will form a fairly comprehensive network.

The last time we talked about Dallas in the Space Race was in Feb of 07. Since then there have been some potholes and push back from the Texas legislature and the business community. After these spikes, this might change. The Green Line has started construction but cost estimates on the Orange Line to DFW airport got a little out of control. Inflation is a problem for all construction projects, not just rail. But this points to a larger problem which has been discussed recently in our spending on infrastructure. It might cost a lot to build this project, but its going to cost a whole heck of a lot more later. We'll see how this all pans out but Dallas looks to be in a good position going into the oil price spike.

Toll Road Conundrum

It seems to me that if gas keeps going up and VMT goes down, how are toll roads and congestion pricing on new roads at the periphery going to add up. The formulas that say whether a road would be a good investment for private companies seems to be determined by models with low gas prices, so how will this add up in the future with less driving? I'm not sure how all this works, anyone have some insight?

Sunday, May 25, 2008

Who Knew...

the answer to congestion was more cars. And the answer to obesity is more food right?

Taking Light Rail to the Speedway

So it's a Sunday and I'm watching a Nascar race at Lowe's Motor Speedway in Charlotte. I'm not sure if I'm a part of that demographic but to me its better than Golf as a background while I'm surfing the news on a Sunday afternoon. Mostly because its similar to my former life as a distance runner and I can relate to the strategy.

But the point of my post is that people in the county in which Lowe's is located want to extend light rail to the track (blue line extension map here). It would be an interesting juxtaposition and show a lot of people who probably don't take transit what rail can do. If the track pays for a spur from another route to the mall it would be helpful for pre and post race traffic. That is if there are races and with oil cheap enough to race.

CharlotteSpeedway

The one thing however I find discouraging is that they are saying if it does happen, it wouldn't be till 2020. Give me a break. We need to move much faster than that on all of this stuff. I'm finding that this country moves way too slow. Think about the time between 1950 and 1970 and how much of the interstate system was built. We're going to have to get at it if we're going to keep up with the demand, especially when gas is $10 a gallon.

Saturday, May 24, 2008

Holy Conversation Change Batman: Walkscore

The walkscore widget flew through the transit and planning blogosphere in about July of last year. There's even an evil twin called drive score which Transit Miami covered in January. Now that gas prices are high, its getting some attention in the larger progressive blogosphere. This might show a tipping point in the transit and planning discussion whereas it becomes more a part of people's consciousness. It's on Barack Obama's mind at least.

Atrios
Yglesias
Kos

Oh, and my score is 92. I'm not sure what else I need to get 100, but there is no bonus for transit. Since BART is a half mile walk and the J-Church streetcar is half a block away I think I might have a higher score.

Giving Transit Expansion to Those Who Plan For It

There was an article in the Ottawa Citizen a few days ago that I didn't get to write up until now. Well Public Transit in Ottawa covered it and Peter discusses the plan to not give neighborhoods new transit unless they agree to more density rules. Seems fair to me, given taxpayers are funding service, they should get the most for their money and a mode that reflects the corridor needs.
One day after the city's transit committee agreed to support the much-discussed Transit Option Four, they added a special note for any suburban constituents or councillors hoping for expansion of the light rail tracks outside the Greenbelt: you'll have to prove that it's a worthy investment by demonstrating greater demand and higher population density.
The only place in the United States I can think of that has this type of rule is the Bay Area and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. The MTC is the local MPO and they have set up a system that mandates certain densities for cities to get funding for new transit expansion. And cities take it seriously. A Contra Costa Times article yesterday discusses transit officials in Antioch that are worried they won't make their intensity benchmark if they leave the station in the place for which its planned.
The median location near Hillcrest Avenue would constrain transit-oriented development because of the existing PG&E property, thus making it difficult to reach a Metropolitan Transportation Commission mandate for residential units within a half mile radius of a station, city planning officials said.
I wish more MPOs were as progressive as the MTC. Most of them are just highway money distributors. Here is their policy summed up:
Each transit extension project funded in Resolution 3434 must plan for a minimum number of housing units along the corridor. These corridor-level thresholds vary by mode of transit, with more capital-intensive modes requiring higher numbers of housing units.
Now that residential units are down, there needs to be a jobs policy, because as we noted in a post on jobs, its great to have residential density, but unless it connects to where you want to go, it doesn't really help much.

Betting on the Wrong Horse

Switchback is a great Boston transit blog. A recent post discusses how the MBTA bet on the wrong mode with gas prices on the rise. Some of the line is run on electricity with dual mode buses, but much of it is diesel buses.

The city bet on the wrong horse, or rather, bet on the wrong bus. Within the past ten years the T has sacrificed the A line tracks and half of the E, while pushing for a “bus rapid transit” system where residents demanded light rail. A light rail network that would ultimately cost less in infrastructure than the BRT network. All of this has been prompted by a fierce anti-rail ideology at work in both the MBTA and mayor’s office.

The anti-rail, pro-bus, pro-car agenda ignores basic logic and economics. Trains hold more people, run at faster speeds through tunnels, and offer comfortable, single-seat rides to anywhere in the urban core of Boston. They do this in vehicles which can operate for forty years as opposed to the ten to twelve of their rubber-wheeled counterparts. And they’re cheaper to run.

