Transit to Empty Fields

In the United States we haven't been able to talk a lot about transit creating new neighborhoods whole cloth since the early 20th century. Now places like Portland have been able to take abandoned rail yards and turn them into new neighborhoods with a walkable street grid and amenities.

In Europe now, it's being taken even further. Eco suburbs in places like Freiburg are popping up and development is happening as tram lines are planned. The map below from a paper written by Berkeley student Andrea Broaddus shows the expansion of the network.

As an interesting side note, Broaddus' study noted that two ecosuburbs were the same except for parking provisions:

Travel behavior data showed that residents of Rieselfeld had higher rates of transit use in an otherwise typical modal split, while Vauban’s residents had extremely low car share and high bicycle share. These differences were attributed in part to more Vauban’s more restrictive parking policies.

But back to the Reiselfeld. Of interest here is how the development was conceived. The tramway was built before the development and historical Google Earth images show this development happening.

Reiselfeld in 2000


Similar image from a different angle, from The Modern Tram in Europe.

And a more recent image in 2006


To me this is awesome. This is true transit oriented and development oriented transit. Could we ever do something similar here in the United States? It's already happening. Though perhaps not as eco-friendly or dense as would be most sustainable.


Salt Lake City is building the Mid Jordan Trax line into the Daybreak Neighborhood drawn up by Calthorpe. While all the houses are planned to be a five minute walk from local shopping and destinations, there are still a lot of single family homes. Additionally, there is a freeway that is being constructed up the left edge of the valley that will just make Utah's air pollution and inversion days that much worse in the future.

Image courtesy of Calthorpe Associates:


Salt Lake City Suffers from Wicked Inversion Days



Flickr Photo via UTA



Daybreak Under Construction - Flickr Photo via Jason S



Daybreak Completed - Flickr Photo via Brett Neilson



All the negatives aside, I think its an interesting experiment and one worth watching. And watch from the air we will...

2003


2005

2006

2009



More Flickr photos at Daybreak from UTA





And finally a little easter egg for LRT Vehicle nuts.

Sunday Night Notes

Whew, it's been a little while. Still reading lots of news and tweeting nightly. Wanted to cover these few news articles in greater than 140 characters though:

Utah's possible new Senator is saying he's going to cut off the spigot for transit capital funding from the feds saying that he doesn't believe they should be spending money on state and regional priorities. I happen to disagree with this but its an interesting question of

A. what is a regional or state vs. a national priority
B. what would he stance be if it were regional freeway expansion instead of transit

