The Metropolitan Candidate

So says Alec MacGillis in the Washington Post.

But dominating Obama's platform are ideas geared more toward the metropolis as a whole: a big investment in infrastructure, including mass transit and inter-city rail, that he now also bills as a jobs measure; a network of public-private business incubators; new green-technology industries; a White House office of urban policy that will goad governments within metro areas into working together.

Is the TTC Really Dead?

The Trans Texas Corridor is what keeps a lot of ranchers and landowners up at night worrying if their property is going to be cut into pieces by the largest land grab in state history. As of now, it might be dead. What a huge waste of space. It was supposed to be a quarter mile wide for trucks, pipelines, cars, and trains or so they said. I won't count my chickens until the smoke disappears but I hope it doesn't just die, but goes down in a fantastic fireball that takes slick Rick and his hair with it.

"I want to clear this up. I did not vote for the Trans-Texas Corridor and you're welcome to look at the voting records," he said in a broadcast by KXAN in Austin. Then Craddick, a Republican who was debating his Democratic opponent, Bill Dingus, in Midland, stuck a fork in the Trans-Texas Corridor and declared the ambitious plan done, according to KXAN. "Everybody in Austin knows it's dead," he said. "Everybody across the state knows it's dead. It's just something to be talking about."

When in Doubt...

make stuff up. Don't let those silly facts get in the way.

The Earl of Transit

The push for an infrastructure stimulus is ramping up and Congressman Earl Blumenauer of Portland is taking the lead.

After years of defeats and futility, Blumenauer is convinced the odds are increasing that Congress could approve this investing as much as $50 billion to improve infrastructure with more next year if Obama is elected.

I'm sure we'll see more discussion of this as we get closer to and after election day. Depending on who gets elected, it could break either way. I've already seen a number of opposition blogs and talkers posting an earlier post from the DOT's economist that was posted to Ma Peters blog. That post has also been discussed by Ryan as well. I remember when people were saying Gore and Bush were the same. Even though they were different, no one would make such a statement today with the current candidates and on issues like this.

No Typewriters?

With gas prices coming down many transit agencies might be feeling a bit better about their balance sheets. But it's a short term deal. The oil cartel is looking to boost prices again. I feel like we need to invest more in electric transit including trolleybuses on core routes. Unfortunately, a trolleybus revolution does not seem to be upon us. Wires baby wires?

Transportation for America Asks the Candidates to Talk About Transportation

The Transportation for America Campaign is launching tomorrow. As the last debate is tomorrow, T4A is asking folks to sign on to ask the candidates to talk about transportation issues.

I Hate It When He Does This

I'm annoyed. When Obama talks about transportation he talks about cars and roads. There have been a few times like in Portland where he talked about bikes or in PA when he talked to the GE train makers. Those are site specific and everywhere else it's usually about cars. I don't want to hear about cars. And I certainly don't want us giving money to companies who can't seem to get it right in the first place.

"We'll create 5 million new, high-wage jobs by investing in the renewable sources of energy that will eliminate the oil we currently import from the Middle East in 10 years, and we'll create 2 million jobs by rebuilding our crumbling roads, schools, and bridges," he said.

He revisited the subject again later in the speech: "It is time to protect the jobs we have and to create the jobs of tomorrow by unlocking the drive, and ingenuity, and innovation of the American people. And we should fast-track the loan guarantees we passed for our auto industry and provide more as needed so that they can build the energy-efficient cars America needs to end our dependence on foreign oil."

Why is it that Toyota and Honda consistently get the market here in America right but Detroit can't seem to figure it out? Obama talks alot about changing the way things are done in Washington. I think he needs to go a step further and talk about changeing the way we do things in State DOTs, MPOs, and Detroit.

Living in Exurbia Getting Expensive

In case you missed it, this PBS show NOW talks about the tough times people are having living far from their jobs. My coworker Gloria is in the film too. I will say, one thing that bothered me is the interviews almost seemed like caricatures of people who live in urban places and in the exurbs. But at least we're starting to cover the issues as they continue to hit people hard.

Congrats to Krugman

Seems he won some Nobel Prize. From Nobel:

Economies of scale combined with reduced transport costs also help to explain why an increasingly larger share of the world population lives in cities and why similar economic activities are concentrated in the same locations. Lower transport costs can trigger a self-reinforcing process whereby a growing metropolitan population gives rise to increased large-scale production, higher real wages and a more diversified supply of goods. This, in turn, stimulates further migration to cities. Krugman's theories have shown that the outcome of these processes can well be that regions become divided into a high-technology urbanized core and a less developed "periphery".