Personally I think building a subway for buses is insane especially when you have to destroy two perfectly good light rail tunnels to do it. You can't go as fast with drivers in the tunnels and you still get that awful bouncy jerkey bus ride and low capacity vehicles. Boston will increase its budget deficit operating these schemes. Perhaps the rise in oil will change some minds. It's not too late.

Friday, May 23, 2008

GDP and Transit

I just wrote a note on Diamajin's post on infrastructure underspending over at STB.

The article he quoted discusses spending on GDP:
...in 1960, the U.S. spent 12 percent of its gross domestic product on infrastructure and now spends 2.4 percent. Japan spends 10 percent, China 9 percent and India 4.6 percent...
I keep wanting to put the GDP thing into perspective. So lets say we spend 10% of GDP on Transportation. Let's say 20% of that goes to transit. Where would that leave us? $262 Billion based on $13.13 Trillion GDP(2006). Now APTA says that we spent $42 Billion in 2005 on capital and operations. That is a big difference! 523% increase.

Which when held against the $3.4 billion per year that will be promised in the climate bill for transit spending makes it look sad and small. I'm glad we're starting to turn the ship around when it comes to the transportation conversation in this country. But right now it feels like we're trying to reverse earth's orbital rotation.

Thursday, May 22, 2008

Chicks Dig Low Carbon Footprints

So Wired has a story on how females are more willing to start conversation if you own a hybrid. I wonder if it goes one step further and you get even more attention if you promote transit. I'm not holding my breath.

Two Peas in a University Pod

For the last few months while I've been watching the central corridor impasse between the University of Minnesota and everyone else , something was nagging me. And it finally clicked. U of M might as well be UT (Texas). Both are trying to reroute their respective lines around campus and near the football stadiums, both routes of which would not maximize ridership. Yet they press on with little care about their affect on the surrounding community.

Here is the U of M alternate route from the Pioneer Press.


Now here are the alternate Austin routes I drew up where the yellow is the better route, however the University continues to push the red route.

Austin-UT Route

I believe what this shows is that Universities for one are scared of things they don't understand, and that they know nothing about transportation planning and so are trying to solve a problem that only exists 8 times a year. Football game and special event congestion. With Austin, they're running the line right past the performing arts center, the football stadium and the track and swim stadiums instead of by the main campus and the dense residential neighborhood to the west.

Another perceived problem is that light rail is dangerous to pedestrians. Unlike those extremely safe cars careening through and around campus driven by students. But it just goes to show that Universities shouldn't control regional decisions by throwing fits. If there were a real issue, regional planners would understand and back off, but planning so that cars can keep driving through campus and less trips on transit can be taken is unacceptable.

Wednesday, May 21, 2008

Bill Language Translation

As promised, an update on the Boxer amendment to the Lieberman Warner climate bill. The bill language in full can be found here. Here are the funding breakdowns for each program to be funded. Here is my translation of the language below for the transit section of the amendment:

Grants for Additional Public Transportation Service

65% of the funds will be put into the formula funding program for transit already set up under section 5307. 60% of these funds can go to capital and operations funds and will be appropriated according to the urbanized area population. 40% of these funds can be allocated based on growth in the state based on the census. Also, any capital project that receives federal funding will be eligible for the funding if it provides 20% of its own funding (See section e). Operating costs will only allow 50%

I worry that some of these funds might be eligible for transfer to freeways and roads. I can't tell for sure though if this is possible, but the rules set out below from the code make it possible.
  1. In a Transportation Management Area (TMA), the MPO may elect to transfer portions of its FTA Section 5307 funds that cannot be used for operating assistance to FHWA for highway projects subject to the requirements of 49 U.S.C. §5307(b)(2).

Requirements:

(3) In a transportation management area designated under section 5305 (a) of this title,[1] amounts that cannot be used to pay operating expenses under this section also are available for a highway project if—
(A) that use is approved, in writing, by the metropolitan planning organization under section 5303 of this title after appropriate notice and an opportunity for comment and appeal is provided to affected public transportation providers;
(B) the Secretary decides the amounts are not needed for investment required by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.); and
(C) the metropolitan planning organization in approving the use under subparagraph (A) determines that the local transit needs are being addressed.

Grants for New Public Transit Projects

This is a really cool part. 30% of the $171 Billion expected would go to fixed guideway construction (Heavy Rail, Light Rail, Streetcar, Commuter Rail, and True BRT). It's subject to the same criteria as the new starts program. Now we have a little bit to worry about here if John McCain and Mary Peters stick around because they are going to water down fixed guideway as much as they can. Earlier this year they tried to make hot lanes eligible for new starts funding as "fixed guideway". This is also pennies. $1.026 Billion per year for fixed guideway projects is the basic idea.