Seems to me much of this debate seems to be framed by subsidization rather than investment. The language needs changing if the livable transportation movement is going to make any ground.
~~~
The Green Line extension to Boston which is a Big Dig offset is delayed again. I'm not sure how anyone could speed it up, but it seems like the state can't really be punished in terms of money more than it already has.
~~~
Transit Miami gets the scoop on the Heavy Rail plug being pulled in the Miami region. This will set Miami back a lot, though local officials say they will refocus on BRT. How much do you want to bet that BRT means limited stop buses only?
~~~
I think this article about job incentives moving employers from state to state which means no new jobs are gained but tax gains for the region are less is replicated around the country when cities fight so hard for sales tax dollars that they lop off the benefits of those jobs. The one that always comes to mind is Emeryville and Oakland.

Trax Siemens Debut

Ok so two posts on this is a bit much but I wanted to compare the Charlotte and Utah vehicles side by side. These are for you Gordon. It looks as if the UTA vehicles are even shorter than the Charlotte LRVs and much shorter than the Houston LRVs which are all the same series. I had read before that this was done to accommodate four car trains.

Utah Transit Authority

Courtesy of UTA

Charlotte CATS


Via Willamore Media Creative Commons on Flickr.

Houston Metro


Via Word Junky Creative Commons on Flickr.

Bonus video footage from today's car unveiling and wow is it going out into the boonies. Better do it right.

New Siemens S70 LRV Debut in Salt Lake

We discussed these bad boys when the order was put in back in 2008. The thing I find interesting about this version of the S70 is that they are snout nosed and less archy on the ends than the new Portland and San Diego vehicles. This apparently was so that they could continue to run four car trains.

Here's a photo of Portland's new LRVs (with some older)


via Thomas Le Ngo on Flickr

Then the new Salt Lake City version

via Transit in Utah

I think I actually like them better. If anyone in Utah gets some photos shoot em over and we'll post them.

Taxing Districts

More and more I think we're going to see assessments on property owners to pay for infrastructure. This specific example comes from a Grand Boulevard in Salt Lake City moving from downtown towards the airport:

The street beautification, intended to blend with the planned airport TRAX line, would include new lighting, landscaping, multipurpose sidewalks, decorative walkways, bicycle paths and public art.

Of course people are going to complain about another tax, but I wish people didn't feel that everything should be provided for free. Improvements cost money.

Playing with Matches

It looks like an amendment was put into the federal transportation budget that would allow Detroit to use a LRT line that it builds with its own money for a federal funding match of the next segment. The funding for the initial segment would come from foundations. While lines have been funded philanthropically before such as Galveston's trolley, I believe this is a first to be funded primarily with foundation money.

The interesting thing about this amendment is that it would allow the Woodward Ave LRT to be constructed much faster than it would have otherwise under the usual new starts process. The general wait time for funding is 10 years and many cities find that such a time commitment increases costs and stretches political will. But there is a catch, the amendment doesn't say anything about the NEPA environmental process which could hamper the project. The amendment reads as follows:

SEC. 173. Hereafter, for interstate multi-modal projects which are in Interstate highway corridors, the Secretary shall base the rating under section 5309(d) of title 49, United States Code, of the non-New Starts share of the public transportation element of the project on the percentage of non-New Starts funds in the unified finance plan for the multi-modal project: Provided, That the Secretary shall base the accounting of local matching funds on the total amount of all local funds incorporated in the unified finance plan for the multi-modal project for the purposes of funding under chapter 53 of title 49, United States Code and title 23, United States Code: Provided further, That the Secretary shall evaluate the justification for the project under section 5309(d) of title 49, United States Code, including cost effectiveness, on the public transportation costs and public transportation benefits.

But the reason why the amendment had to be created is because federal funding has lots of strings and these matches are quite tricky. And while many cities would like to skip the new starts process initially by building the first line themselves, the NEPA rules are not structured to allow this. Several different cities have tried successfully and unsuccessfully to do something similar with their match process however the key sticking point is always the NEPA process and following the environmental rules.

Initially Houston looked into using the Main Street Line as a match for the next projects but that idea smoldered. Metro did however get an investment "credit" in the form of an Earmark for future fixed guideway construction. What happened to this money is unknown, though it seems as if it was just put into the pot for the five line expansion.

In 2005 Kay Bailey Hutchinson sought to fund 100% of two lines in Houston through the same mechanism while the city saved up for three others. This was blocked by Tom Delay and John Culbertson (who is still blocking the University Line) because they didn't feel it was following the law. Of course this was just a good excuse to block light rail for those two jokers. Houston eventually put the lines into the New Starts process and is seeking 49% of two out of five lines. Because they weren't able to use the first two lines as a match, they are likely leaving $270M on the table because they are not going for funding on two they are building on their own.