Let's look back to what he's said on transit...

But none of it amounts to much. For example, some major public transit systems are excited about ridership gains of 5 or 10 percent. But fewer than 5 percent of Americans take public transit to work, so this surge of riders takes only a relative handful of drivers off the road.

Any serious reduction in American driving will require more than this — it will mean changing how and where many of us live. 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.

Bonds, Road Bonds

Shaking and stirred? But they pay for themselves! As one commenter brings up:

Funny how no one brings things like this up when talking about transit. Transit never has the expected usage and is a waste. Toll roads without expected usage are planning for the future.

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.

More on City Competitiveness & The MEniverse

In a similar discussion as the post below on Charlotte's competitiveness, Brendan O'Shaughnessy at the Indianapolis Star discusses why it is that Indianapolis isn't as competitive. The reason? The want to keep the cost of government low.

Indianapolis spends far less than these other cities on government -- and consequently spends far less on such things as parks, public transportation, the arts and libraries, amenities that some people view as optional but that experts see as critical to making a city vibrant and competitive.

Indianapolis' spending choices underscore two core community values: thrift and an affinity for small government.

It sure explains a lot and offers a vision of what a more libertarian type future would be like. The point seems to be that they don't value the commonwealth ideals as much as regions like Portland and Seattle who value parks and libraries.

"The unwillingness to gut it up for big expenditures made it hard to keep pace with other cities," Hudnut said. "It's very tough to fund some of these necessary improvements if you campaign on a no-tax mantra."

The no-tax mantra is alive and well as we know from the famous Grover Norquist wish to shrink government so much that it could be drowned in a bathtub. But this no-tax policy also seems to be killing needed services and common goals. Unfortunately, people don't quite understand the value of networks when thinking about the beginning of transit or parks for that matter. It's all about what benefits me now and not the Universe of benefits but rather the MEniverse.

Melyssa Donaghy, an anti-tax activist with Hoosiers for Fair Taxation, acknowledges as much. "I don't use the parks except the Monon Trail," she said. "I don't think it's affecting my quality of life. What's affecting my quality of life is the ability to pay my bills."

Sure it might not be affecting your quality of life, but what about others? What about things that do affect your quality of life that others don't want to pay for. This comes up with transit as well. Why should I pay for that if I don't use it. Well, the people who will take transit often pay for your roads, why should they do that? If I take BART to work every day, why should I pay for the new Bay Bridge span? It doesn't benefit me directly. Therein lies the problem.

I think this answers why older rust belt cities are doomed to die a slow painful death. Places like Cincinnati and Indianapolis will never be havens for the creative class unless they start investing money in their cities instead of being misers. Being cheap in the MEniverse is easy. Investing in all aspects of community, well that takes civic pride and a willingness to provide common wealth for the common good.

Bike Tax Credit in Bailout Bill

It seems as if you can get credit for up to $240 for expenses occurred while commuting on your bicycle. This is a portion of the bailout plan that the Senate passed so its still up in the air, but its interesting.

(i) QUALIFIED BICYCLE COMMUTING REIMBURSEMENT- The term `qualified bicycle commuting reimbursement’ means, with respect to any calendar year, any employer reimbursement during the 15-month period beginning with the first day of such calendar year for reasonable expenses incurred by the employee during such calendar year for the purchase of a bicycle and bicycle improvements, repair, and storage, if such bicycle is regularly used for travel between the employee’s residence and place of employment.

`(ii) APPLICABLE ANNUAL LIMITATION- The term `applicable annual limitation’ means, with respect to any employee for any calendar year, the product of $20 multiplied by the number of qualified bicycle commuting months during such year.

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.

A National Expansion Strategy

Since the FTA and the federal government are always looking at ways to judge projects based on how they fit into a national strategy, it might be good to think about funding transit in this way. Not because we want to be forced into the frame of the FTA, but rather it might get more interest and importance if it ties into a national strategy. Much like the 1950 federal defense highway system, this could be the national defense transit network.

The idea is that if you hop on a plane and go to Columbus, you can get to the major destinations within Columbus and then hop on a train to Pittsburgh or Cleveland and get around in those places without a car. It seems to me that if you made it easy for people from outside of the city to operate without a car, it would make it easier to operate inside of the city.

There are two components, good metro networks and good city high/moderate speed networks. The larger network should connect cities together that are larger but probably don't get as good of airplane service and major cities that generate a lot of short flight trips. The smaller networks should connect, as said before, the major destinations in a region. For example, Denver's transit network is connecting the Federal Center, the Tech Center, Downtown, and Boulder together with transit. To me, making all of these connections should make it easier for creating transit villages where people can walk or bike for many of their trips and make intercity travel easier as well.