Grants for Efficiency at Public Transit Agencies

5% of the funds will be allocated for reducing VMT, Bike and Ped infrastructure, carpool and telecommuting programs that don't include new road capacity. Funding will be distributed based on the total GHG reductions of the project applying for funding. This could include any of the following:

(A) improvements to lighting, heating, cooling, or ventilation systems in stations and other facilities that reduce direct or indirect greenhouse‐gas emissions;
(B) adjustments to signal timing or other vehicle controlling systems that reduce direct or indirect greenhouse‐gas emissions;
(C) purchasing or retrofitting rolling stock to improve efficiency or reduce greenhouse‐gas emissions; or
(D) improvements to energy distribution systems.

Like Ryan says, we can do better. But its a small start that could and should be expanded.

Bill Language Up for Boxer Amendment

The bill language in full can be found here. Specifically on the transit front, here is the language with links to the corresponding laws. Now I know this is a bit hard to get through but I'll try and translate and commentate in the next post up. So if you don't want to read lawyer speak, go up one post.

(f) GRANTS TO PROVIDE FOR ADDITIONAL AND IMPROVED PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SERVICE.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Of the funds deposited into the Transportation Sector Emission Reduction Fund each year pursuant to subsection (d), 65 percent shall be distributed to designated recipients as defined in section 5307 of Title 49, United States Code, to maintain or improve public transportation through activities eligible under that section.
(2) DISTRIBUTION.—Of the funds made available under paragraph (1)—
(A) 60 percent shall be distributed according to the formula in subsections (a) through (c) of section 5336 of Title 49, United States Code; and
(B) 40 percent shall be distributed according to the formula in section 5340 of Title 49, United States
Code.
(3) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—Any grant provided under this section shall be subject to the terms and conditions applicable to a grant made under section 5307 of Title 49, United States Code.
(4) COST SHARE.—The Federal government’s share of costs shall be as specified in section 5307(e) of Title 49, United States Code.

(g) GRANTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Of the funds deposited into the Transportation Sector Emission Reduction Fund each year pursuant to subsection (d), 30 percent shall be distributed to State and local governmental authorities for design, engineering, and construction of new fixed guideway transit projects or extensions to existing fixed guideway transit systems.
(2) APPLICATIONS.—Applications for grants under this subsection shall be reviewed according to the process and criteria established in section 5309(d) of Title 49, United States Code, for major capital investments and section 5309(e) of Title 49, United states Code for other projects.
(3) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—Grant funds awarded under this subsection shall be subject to the terms and conditions applicable to a grant made under section 5309 of Title 49, United States Code.

(h) GRANTS FOR EFFICIENCY AT PUBLIC TRANSIT AGENCIES, TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES, AND
TRAVEL DEMAND REDUCTION PROJECTS.—
(1) IN GENERAL.— Of the funds deposited into the Transportation Sector Emission Reduction Fund each year pursuant to subsection (d), 5 percent shall be awarded to State and local governmental authorities as defined in section 5307 of Title 49, United States Code, to assist in reducing the direct and indirect greenhouse‐gas emissions of their systems, through—
(A) programs to reduce vehicle miles traveled;
(B) bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, including trail networks integrated with transportation plans or bicycle mode‐share targets; and
(C) programs to establish or expand telecommuting or carpool projects that do not include new roadway capacity.
(2) ELIGIBLE USES OF FUNDS.—A recipient of funds under paragraph (1) shall use the funds for—
(A) improvements to lighting, heating, cooling, or ventilation systems in stations and other facilities that reduce direct or indirect greenhouse‐gas emissions;
(B) adjustments to signal timing or other vehicle controlling systems that reduce direct or indirect greenhouse‐gas emissions;
(C) purchasing or retrofitting rolling stock to improve efficiency or reduce greenhouse‐gas emissions; or
(D) improvements to energy distribution systems.
(3) DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS.—In determining the recipients of grants under this subsection,
applications shall be evaluated based on the total direct and indirect greenhouse‐gas emissions
reductions that are projected to result from the project and projected reductions as a percentage of the entity’s total direct and indirect emissions.
(4) GOVERNMENT SHARE OF COSTS.—The Federal government’s share of the cost of an activity funded using amounts made available under this subsection may not exceed 80 percent of the cost of the activity.
(i) CONDITION FOR RECEIPT OF FUNDS.—To be eligible to receive funds under this section, projects or activities must be part of an integrated State‐wide transportation plan that shall‐‐
(1) include all modes of surface transportation;
(2) integrate transportation data collection, monitoring, planning, and modeling;
(3) report on estimated greenhouse‐gas emissions;
(4) be designed to reduce greenhouse‐gas emissions from the transportation sector; and
(5) be certified by the Administrator as consistent with the purposes of this Act.

LA Streetcar Workshop

Tomorrow is the LA Streetcar Workshop put on by Reconnecting America and the Seaside Institute. If you're in LA go and check it out. My colleagues Gloria Ohland and Natasha Daggs have been working really hard to put together a good program so if you get a chance say hi.

On a side note about Streetcars in LA, I was talking to my grandmother tonight and we started talking about LA. She lived there in the 20's from when she was 7 to about 17. Her grandmother lived on Pico and she said she and her siblings used to take safety pins and cross them to put on the tracks of the passing streetcar line. When they were run over, they would come out looking like scissors. Funny stuff kids do.

