Inertia Continued

A serious (R) blogger at the Oregonian believes that automobiles are tied to our DNA.

Now, I'm not trying to dismiss Maus' opinion (he's a good guy and certainly knows his stuff when it comes to bike issues), but we still live in an auto-centric society. Car ownership is part of America's DNA. In most places across the country, bicycling as a primary mode of transportation is indeed, I hate to say it, considered a fringe movement.

I think we need some gene therapy. Of course when people write these types of things, it's just continuing the self fulfilling prophecy. Of course people will continue to be auto-centric if they aren't given an alternative. It's just like those people that say, no one takes transit, so why build it so they can?

And it looks like we have our new Ma "Bike's Aren't Transport" Peters in Minority Leader John Boehner. He stated that he saw bike paths as not stimulus. Some will say he means recreational trails, but we know these guys think any bike infrastructure is just for recreation. These guys are just out of touch.

Youth Vote? Gone. We ask for nothing from these idealistic voters, we offer little except chastisement of their lifestyle choices and denial of global warming, and we are woefully behind the Democrats in learning how to connect with them.

Lifestyle choices such as biking, transit and urbanism. Keep chipping away John.

Did Anything Really Change?

Apparently Dulles is a go. But Ma Peters made a comment:

"We wanted to find a way to make this a good project. It's a better project than it was a year ago."

Peters said the most significant improvement made by project managers was to strengthen the proposal's finances and contingency budget. The rail line's costs have spiraled in recent years, and the project was at risk of failing federal transit cost-efficiency standards. That risk is now gone, Peters said.

Did anyone think to ask them if the reason that costs were spiraling out of control was because they kept delaying the project? Then the hurl inducing comment of the week:

"God bless Mary Peters," said U.S. Rep. Frank R. Wolf (R-Va.), who, along with Kaine and recently retired U.S. senator John W. Warner (R) led state efforts to revive Dulles rail.

You mean the lady that almost single handedly killed the project. Thank you sir may I have another?

Final Administration Push on HSR

Seems kind of strange that the DOT would be looking at HSR, though I think its a plot to do it more privately than publicly. It's kind of the last gasp of the Bush administration. Perhaps it will go somewhere, but with the economy, It's seems kind of like an empty gesture.

H/T NJH

Streetfighter!

Now that's the framing I like. I don't know if JSK is up on the list for Transportation Secretary, but she should be. I'd love to see her and Ma Peters in a match too. I suggest the read even if Dana Goldstein doesn't know what high speed rail is.

Take a Walk Down To Electric Avenue

There was an article today in the New York Times discussing spending out infrastructure money wisely. So many times we've build freeways to nowhere and sports stadiums instead of things that will actually make our cities livable. It's kind of funny because the article really repudiates everything that Mary Peters is all about, yet she twisted it to her idea of funding. No Ma Pete, it's not about toll roading for new capacity. The article discusses what is wrong with the system:

It’s hard to exaggerate how scattershot the current system is. Government agencies usually don’t even have to do a rigorous analysis of a project or how it would affect traffic and the environment, relative to its cost and to the alternatives — before deciding whether to proceed. In one recent survey of local officials, almost 80 percent said they had based their decisions largely on politics, while fewer than 20 percent cited a project’s potential benefits.

This means most of those toll roads that she wants. It also means the sprawl roads that really have no environmental or fiscal benefits, such as the one we discussed yesterday. Yet Mary Peters still wants a cost benefit analysis done on projects. If it's the one that she's performing on the Central Corridor or the Dulles extension no thanks. We need better measures, and ones that put livability before driving fast or moving more cars.

But we also see articles like this, where the utilities are thinking about ordering electric cars. What the heck are you thinking? String up some wires on major corridors and order some buses that can be made fast. If they were so worried about making the shift to electric vehicles, they should start with modest changes now and public transport.

One interesting point the Journal piece gets into is that utilities want to play a much bigger role in managing the shift to electrified transport, to ensure that it doesn't put strain on the grid the way that the sudden burst in popularity of air conditioners did after World War II, taking the power industry by surprise.

On trunk lines this would be cheaper for the transit agency and the electric company, not diesel makers, would be pulling in more money. I'm ashamed we have such tunnel vision.

Yo Yo Ma

I don't think the transit community will miss you Mrs. Peters.

"I truly believe we have the best team in the Administration."

If by best team you mean best obstructionists and lawyers with no transportation experience then yes, you had the best team.

File Under Peg Round, Hole Square

Decreased driving could threaten road and bridge projects. Now I have to wonder if that is true, or if the building of new capacity that is speculative in nature is getting in the way. What do you all think?

Euclid Corridor BRT Opens

The Euclid Corridor BRT opens this weekend in Cleveland making it the third true BRT line to launch in recent years (Orange Line and Eugene EMX). Expectations will be high, err low. Projected 2025 ridership stated in the Plain Dealer is 15,000. That's a far cry from the previous projections of 39,000 cited by the FTA. Given the amount of destinations and jobs on the line I doubt it will take long to get to 15,000.