Salt Lake City looked to build their five lines faster by creating a memorandum of understanding whereby 20% of the total projects cost was funded by the FTA. This would fund the Mid Jordan Line at 78% federal and the remainder of the Draper line while UTA built the others as a match. However the office of management and budget rescinded this deal in 2008 when they felt that it was in violation of NEPA. It is believed that the feds decided that this wasn't legal because when the MOU was signed all of the lines entered into the contract with the federal government. Because not all the lines went through the NEPA process, it was thought that they would be constructed outside of the rules set forth by the federal government for environmental process. The FTA is said to still be honoring the deal, even if it is outside of the MOU document.

This was also worrisome to the FTA because it was seen as a precedent that would set off a wave of deal making which it eventually did with Charlotte. In 2008 Charlotte tried to make a deal that would have funded the Northeast Corridor at 80% while platform extensions for the South Corridor and the Northeast Corridor were constructed with local funds. This deal never came to pass. Finally San Francisco built the T Third line with local funds but went through the NEPA process therefor allowing it to be used as a match legally within the federal process. Nancy Pelosi still had to put an amendment in a spending bill but the line is currently being used as a match for the Central Subway project.

With all these examples, the federal match amendment still doesn't address the NEPA issue that came up in Salt Lake City and San Francisco. Ultimately it would be nice for cities to make big deals so that they can build transit networks faster than they would ultimately be able to under the current rules that keep lines in planning for ten years. So while Detroit might have gotten this match language, I would expect the OMB to jump in at some point and derail it because once the match project is seen as part of the whole deal, it is likely that they will believe the first segment would be subject to the rules of the new starts process including NEPA as well.

Tuesday Night Notes

I don't know if I want my buses to be described as “Quiet as a tomb”
~~~
If Oklahoma City builds a streetcar before much of the country...
~~~
The opposition in Madison wants to pull an Austin by having an election before all the facts are in. This happened in 2000 and things worked out pretty well....right?
~~~
Streetcars and traffic are tricky. Yonah is right that these issues should be dealt with but every place is different and will have different solutions.
~~~
Salt Lake City residents can have more bars! Put them near transit they say.

"Clustering bars near public transit, they agree, could reel in visitors, reduce drunken driving and send a signal that Utah's capital doesn't shut down after dark. "

Sunday Night Notes

Design of train stations is important. My favorite airport in the US is Austin, because when you get off the plane, the high ceilings make you feel free from the cramped space. I think good train stations can give that same feeling.
~~~
Salt Lake City is looking at Streetcar network plans. Just another arrow in the quiver.
~~~
The Houston Chronicle interviewed the outgoing chairman of Metro. From afar, it seems like he's done a good job at moving the network forward. I hope he gets replaced with someone as good. Another interesting thing to note is the opposition from the congressional delegation. Sometimes I have to wonder why cities get represented by the suburbs, which seems to happen a lot, especially in Texas.

Light Rail Kills Babies 2

That's what the opponents told the folks in Salt Lake City. They've come a long way since then and are probably doing the best job of just getting things built of anyone in the country.

But now the opponents are going with the next common denominator attack. If they build light rail, say they should have built BRT. If they built BRT they would be saying only use buses such as is happening in Oakland. This is at the time when UTA is actually building out a real transit network with all different transit modes including streetcars, light rail, BRT and bus networks.

"I don't think it's done any great favors to transit down here," said Salt Lake City resident Stephen Pace, who led the anti-rail group Utahns for Responsible Public Spending. He said UTA should have focused instead on buses that have the same right-of-way preference over cars as trains, but are more flexible and require a less massive investment.

This is the ugly side of the mode wars where people who fight it don't think ANY money should be spent on transit, even if they say in public we should. It's not a nod to smart planning ideas but rather what is cheaper. It shows because these attacks come amongst vigorous transit expansion in all modes. It's also interesting that opponents are starting to attack the conservative credibility of UTA's leaders. A lot of the anti-tax folks are coming out to argue against any spending via taxes.

Pace rails against the "so-called" elected officials who champion fiscally conservative values but are "just as deep in the federal trough as anybody else" to fund TRAX extensions into their communities.

It makes me wonder, what is fiscally conservative anyway in terms of development and infrastructure expansion? Is it doing nothing?

This is also happening in Tampa where anti-tax conservatives are starting to feel as if they were left behind by their elected officials who understand that infrastructure is better funded collectively. The polarizing effects of the national debates are starting to trickle down to pure ideologies.