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Gas Tax Losers

Wanna see if your region gets the short end of the stick? Check out Gas Tax Losers.

A few examples: for every gas tax dollar to the feds

Austin gets 76 cents
SF gets $1.44
LA gets 87 cents
Columbus OH 66 cents

It seems like if you have a transit system, you get real money back.

U of M Route Choice Crashes and Burns

Instead of going straight through campus, the University of Minnesota wanted the Central Corridor to go around. They even had Governor Pawlenty hold up State Funding for the project so they could study the route that would kill ridership. Well the study is back and like everyone said it would, it tanked:

The University of Minnesota's preferred route for the Central Corridor would fail to pass — big time — a key scoring index needed for federal approval, according to records obtained by the Pioneer Press today.

...

The Washington Avenue route, which would cost $909 million, is 23.80. The U's Dinkytown route, which would cost between $889 million and $894 million, would have a CEI of between 28.25 and 28.44, according to the U's study, which notes that 23.99 "is recommended by the FTA to be considered for federal funding.
The University is still going to try and lobby to change the CEI measures but good luck with that. How many other cities have tried to change it and failed. This is just another example of even smart people building for cars. And from now on, they will get much more pushback.

Monday, May 19, 2008

Possibly Billions for US Transit in Climate Bill

The word on the street is that an amendment will be introduced by Barbara Boxer to the Lieberman Warner Climate bill that would raise $171 billion dollars for transit (see title VI subtitle B). While this sounds good, it is only pennies. Over 50 years, thats only $3.42 billion per year which compared with the last transportation bill was $244 billion over 6 years, most of it for roads.

Now there is another pot of money that could possibly be used for transit. There will $544 billion available as energy block grants. The money is available for states that reduce GHG emissions. Some of that money could go to transit as well. Now this is just an amendment and while its got some support, it still needs votes.

We'll let you know more as it comes online.

Sunday, May 18, 2008

Krugman on Living in a High Cost Oil World

I hope Mr. Krugman gets more folks to start talking about the changes we need to make in order to live a low oil lifestyle. And as he states, its not about prying cars away from Americans, but instead facilitating walking, biking, and transit. You know, what the transit blogosphere is talking about anyways.

To see what I’m talking about, consider where I am at the moment: in a pleasant, middle-class neighborhood consisting mainly of four- or five-story apartment buildings, with easy access to public transit and plenty of local shopping.

It’s the kind of neighborhood in which people don’t have to drive a lot, but it’s also a kind of neighborhood that barely exists in America, even in big metropolitan areas. Greater Atlanta has roughly the same population as Greater Berlin — but Berlin is a city of trains, buses and bikes, while Atlanta is a city of cars, cars and cars.

Central Corridor Alive

Governor, legislators make a deal.

Updated with better link. Thx Tedder.

Saturday, May 17, 2008

Vulgar Libertarianism in Pittsburgh

I often wonder if libertarianism has a built in preference for getting around. Why do I wonder? Because it shouldn't. But that is how conversations about transport and libertarianism start out in this country. Basically most libertarians (I say most because there are some that understand history) use their libertarianism to declare that transit does not work. "Let the free market work" they say, without discussing the massive amount of subsidies that turned the United States into its car loving, wealth transferring, big business loving self.

In fact during the time at which most transit was built, it was during the most free market period in the history of this country and it was about the development of land. That development opportunity disappeared with the invention of the automobile and the road funding by the government. By that time zoning was implemented and separate districts mostly single family were created like they were on an assembly line.

So I'm not surprised when the assistant editor of the Pittsburgh Tribune started his column out like this without historical context:
It was no place for a lone libertarian. And it was certainly no friendly place for anyone who thinks wasteful government transportation monopolies like the Port Authority of Allegheny County are proof that America's 40-year-old experiment in socialized urban mass transit is a failure.
Just jump right into it Bill, leave no history forgetting opinion out. Then the preference issue:
In fact, anyone who openly prefers cars to buses would have found himself feeling very alone during a salon dinner discussion on "The Future of Urban Growth and Transportation" Tuesday night at the upscale restaurant Eleven in the Strip District.
Why is it that you prefer cars? Is it because we've made cars and oil pretty much the only game in town? This brings me to Vulgar Libertarianism. The Mutualist Blog lays it out:
The defining feature of vulgar political economy, as Marx described it, was that it had ceased to be an attempt at the scientific explication of the laws of economics, and had become a hired prize-fighter on behalf of plutocratic interests.
Interests like the automobile, at the cost of every other mode. But Japan can have free market transit! Why not be like them?

When the lone libertarian finally found the nerve, he did his uncomfortable best to politely shame his fellow salon-goers for their blind acceptance of our obviously third-rate mass-transit industrial complex. He pointed out that Tokyo's gargantuan transit system -- arguably the world's best -- was about 90 percent private and mostly profitable.

He tried to point out that in progressive Europe, governments are decentralizing control and funding of mass transit or privatizing its bus and rail lines, as Stockholm and London have done.