A Logic Disconnect

We discussed the moves by the Dallas Ft. Worth region to move forward with a regional transit network but some skeptics still don't understand how things work as it pertains to automobiles. In a Fort Worth Star Telegram article, the following is mentioned.

Others argued that technological improvements to cars might improve the region’s air pollution, making commuter rail unnecessary. "It’s likely that by 2011 we’re going to see a lot of electric automobiles on the road," said Dave McElwee, president of the Tarrant Alliance for Responsible Government. "Ridership will go down."

I'm constantly amazed by the technophiles that are hoping some magic electric car will rise making transit useless. The problem with this is even if you built a car like that, the roads still need to be expanded to accommodate them. Also, with the increases in VMT expected from hybrid cars making people more mobile, energy consumption still continues to rise. So while there might be electric cars at some point, mobility still creates issues. The human condition causes a problem in that for work people need to be close to each other but the dispersed living arrangement causes a need for greater infrastructure to accommodate mobility.

I also don't see what people have wrong with transit. The narrative in this country has been driving for so long by suburbanites, it discounts the feelings of urban dwellers. In places with well run transit, movement is so easy, and city life is their choice. When I was in Budapest and Vienna, I couldn't imagine having a car in that city. The Metro came every 3 minutes and urban form made all trips convenient by walking. Even here in San Francisco, I can get where I need to go easily by walking or using transit. It's silly to think about getting in my car, yet there are still car driven policies, pushed by those might as well be living in the suburbs.

Getting Slim? Eat More Food

Martin hits the nail on the head. Why are we begging for more highway money when the funding source is going down because people are driving less. Perhaps it's because there is an extreme want by the motoring and sprawling industries to keep pushing. Maybe this is what is needed to starve the sprawling beast.

Istook Is Right

Arcady and the Cap'n pointed out a comment Istook made in that crazy article yesterday.

Forcing people to use a particular mode of travel is not the American way.

Arcady said: "Damn right! Stop forcing me to drive!"

Agreed.

The Option of Urbanism: Subsidizing the Rich

Here is another view of it from the Option of Urbanism. We've been taking quotes for the last week from the book.

According to Myron Orfield's Metropolitics, the affluent outer-ring suburbs in the favored quarter "dominate regional economic growth and garner a disproportionate share of the region's new roads and other development infrastructure." Orfield also pointed out that much of the funding for this infrastructure is raised from the region as a whole. For example, all car-driving residents in the region pay gas taxes to partially support the building of highways, and taxpayers of the region as a whole pay the rest of the money through their income, property, and sales taxes.

So this happens for roads, but people yell and scream bloody murder when they are taxed for transit and "it doesn't help me directly". The worst part about this as well is that cities are slowly signing on to their own declines.

The unlikely consequence of this pattern of infrastructure development is that the whole region pays for infrastructure that tends to be placed in the favored quarter; the poor pay for the infrastructure of the rich. According to Orfield, the central cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, for example, pay $6 million a year to help move their middle class households and businesses to the edge of the region.

Part of the problem is the regional competition for jobs. Minneapolis has a tax base sharing program that might alleviate this a little, but most regions are not so lucky. And there is still exporting going on to places like Bloomington and Eden Prairie.

M1ek has discussed this before and James Rowen covered a similar issue for Milwaukee in talking about how much they give to the regional planning commission, and how little they get out of it. Perhaps this is something that needs to be put in mayor's and city council members faces. DC, for all its flaws has the right idea of trying to take care of its citizens instead of the folks who take advantage of their services during the day, but drive back out at night.

Option of Urbanism: Favored Quarter

In real estate speak, there is such a thing as the favored quarter, where developers follow the infrastructure and investment. From The Option of Urbanism:

These housing and retail trends began to reveal a new and unexpected metropolitan development trend. Each metro area began to grow in a single predominant direction: the favored quarter, a ninety degree arc that starts in the traditional downtown of the major city in the region and fans outward in one direction.
...

The unlikely consequence of this pattern of infrastructure development is that the whole region pays for infrastructure that tends to be placed in the favored quarter; the poor pay the infrastructure of the rich.

Very interesting concept that I had never heard of before. Some examples would include northwest Austin and East Seattle towards Redmond. He mentions that 70% of Seattle's office space is in this quarter. Some cities such as San Francisco and New York have multiple favored quarters because they are such large regions.