They basically reconstructed the street and are running the same buses as the Eugene system. It's also another case of a project in the FTA process opening over 10 years after conception. I thought BRT was supposed to be cheaper and quicker to implement? Though if it started today, the project wouldn't even be funded under Ma Peters. It got a Medium Low in Cost-Effectiveness and cost $21 million per mile. I thought the reason for BRT projects was because they are more cost-effective. Basically what this proves is that the FTA doesn't want to spend money on projects that give transit its own ROW. No not painting lanes on the street, but a true separation from other traffic that makes it more effective. Today, its required to get a medium in CE as we've discussed before.

Those projects that do not currently have a rating of "medium" in cost-effectiveness would automatically be precluded from funding recommendation by the FTA, notwithstanding the merits of other criteria applicable to those projects.

This is part of the cutdown in projects that has been going on lately. It's recently dropped from 85 projects in the pipe before the 2005 "medium" enforcement to 2007. Not counting small starts, this year only has 31 projects in the New Starts report.

Lest you think that projects are rightly being cut, it should be noted that Denver's Southeast Corridor, Charlotte's South Corridor, the Los Angeles Orange Line, and the Minneapolis Hiawatha Line all had a Medium Low ratings. Those projects have all passed their projections yet would not have been funded under the current process. Anyone else tired of cost-effectiveness being used as a blunt object to bludgeon the alternatives that will truly get people into transit, including rail AND true BRT?

Let's see how this line goes. I still wish it would have been rail and electrified, but it's an improvement in the corridor, one that the FTA would not approve of these days.

Friday Night Linkage

Peter at SF Bike Blog points out the shameful state of bike lanes compared to other green cities.
~~~
To me, when McCain's economist says we should invest in infrastructure "wisely", especially after talking about Dulles, he really means that like Ma Peters, he thinks investing in bikes and transit is silly. He also uses the phrase "performance and accountability in our taxpayer dollars". If we continue to measure performance like they do, the New York Subway and Metro are worthless investments.

H/T Greater Greater Washington via Grist
~~~
Options are available for cutting down the cost of the Fastracks program, especially the sections to Boulder. I'm hoping that the stimulus package includes money for them to finish.
~~~
Senators are standing up to the transit cuts that would happen if AIG and others go back on thier deals with transit agencies.
~~~
Purple Line leaders formed a coalition to be more effective at getting federal funding, or as its known these days, beating your fellow Americans for the scraps.