Remember earlier when we talked about land and our zoning. Well Japan's railroad owns land and that's where it makes most of its money. We don't let transit agencies become real estate companies either in this country. If we do, we often get into the whole eminent domain mess, which libertarians hate. In addition, London's privatization has been seen as a money sucking failure and the government in Denmark provides the best bike infrastructure in the world by which 24% of total trips are made.

So all of this points to hypocrisy and a misunderstanding of the past(or even the present) by the libertarian faction, one in which we subsidized cars and trucks so much, it killed the private railroads, passenger and freight. Now when are we going to talk about how much money we're sending overseas to fuel those cars? Is that the free market at work?

Friday, May 16, 2008

Transfer of Wealth

Via the Bellows, Mr. Setser notes the Transfer of Wealth.
If oil -- using the price for sweet light crude -- stays to $125 a barrel for the rest of the year, the average price of oil over the course of 2008 will be around $115 a barrel. The average 2007 price was around $70 a barrel. The $45 a barrel y/y increase in the average price of oil is equivalent to going from $25 a barrel oil to $70 a barrel oil in a single year. It is a large jump. It would lead to something like a $650-700 billion transfer of wealth from the oil-importing economies to the major oil-exporting economies.

It's very very disgusting. Actually, you know I saw an article on Wired's blog about Dubai's awesome Metro today. The sad thing is that it was basically funded by us.
The system will carry 200 million passengers a year, about 547,000 passengers each day. Officials hope to have almost 200 miles of subway lines built by 2020, at which point it would be one of the largest automated subway systems in the world.
That could have been LA.

Thursday, May 15, 2008

Where Are the Whiners on This One?

Man that Houston can sure build roads! Good thing they're starting to get a little balance. An email on the LightRail_Now yahoo group came in with an article about the Hampton Roads cost increase for a specific piece of the route. Now they have contingency money set aside so its not busting the budget but the ridiculousness of transit opponents comes out when overruns occur. It's a "boondoggle"! they say.

Well what about boondoggles like this: the Katy Freeway in Houston. Charles Kuffner covered this back in February but the email reminded me about this fantastic project that's $1.7 Billion over the original $1 Billion or $1.2 Billion estimate. How many more billions in GHG cleanup will this one cost?

As for Hampton Roads and other FTA projects, what do you expect when you start a project and over10 years it gets changed a little and built. This type of time overrun has got to stop. We can't wait that long anymore. Don't get me wrong, we need to build it right...but ten years?! Give me a break.

Space Race Update: UTA Vehicle Purchase

UTA, the transit agency on Utah's front range which includes Salt Lake City has started up the PR campaign and purchases for its Front Lines 2015 program. The plan is to build 70 miles in 7 years. So to keep on track with that, they are buying up 77 Siemens SD70 Avantos for $277 million or $3.6 M per vehicle. The same type used in Charlotte and Houston.

To make the order cheaper, buy in bulk. And that bulk includes an option for 120 more. My best guess is that either Houston or San Diego is going to be exercising those options with San Diego's cars reaching the end of their 25 year life and Houston embarking on the metro solutions plan. It might also be split up into smaller orders if cities that are running low based on this most recent ridership surge.
Siemens' news release about the contract lists an option for 180 more rail cars, though UTA General Manager John Inglish said the agency most likely won't use that many. It's common practice to secure more than needed at a good bulk price, he said, then offer the excess to another transit system that needs the cars.
Looks like the Siemens plant in Sacramento is going to be working overtime. Glad that these vehicles are all being built here. Imagine the economic impact if every city was building new LRVs and transit networks. Jobs Jobs Jobs.

Update: a Railway Gazette Article states that the Siemens vehicles will be a bit shorter than the Charlotte and San Diego Cars in order to accommodate 4 car trains.

Anyone Need Some Modern Trams? Never Been Used!

Prague apparently bought four streetcars but never used them. They didn't work. Now they are building Skoda models built at home in the Czech Republic and selling off the surplus four Tatras. Anyone think they can be fixed up and used in the US? I dunno, but it might be worth looking into.

Update: On second thought, probably not a good idea. Translation here.

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Dragging Them Kicking and Screaming

A few items of good news out tonight:

Rep. John Mica is from Florida and the ranking Republican on the house transportation and infrastructure committee. He has been fighting for local commuter rail recently but took a time out to gave a speech at the Dow Jones Infrastructure Conference. He discussed Semi HSR on the Northeast Corridor and improvements to Amtrak. When asked about the airline lobby, he had this to say:

"We'll drag them kicking and screaming into the 21st century."

There was also news from the Ranking Democrat from the same committee, James Oberstar. He stated in a discussion with Minnesota Public Radio that new starts rules would be changing. This would perhaps allow a tunnel under the university and cut down the importance of our favorite cost effectiveness measure.
Oberstar, who chairs the influential House Transportation Committee, supports the Central Corridor project linking St. Paul and Minneapolis. The DFLer said a recently passed bill changes how the Federal Transit Administration evaluates transportation projects that are seeking federal money.

Under the old system, Oberstar said the FTA focused on what's known as the cost-effectiveness index. The CEI is a complicated formula that looks at travel times, ridership and construction costs.