How ironic that Republicans, one of whom I first supported over 20 years ago, and one who pledged never to impose new taxes when he came seeking my assistance in running his first campaign several years ago, would be the leading proponents of a new tax that could siphon as much as $300 million per year from the residents of Hillsborough County.

What's even better is that the author of the Tampa article also believes that people have a choice whether to spend money on gasoline or not, even when they construction of the communities they live in are based on the automobile alone.

Sharpe writes that the proposed tax increase of $85 per person is "... less than the three-week price rise in the cost of gasoline." Perhaps. But the option of paying for gas is ours and not an imposed burden by our government.

Funny that imposed burden.

Infrastructure Spending

There's an article in the New York Times that discusses the lack of major infrastructure projects around the country funded by the Federal Government. For the most part it seems as if major infrastructure projects are having to go at it alone locally.

Another approach is to finance new projects several notches smaller in cost and boldness — and in contribution to economic growth. Denver and Salt Lake City, for example, are extending light rail and bus lines into the outlying suburbs, at a cost of less than $5 billion apiece.

The Federal Government is a limited partner in these investments. For example while the Feds pay 90% of freeway expansion, more recent experience for these transit projects shows there is only a 50% match, and in more recent new starts reports that has been sliding down. Denver for example is asking for less than 40%.

With federal funds dwindling it also begs the question, if the Federal Government is not going to give regions funding for projects, why are regions sending the federal government any gas tax money? Sometimes it seems like a fairly inefficient funnel. Ultimately the MPO is the acting federal government at a regional level where there usually is no real governance. Since regions are the economic engines for the country, it makes a little sense but the federal government has too much power to tell regions what they can and can't spend money on.

But the benefits of having the federal funding mechanism dialed into the region is during a severe downturn. Ultimately that funnel can become a spigot pushing projects faster than they would normally go by providing jobs. In thinking about it this way, perhaps something they can do to help places like Denver or Salt Lake City is take over the capital funding for already under construction projects and allow those cities to use their existing capital money for operations or other projects. There are plenty of places that already have transit networks that could get pushed up if there were a guaranteed capital outlay.

I don't quite understand why the large goal oriented projects have stopped or are at least slowed. My only guess is that things have become so politicized and the no taxes groups have taken over the political landscape, making everyone else afraid to make a decision without getting hammered politically. Ultimately there needs to be a way to pay for needed infrastructure improvements, even outside of a crisis.

The Short End of the Stick Is Still Long

The transportation bill is stuck and as its written might increase transit's share of funding by a whopping 2% and the road people are already going nuts.

Utah transportation officials fear a proposed six-year federal highway-spending bill will siphon money from new roads in growing states like Utah and reward transit systems instead.

Why these strikes extreme fear into their hearts I don't know. Perhaps because they know that people are starting to change their minds about the great freeway subsidy experiment. What I do know is that it's a little bit funny that on the same day that the Moving Cooler report came out supported by government agencies including the Federal Highway Administration, a new website from AASHTO came out as well touting 'REAL' solutions to climate change that include cars, cars, and did we mention cars? Their big suggestion? Reduce annual growth in driving through smarter driving. But initially they were on the committee for Moving Cooler but were conspicuously absent from the final report pages. It seems as if someone decided to take their ball and go home because the results didn't cater to them.

But it's interesting that AASHTO was trying to cut them off at the pass after being part of the team. It's also likely that groups like AASHTO are more aligned with county and state DOTs than they are with cities, which means that if AASHTO exerts its power on congress, it's likely to push further away from the interests of cities. In the stimulus and in the climate bill, cities have been getting the shaft even though they are the nation's biggest economic engines and have the most to lose.

Washington's omission is troubling to metropolitan areas like New York City and Chicago because they are the dominant source of carbon dioxide in their regions and will face the earliest impacts.

Those in the status quo of road building have much to lose as well if we are to believe thier howls, even if the opposite of Transit expansion will benefit places like Salt Lake more.

Utah's reluctance to embrace more transit money puzzles him {Rob Puentes}. The Wasatch Front's train system is growing, he noted, and he believes it makes no sense, at a national level, to fight carbon emissions with energy policy while ignoring them in transportation policy.

The Utah Transit Authority finds the bill a possible upgrade because it streamlines the grant process for new projects, spokesman Gerry Carpenter said Tuesday, although it's too early in the legislative process to comment on details.