State legislators from Montgomery and Prince George's counties announced the formation of the Purple Line Legislative Caucus Thursday in order to make a stronger case for federal funding of the proposed light rail or bus line.

~~~
Surprise Surprise!!! The Seattle Times columnist says vote No on Light Rail in Seattle. I hope it passes big time under the big blue wave.

Transportation Secretary Short List

I'm not sure how accurate these are but it apparently was reported in Congressional Quarterly (Original here. Thanks Morgan):

McCain
- Ma Peters
- Bill Graves, president of the American Trucking Associations
- Pete K. Rahn, Missouri Department of Transportation director

Obama
- Governor Edward G. Rendell (D-PA), chair of National Govenors Association
- Jane F. Garvey, executive vice president, APCO Worldwide
- Steve Heminger, executive director of the San Francisco Bay area’s Metropolitan Transportation Commission

Ma Peters. We know all about her. Someone from the American Trucking Association? Serious? Or hows about Pete Rahn, the president of the Highway Lobby! This is stark. YGBFKM!

On the Blue team, it looks much better. Governor Rendell is big on transit in Philadelphia and understands transportation is multi-modal. I'm not so sure how good Jane Garvey would be as she was a former FAA administrator and Deputy Administrator at the Federal Highway Administration (booo!!).

I'm not so sure what I think of Steve Heminger either. His MTC has already been reprimanded by Jerry Brown for keeping roads we know the region doesn't need (Read Eric's post) and he got into trouble by taking a paragraph out of the recent National Transportation Commission Study Report about electric transit that Conservative Paul Weyrich had inserted. He's recently been a HOT lane enthusiast as well.

On the other hand, he understands multi-modal transportation systems, though the Bay Area's hodge podge of 26 agencies makes it a little hard to coordinate. They also have very aggressive performance measures for TOD that only spend money on new projects if the area is willing to accept a certain amount of density. I will say he and Gov. Rendell would be light years better than any of these other highway clowns. The McCain picks are telling, and if you were thinking he would address global warming and go against the auto-oil industrial complex, you might have just gotten smacked in the face.

Less Driving...Again

VMT has dropped again. Looks like we need more roads.

"The decline means Americans are consuming less fuel and emitting less CO2 (tailpipe emissions), which is a positive development," Transportation Secretary Mary Peters said in an interview with Reuters. "But it is a challenge to how we fund transportation today."

Hmmm...

Ma Peters: Get Those Bikes Off My Lawn

Yglesias slams Mary Peters with this gem:

That said, I got to work today by . . . riding my bike. And I got to work Friday by . . . riding my bike. Indeed, I commute to work on my bike most every day. And to buy groceries. I use it, in other words, to transport myself from place to place. That sounds a lot like transportation to me.

No Transfer

The highway trust fund is out of money. But they aren't going to take from the mass transit account, just borrow from the general fund. Hmm the general fund never pays for highways. Wait a minute...

Ma Peters derided earmarks as the reason for the shortfall. I think earmarks have gotten a bad name in the transportation world and is a catch phrase used by all for waste. However, its hard to complain about earmarks when they are actually being used to circumvent awful policy, such as the one discussed below where highways get 80% funding and transit projects less than 60% funding.
Yeah there are some bad earmarks, but I bet she would lump in bad transit earmarks with ones that are made because of her awful New Starts policy.

Merry Peters! Houston Edition

Instead of Merry Christmas or Happy Birthday, It's Merry Peters! In this edition, Houston was really excited to have her come down this morning to give a major speech. My assumption as perhaps was others is that she was going to fund the two light rail lines now in preliminary engineering or perhaps move them to final design. From the Houston Chronicle two days ago:

"We wouldn't be coming there to announce bad news," said the spokeswoman, declining to elaborate.

The site of Peters' announcement will be the northern end of the Metropolitan Transit Authority's Red Line light rail tracks. Metro's planned North Line would link to them and continue to Northline Mall. Metro is seeking federal funding for half the cost of the North Line and the planned Southeast Line, which would cross the Red Line at Main and continue through southeast Houston to Palm Center.

Metro also wants federal funding for an Intermodal Terminal just north of UH-Downtown where buses, light rail and commuter rail trains would converge. Metro spokeswoman Raequel Roberts said she she does not know what Peters will announce.

Well those hopes were unfounded as Secretary Peters came to hock her hopes for a privatization heavy transportation policy. Touting her metro mobility program, she stated that new systems like Houston's Light Rail could be funded through her new program. But with the funds somewhat open ended, many feel like its a back door gift for road builders and could be a blow to the livability movement in regions where DOTs are basically highway departments.

But yet again she doesn't tell the truth about what is really happening in Washington, with the DOT trying to steal from the transit fund to pay for roads and last year trying to allow HOT lanes to be funded by the New Starts transit program. Here's her most recent tall tale:

"The bottom line is that our current approach to transportation discourages, actively discourages instead of encourages the type of innovative approaches to financing and building like the north transit corridor that Houston needs to keep its residents moving," said Peters earlier today.

The current approach to transportation is YOUR approach Ms Peters. You're in control of how things work, yet you keep pushing towards faux BRT and more privately funded roads. You wanted to make it harder to build beneficial rail projects because you don't understand the benefits to cities. The benefits to people, not cars. Don't give us this crap about who discourages innovative transport when its you. You're in the way. Portland is looking at innovative ways to fund the east side streetcar with developers but you won't allow it to complete the process.

Forbes actually described it correctly with their headline. "Bush administration pushing new roads." It has a money quote from the Secretary as well that shows her true intentions, as she mentioned earlier this year. Bikes and alternative transport are not transportation:

"Under our approach, communities will no longer have to slice and dice every federal dollar to qualify for niche programs that do little to improve their communities or commutes," Peters said. "Instead, projects that make sense for commuters get funded, while projects designed only to help politicians won't."

Niche programs like the New Starts Program? Niche Program like safe routes to school? How about programs that promote cycling? The problem with this is the sole focus on the commute. Improving communities does not mean speeding up traffic on roads or creating new concrete for cars that are the main part of our national energy addiction. I'm so tired of this BS. Just say what you really mean Mary. Tell us how you really feel. You and your friends hate cities. Speeding up the commute is just code for building freeways through them. I can't wait for November.

Mary Peters Is After Me Lucky Charms

As we've mentioned before, she wants to take transit money and transfer it to the highway fund. Last time I checked, the highway fund was really huge, and the transit fund was rather small. And also last time I checked, why do we have such a huge surplus? Is that from not building projects like Dulles or making places like Minneapolis fight each other to the death because their CEI is a few cents high? Perhaps it has been an evil plot to take the money all along. You know it wouldn't surprise me with this group.

Gas Tax Holiday Talk Dead

Good. This was the dumbest idea ever! First the highway trust fund which funds transportation and transit projects is going into the red this year anyways. Second the transit fund could hold out for the next year but the administration proposed channeling money to the highway fund which would bankrupt the transit fund. A gas tax holiday would mean a lot less money from the highway fund which would almost guaranty the transit fund's death. Dumb idea proposed by people who aren't looking for solution but political expediency. I'm sure it thrilled Mary "Bikes Aren't Transportation" Peters to no end.

Pot Meet Kettle

I wrote out a long post but I thought I should just let everyone read Mary Peters really gross blog post.

Here's my favorite quote:

Most people haven’t yet fully grasped the unprecedented innovation taking place in transportation today.

Of course its ironic because neither has she.