But Oberstar said the index means the agency essentially ignores other factors, such as environmental benefits and the potential for economic development. He pushed for the recent changes, which will require the FTA to also give comparable weight to five other criteria.
Hopefully this means that cities start planning lines based on ridership, rather than saying, what can we build for this small amount of money.

Monday, May 12, 2008

Debunking O'Toole #3,520

Mr. Setty at PublicTransit.us is debunking Randal's latest try to put down light rail yet again. This time the claim is that a Prius is more energy efficient:
With most renewable sources such as wind, solar and hydroelectric, "gross energy" is essentially meaningless in this "Prius vs. Electric Transit" argument, except that efficient extraction of available energy keeps the price of the power obtained down. Taking O'Toole's reasoning to its logical extreme, if wind and solar only captures 10% of the available energy, or a hydroelectric project only captures 25% of the energy available, he'd still report absurdly high BTU's expended. Never mind that in these cases, nature still radiates this energy into Earth's environment--whether humans choose to tap into it or not.

People Are Using the T Word!

Paul Krugman of the New York Times is blogging transit. Did he use the T word? Really? In the first post he discusses three different cities.

Atlanta is the poster child for sprawl, and as a result it has hardly any alternatives to cars: 89 percent of workers drive; less than 4 percent take public transit.

Boston is an older city, with an extensive transit system from the days when most people didn’t have cars. Even so, 79 percent of the labor force drives to work, but 11 percent do take public transit.

And then there’s Toronto. It’s still more auto-centered than not — but 22 percent of workers take public transit.

The thing about Toronto, they never got rid of their streetcars. I wonder how much that has to do with their ability to keep transit numbers up. Now they are off on a light rail expansion to fill in some gaps.

You can read some more thoughts on Krugman's posts here(Bellows), here(Yglesias), here(City Comforts), and (BT). Are things starting to change in the US? Are people actually starting to discuss land use and transportation? Frank at Orphan Road covers this as well:
I've been ranting for a while now about the connection between land use patterns and energy consumption, but for a whle it seemed like shouting into the wind, especially as national politicians talked about how some magic pill like ethanol was going to solve all our problems. Lately, though, it seems like the connection between land use, public transit, energy consumption and national security is finally starting to gel in people's minds.
I hope you're right.

Saturday, May 10, 2008

Dumb Idea

Governor of Arizona Janet Napolitano decided not to tax sprawl homebuilders and instead asked them to help raise the sales tax for transportation. First off, homebuilders are the ones that gain the most from new transit and transportation infrastructure, they should pay for it. Second, why are they still building in that desert???

Arnold on HSR

From the Financial Times quoting Governor Schwarzenegger on a trip with French President Sarkozy:

"I could not believe we were going at 350km an hour"

Believe it Governor, and make it happen here.

Obama at Hayward Field

Man this is pretty cool for a track fan. Barack Obama at the Mecca of Track and Field in the United States. Hayward Field. Flotrack will have a video tomorrow I'll post up if I can get the code.

Friday, May 9, 2008

History Lesson: Demise of Twin Cities Rapid Transit

Twin Cities Rapid Transit was one of the best streetcar companies in the country before its demise. It's secondly most famous for the streetcar burning photos that many cite when discussing conspiracy theories.


Well part of the story I had never heard before was told on one of my listserves by transit expert and former Deputy Secretary of Transportation for Pennsylvania Ed Tennyson. He states that at one point TCRT had saved up $10 million dollars to buy new streetcars and repair the tracks but got destroyed by Wall Street speculators. Well, I'll let his words tell the story. I'll add links for emphasis:

The Twin City street car to bus conversion was ironically caused by a pro-street car management, a man named Strouse, I think he was. During gasoline rationing he saved up ten million dollars ($ 160 million at today's prices) to buy more PCC cars, re-lay more track, moderninze the rail system.

A shrewd vulture on Wall Street named Green saw all that money in the bank and solicited the stockholder votes to throw out the sfreet car management so Green could disburse all that money to stockholders including himself. His first attempt failed as the stockholder had pride in the company but inflation hit them (and everyone else) so Green prevailed on his second take over attempt. Strouse was fired and the money was paid out to stockholders leaving nothing for renewals.

Wall Street neophytes saw those big dividends and sent the stock price soaring. Green soid his. Buy low and sell high. Local politicians took Green's place, one named Fred Osanna(In the picture above), a political lawyer. He got a promise from General Motors to loan him all the money he needed to rid the city of street cars and they had National City Lines send him their Barney Larrick to manage the job.

Since there would be no more profits, Osanna and Larrick sold all of the copper wires, car baen property and salvage from scrapping cars to their wives or other relatives at a rock bottom price. Their relatives waited a few weeks then sold all the junk on the market for far more than they paid Twin City Rapid Transit for it. Roy Chalk did the same thing in Washington but was careful not to go to jail. Osanna and Larrick both went to jail, for defrauding the other stockholders.