Yeah, you know that broken new starts process. Congressman Oberstar gets this which is why I'm glad he's on our team:

"When highway planners sit down to build a roadway," Oberstar said today, "they don't go through the gymnastics of a cost-effectiveness index," as transit planners are currently required to do. "They sit down, get the money, and build a road." Expanding transit, the House chairman concluded, is difficult "if you've got a millstone around your neck."

But all of this leads to the fact that Salt Lake City and other regions need to do something other than the status quo proposed by AASHTO (people are already lowering driving habits because of the economy), because on many days of the year, look how well the AASHTO way works out for them:

Streetcar Post

There's an interesting post at Steve Munro's site on some things that have happened in Toronto over the years. Also, Mayor Becker in Salt Lake City talks about getting funding for the Sugar House Streetcar and a downtown network on a local NPR station.

Redundancy

State Street in Salt Lake is looking to bring a better place making game to the city. Though when comments about rapid transit along the street state that its not needed because of an existing parallel line, I worry about not seeing the need for redundancies at different scales. There is a need for quality transit, perhaps it's BRT, on parallel streets. Especially if its a shorter stop than the line a few blocks over.

So far, "high-capacity transit" means bus rapid transit. Anything else, such as streetcars, makes no sense, since most of the 16 miles of State in the study run parallel to, and only a few blocks from, the existing TRAX line.

Thinking of Market Street, there is BART, Muni Metro, Buses, and the F Line. Certainly one of those is not needed right? Wrong. All of these lines serve a different travel function. I'm surprised at how much this is misunderstood when you talk about transit in other cities. But there you have it. On the major streets in a region, redundant service types are necessary to get people where they want to go.

Sunday Night Photo Dump: Salt Lake & SF Aerials

I forgot to post these after my Salt Lake Trip but there are a few good shots from the one station I got to hang around at that weekend. Unfortunately I didn't get to take a ride but I did get an all too familiar video of someone running after the train.



Also I'm not sure but these look like the trains that VTA sold to Salt Lake City.



Some more photos:

Thinker



Great Mountains



Downtown



I also got a few San Francisco shots on the way home...I wish I could have opened the window.

New Bridge Span



Downtown



Third Street



Eastern Neighborhoods

Take Off!

That's the loud phrase I used to hear from one of my college track coaches, Bubba Thornton, during races urging me and my teammates to move faster. A similar call was made by UTA's (That's Utah Transit Authority, Not Univ of Texas at Arlington) John Inglish when he spoke before the Banking Committee Friday. This time however, it was a call to speed up the New Starts program.

Inglish and UTA however somewhat gamed the system when they got the federal government to pay 80% of the Mid Jordan Line and a piece of the Draper Line if UTA constructed three lines by themselves. This meant that the other three lines didn't have to wait a huge amount of time while costs escalated and people complained. Here's the wording of the MOU from the FTA:

In August 2007, FTA and UTA executed a Memorandum of Understanding to set forth their mutual expectations for Federal financial participation in two of five projects that comprise UTA’s “Transit 2015 Program.” UTA was seeking a combined $570 million in Section 5309 New Starts funding for the Mid-Jordan and Draper LRT extensions. In return, UTA made a commitment to build, by 2015, the West Valley City and Airport LRT extensions, as well as the South Front Runner (commuter rail) extension without Federal financial assistance. The current total capital cost estimate for the five projects in the Transit 2015 Program is $2.85 billion.

That's a pretty good deal. And UTA is having a better time than their counterparts in Denver who decided to wait to buy up existing rail lines. I'm not a huge fan of using existing rail lines unless they go exactly where you want to go, but UTA bought up 175 miles worth for $185 million dollars back in 2002. With the Fastracks plan, the railroads can pretty much get away with murder and seem to be trying.

But all of this points to the need for the FTA and DOT to start thinking strategically about regions that don't want to build systems line by line. Fixing the new starts program such as Congressman Oberstar wants to is great (PDF 42), but it still isn't a holistic look at how to provide support for regions that are going for more than one line at a time. I'm sure there are some other programs that allow regions to program funding, but I'd like to see the feds take a look at directly enabling this type of expansion. Obviously there are a lot of regions with a lot of expansion needs, and if they are going to succeed and not waste any money, they need to speed it up.

The Battle for Salt Lake

Previously we posted videos from the Charlotte effort against repeal. Here are some of the videos the Salt Lake City Chamber was kind enough to post up for us.

The first two I like a lot. Forcing cars on your children is a pretty powerful message. A stuffed up vascular system is a great metaphor as well.



The following are a bit more boring.

Oh Noes! Streetcars Go Slower!

The Salt Lake Tribune apparently doesn't get the point of Streetcars AT ALL.

According to the UTA's own study, capital investment for expanded bus service on 2100 South would cost only $10 million. The streetcar would cost $37 million. Buses are more expensive to operate, but you could run expanded bus service for 26 years on the difference in capital cost between buses and the streetcar.

Great, run buses on a private ROW that has a ton of development potential. No comments on the difference in development that will result or the benefits of electric transit. Also, they apparently also haven't even taken a look at Portland, Tacoma, or Seattle to see if people actually ride.

TRAX has shown that Utahns will ride trains when they won't ride buses. That might be another point in the streetcar's favor, except that Utah doesn't have experience with a slow-moving streetcar system.

Oh noes! Not a slower moving streetcar! It operates nothing like Trax in downtown Salt Lake!!!

Sugarhouse Update

Last year we posted on the Sugarhouse Trolley in Salt Lake City. Since I'm going to Salt Lake tomorrow, I thought this update from the Salt Lake Tribune and Deseret News was appropriate.

What's interesting is that in order to keep costs down, they are going with a single track leaving the option for double track on the abandoned rail ROW between the closest Trax Station and the Sugarhouse district, a denser part of the city. In addition to this gem, there was a hint that mayors would be pushing congress to streamline the funding process for streetcar lines with Salt Lake Mayor Becker taking the charge.

In two weeks, Becker plans to sponsor a resolution at the U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting in Providence, R.I., calling on Congress to streamline the funding process for streetcars nationwide. Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, already has placed a cash request for the Sugar House project.

"We're hoping," Becker said, "that Congress will accelerate the investments."

Recently Congressman Blumenaeur wrote a letter to Secretary LaHood asking for smaller investments to be made in ready to go streetcar projects around the country. In addition to Boise, I imagine the small Sugarhouse project would be one of the many that could apply for the proposed $25 million grant that would be requested.

Next week, Crapo and Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., will send a letter to U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood asking him to designate $300 million in federal stimulus money for streetcar projects like Boise's.

Below is the alternatives analysis map from UTA showing potential development projects on the corridor as well as possible places for crossover sidings where streetcars will be able to pass on the single track.


What will be interesting to see is if they can keep in the $50 million target for the two mile route. If they do, it will hopefully push others to try and keep costs low.

H/T Ed Havens

So Much to Read!

I've been away for a couple of days in LA and haven't been able to keep up with the feeds. It gets a little disconcerting when you take a day off and your feed reader shows 600 articles to dash through. Here are a few gems from those days. I can't comment in depth on all of them but hopefully I'll be back to full speed tomorrow. Also, if anyone is in Minneapolis for APA next weekend, let me know as I'll be there too!

Wall Street Journal - Spain has a rockin HSR system. I had heard before that the Basque separatists (ETA) aren't happy about a possible extension to their neck of the woods. Very interesting article.
~~~
I guess history doesn't matter as much as making money. Give them some time to get some samples out of the ground. I don't see why the dig can't be a part of the development plan. Themes!
~~~
Trees vs. Sidewalks!
~~~
What Pedestrianist said... and Mayor Tom Bates is beating the Emerald Aristocracy at the green game. Now if we could only get his wife to find this thing called the Capital Corridor.
~~~
MTC pushing back hard because well, they like bad plans.
~~~
Suburban demographics are changing. Any surprise there is a market for not suburbia?
~~~
Relating transit to your road network.

Within two to three decades, 90 percent of Wasatch Front homes should be within a mile of a major rail or express bus stop, said Mike Allegra, UTA's assistant general manager.

He describes the end result the same way one would Utah's network of roads and highways. The streetcars will act like neighborhood collector roads that move traffic to TRAX or rapid buses, which run in their own lanes, whisking people the way a major highway does. From there, passengers can transfer to FrontRunner, the rail system's limited-access freeway. "Each mode feeds the other," Allegra said.

~~~
NIMBYs!

Opponents of a proposed commuter rail line from southwest Fort Worth to Grapevine say they will file a petition today in Colleyville saying increased train traffic would clog intersections and lower property values.

I've said this before and I'll say it again. Don't move near a rail line if you don't want to hear trains. Is that really so hard to get? This is pretty comical though. I hardly think a train every 15 minutes is going to jam up intersections. Perhaps they are thinking freight trains? Who knows.

Friday Night Allergy Links

Ughh I've never had allergies before, but perhaps something crazy in the air has got me going. Anyways, short links list...but I had to post something while I'm just laying here on the couch.

BART Board will decide how to raise parking fees. I have another idea for them to think about, how about banning people that clip their nails on BART. Yeah you guy sitting across from me the other day.
~~~
Salt Lake City is employing some interesting construction methods for the West Valley LRT. They are using foam blocks as the subsurface for an embankment.

Photo from KSL.
~~~
The GAO has released a report on HSR. I expect Robert and crew to get to the details. Thanks to the anon poster who linked in the comments.
~~~
Don't rely too much on modeling. Sky is blue today.
~~~