Thursday, May 8, 2008

Austin Hits the Pause Button

It seems that Austin is going to take a breath on the issue of light rail. This means no election in the fall. But another alarming issue is the loss of direct flights from Austin's airport. In fact, being a smaller non-hub airport, this means that with rising gas costs and cuts, traffic could drop. But why does that matter for rail? Because one of Brewster's plans was to use revenue from the airport to connect a line there. In fact there was a huge list of possible funding sources. If I were Austin, I wouldn't rule it out, but I might be worried that it won't produce as much as expected. Now that there won't be an election in the fall, perhaps folks have time to think up a few more sources. And perhaps it's more important now to start thinking about high speed rail to make the short connections in Texas.

Wednesday, May 7, 2008

Increasing Value

In Toronto a study recently completed posits that with the completion of the Spadina Line expansion, land costs will have risen 20%. I hope they are doing something to capture some of that increased value. The Star reports.

"In the future, these areas will outperform the rest of the region. If the market goes up everywhere, these areas will increase by 10 to 20 per cent or more. If values in the GTA drop, these will drop by 10to 20 per cent less," forecasts Campbell.

Campbell said he doesn't own property in the area, but will be looking this week for multi-residential units as an investment.

Access to transportation is just one of many real estate criteria used to determine value, but it is becoming increasingly important as highways grow more congested and gas prices increase.

The Tragedy of California

Yglesias laments the weather wasted in Southern California. I would include Northern California and most of the Bay Area that is not served by transit in that assessment.

The thing you really forget about the deplorable land use and development patterns in southern California (and the Southwest more generally) until you come back out here is how goddamn nice the weather is, a fact that takes the situation out of the realm of farce and into tragedy. You know what a good place to never walk anywhere would be? Boston or Chicago in the winter. Or maybe DC or New York in the summer. That's some nasty weather to be walking around in.


But LA would be a great place to walk or ride a bike to work all year 'round. But it's our bad weather belt that has the walkable cities, and our sunny and temperate all the time region that barely has sidewalks.

Miami Faces Some Hurdles, Is the Next Dulles

Miami has been trying to build its North Corridor Metro line for a while now. Today the Miami Herald discusses an increased push on the part of the local leaders for the line.

Desperate to regain a shot at $700 million in federal funding for expanded Metrorail service, Miami-Dade leaders promised Monday to quickly improve the county transit department's financial and operational plans.

''We're going to have to have not only great planning, but great action,'' said U.S. Rep. Kendrick Meek, D-Miami, who prodded the Federal Transit Administration to write a step-by-step plan last month for reviving the county's funding application.

This is another Dulles. I fully expect to see Peters and Simpson to whip out a big red pen on this project. The Feds don't believe in Metros and will not as long as they are compared to highways using highway metrics. They've made it abundantly clear that all they care about is tolls and roads. Don't believe the lip service.

Monday, May 5, 2008

Dubai to Install Alstom APS

Interesting news on the International Tram front. Dubai is going to build a 10 km (6.2 miles) tramway with 13 stations. But that isn't the interesting part. Alstom, who owns the rights to the catenary free APS ground level electrification system, has started moving it outside of France. Bordeaux is the only city currently to operate the system. However other cities such as Angers have begun looking to install it. It will be interesting how the technology fares in the sun soaked middle east.

Many have hoped that the technology would come to the United States and answer the call to get rid over overhead wires, specifically in the District of Columbia where an old law prohibits wires. It was specifically called for by Clay Chastain for Kansas City's system. However experts in the US have said that Alstom has no plans to bring the system to the United States. Part of the problem is the unknown effects of stray current coming from the third rail when the roads are salted during snow or ice storms.

How it works: Basically a third rail is laid between the two tracks and turns on when radioed by the vehicle. Two shoes, one on each end of the tram take up power as the electrified sections pass under. Sections only turn on when they are underneath the vehicle leaving pedestrians safe from being electrification.



Flickr Photo Courtesy of Art in BX

Flickr Photo Courtesy of Dorsetbays

Outside of the historic downtown, the line in Bordeaux switches over to catenaries. Other cities are looking into using batteries and Stone Consulting that brought us the Kenosha Streetcar for $3 million per mile is also looking to use a ultra-capacitor for a heritage line in Savannah Georgia.

Express Your Displeasure for the Gas Tax Proposals

Greater Greater Washington has put together a site to express your displeasure at the dumb gas tax ideas put forth by Hillary Clinton and John McCain. It's formatted as a Nigerian scam letter. You know, the ones that try to get people to give their bank account numbers to wire a large sum of money, but then take yours instead.

We are top officials of the United States Senate Government who are interested in importation of oil into our country with funds that are presently trapped in the FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION TRUST FUND dedicated to improving transportation. We wish to send this money to overseas accounts in the MIDDLE EAST but cannot due to restrictions in Congress Transportation Equity Act requiring that this money must be spent to build roads, bridges and high speed trains.

If you accept we will deliver to your a sum of 30 DOLLARS in the summer 2008 in form of a "GAS TAX HOLIDAY". You will then deliver this money to accounts of our friends in Middle East by taking it to your nearby gasoline station where they have information to forward the money. Please supply your bank account, social security number, address and your vote in DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES AND NOVEMBER GENERAL ELECTION.

Doesn't sound so far off does it?

Sunday, May 4, 2008

A Wheel Tax?

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel had an article today about a $10 car tab tax for transit operations. They call it a wheel tax. But here's another idea, what if we had a real wheel tax. Wheel's go on the road and deteriorate over time. Replacement is based on how much one drives. What if there were a small tax every time you got new tires? Ideally, the folks that would pay more are the ones who would drive more.

I think I get tires every 25,000 miles or so. I also think it's supposed to be more than that but I'm on my 4th set for my 99 Jetta. Given that it's got about 85K miles on it, I'm not paying as much because I don't drive as much. It's just another small incentive to take transit if you can. We might also make the tax vehicle size regressive, meaning the larger the vehicle you drive and the bigger the tire, the more tax you pay. I dunno, another idea for the funding mechanism pot. What do you all think?

Saturday, May 3, 2008

Using Space Better

What happens when we orient buildings to transit? It saves space. It creates more value from the land. It creates more opportunities for walking. Here is an exercise I did with that employment sprawl photo from the post below.

1. The Sprawl Way - What San Jose Looks Like

San Jose Sprawl

2. Sprawl Rearranged - What the same amount of development would look Like if the development were organized around the station. I outlined the buildings and rearranged them in a more compact way.

SJArrange

3. Sprawl Rearranged x2 - Doubling the amount of buildings, using the same footprint for each original building.

SJArrange

Friday, May 2, 2008

Kenworthy Speaks

Fred at MetroRiderLA went to a lecture by Australian researcher Jeff Kenworthy. Here are a few things from Fred's overview that caught my eye.

1. LRT(Tram) Patronage in Europe has been increasing while bus ridership falls.

This is interesting to me because unlike the United States, Europe has kept a good amount of its tram systems. In many large cities, they are still networked to go a lot of places.
According to Jeff, in Europe, over a period of 10 years, Light Rail Transit (LRT) patronage rose 20.3% while bus patronage fell 5.6%. His implication is that people, the masses, simply and unequivocally prefer rail over bus. And surprisingly, it’s actually what are commonly considered the disadvantages of rail that turn out to be it’s advantages over bus transit in encouraging use. The high cost and inflexibility of rail creates a permanence that people prefer over the impermanent and unreliable nature of bus transit.
2. Rail Focuses Development, Buses Follow it
Another polished gem Jeff provided us with was the idea that rail systems “focus” a city and development while bus systems simply “follow” development. So buses, because of their impermanence and reliance on auto roads, must heed to the “predict and provide” game and attempt to follow wherever development may randomly occur. Rail on the other hand spurs and centralizes development, creating a sense of permanence not found in no rail cities. Rail and streets renaissances go hand in hand.
I've said this a few times before. Rail has the power if harnessed to focus development unlike buses that just respond to it. But it's not going to just happen. There need to be plans and policies in place to do it right. In the comments below Fred's post, a discussion started on San Jose. This is the perfect example of just saying that light rail is going to do all the work. I posted a while ago on employment sprawl. Well here again is an aerial of San Jose's system by all the tech jobs, something to not emulate.

San Jose Sprawl

Here is the Pearl District, which used to be a rail yard and was helped by the plans and policies of the PDC and the streetcar

Pearl District

Update: ABC in the comments asked that we use a more suburban area to show what's possible instead of an urban area. In the situation like San Jose above with 3 -5 story office buildings I think it's perfectly ok to expect a street grid like the Pearl Districts, there was a thought that it was the Pearl was predestined to turn out that way. Before the development agreement it was supposed to be tops 15 units an acre and the developer had thought about doing townhomes. Here is what it looked like in 1996.

But as suburban examples go, here is another from Portland with single family homes in a grid South of Orenco Station.

Orenco South

Downtown Plano trying to reintroduce Urbanism

Downtown Plano

And a Heavy Rail Subway example, Rosslyn Ballston on the Metro Orange Line. I've discussed this before but this used to be a strip suburban corridor. These things take time, this has been over 30 years.

RB Corridor

Thursday, May 1, 2008

Obama on HSR

Yesterday we talked about the dumb gas tax holiday. Also yesterday Obama was talking about real solutions including high speed rail. It didn't get a lot of airtime from the MSM probably because it had nothing to do with...i digress.

Grist has the money quote:

The irony is with the gas prices what they are, we should be expanding rail service. One of the things I have been talking bout for awhile is high speed rail connecting all of these Midwest cities -- Indianapolis, Chicago, Milwaukee, Detroit, St. Louis. They are not that far away from each other. Because of how big of a hassle airlines are now. There are a lot of people if they had the choice, it takes you just about as much time if you had high speed rail to go the airport, park, take your shoes off.

This is something that we should be talking about a lot more. We are going to be having a lot of conversations this summer about gas prices. And it is a perfect time to start talk about why we don't have better rail service. We are the only advanced country in the world that doesn't have high speed rail. We just don't have it. And it works on the Northeast corridor. They would rather go from New York to Washington by train than they would by plane. It is a lot more reliable and it is a good way for us to start reducing how much gas we are using. It is a good story to tell.