There is an article in the Times of London on whether purchasing a home near transit is a worthwhile investment. In London people are willing to pay a premium to be near a tube stop and values around areas that will soon be stations are rising quickly.
The extension of the former East London Tube Line will run from West Croydon and Crystal Palace to Dalston Junction, and will connect with the Tube network at Whitechapel. A second phase, due to open in 2011, will continue the line through Canonbury to Highbury & Islington Tube station. The average house price has already risen from £187,800 in 2001 to £317,959 in 2007, according to Hometrack, and gentrification has arrived in the form of the Dalston Culture House and the relocation of the Vortex jazz club to new premises, as well as several new restaurants. ... A 2005 report by the Passenger Transport Executive Group found that all UK tram schemes have led to increases in commercial and residential property values, in some cases by 15 per cent. Rental prices have risen by 7 percent.
What is most interesting though is something we never think of here in the United States. The warnings to some are that retailers won't be around until closer to the time that the new station opens.
But buyers must be prepared to wait. “The change will not be instantaneous. Some people who would never have considered living in an area without a Tube line will come immediately. Others will wait for the retail and restaurants.” Scotford urges buyers to be aware that retailers may not arrive immediately to the area because current leases will take a while to expire. But it should not take too long.
The fact that they expect retail that is within walking distance is a little bit different. Here there are a whole heap of issues surrounding the type of retail and whether there will be enough parking because around the station extensions, there is generally not enough density to support such retail without parking or other help from cities, but there it's expected. Kind of an upsetting commentary if you ask me.
You know you want to say it like Dr. Evil. WMATA rocked it's all time high with an exclamation point. This was forcast by many before so it wasn't too much of a surprise, but its still an achievement. On that note, Richard has a post up about capacity and the additional costs of capacity and makes the case for those people paying more that use it at peak due to capacity built explicitly for peak travel instead of average travel.
At the same time, Ryan notes that this super ridership record should make the region think about increasing core capacity with new subway lines and streetcars. I tend to agree. More core capacity can only increase mobility and perhaps let out a bit of a relief valve. Other cities such as Budapest are still building core lines in the central city (like line 4, line 5), we should be doing that as well.
Apparently they just couldn't keep the tunnel option out of their minds. What a huge waste of money. We did it (surface only) here in San Francisco, though some would say it resulted in another tunnel that will be a waste of money in the Central Subway, but I'm thinking that would be much cheaper than what Seattle is planning. I guess no one learned anything from the last 50 years and decided that giving cars a through way is the answer to all ills.
I haven't had a lot of time to write, but wanted to share with you all what has come through the ole reader. ~~~ Arnold wants to waive CEQA to pass the budget. I like that for transit, not so much for roads. ~~~ Tom Friedman writes gas tax and Oberstar talks about it on NPR. ~~~ A Portland Architect talks about how GM should be the catalyst for a nationwide streetcar revival. ~~~ Four subway lines opened this year. Just not in this country.
Wow. You guys really don't like the Silver Line Phase 3 BRT project or as locals like to call it, the Silver Lie. I know its not a rail project but I thought it was an appropriate project to throw into the mix. Second was BART to San Jose and third was the San Francisco Central Subway which unfortunately for the project opponents got one step further to Federal Funding at the FTA with environmental clearance today.
I saw a few other poll ideas in the last poll series so I'll bring those up soon. I'll probably wait a few days as tonight is a pretty busy news night.
We've seen this before in the OPEC states. In Baghdad they are building a subway. Where are they getting the money? It seems they are giving it the ole PPP. From the Guardian:
"This is one of Baghdad's most important projects and we hope that investors will join it," he said. "We have called for tenders from them and we have some money to contribute from the government. We are planning to start work as early as next year.
"This has been postponed so many times because of war and chaos but this time we are sure it will happen."
It will likely connect in to a national rail network that already exists and will allow dense Baghdad to move a little easier. But the biggest discussion is on security. I understand the fear of bombings, but I don' t see why that should lead to not building something beneficial. This will be a huge construction project that will get people to work, I don't know why we didn't start building it earlier with all that money we sent over for reconstruction. Seems to me that by putting people to work, that's less people to get angry over conditions.
I was going to write this comment in the last subways post but I thought it might warrant its own post.
Folks have been asking why we need subways or why surface transit expanded won't do the trick. I think Zurich, Budapest, and Vienna for example have excellent surface transit systems. As 295bus points out in the comments, Zurich has been very progressive with their que jumping tram systems. But I don't have that kind of faith in San Francisco to do it right. Everything seems to get messed up in engineering. But even if what they say about the signal priority is true on the T Third, something like a 10% increase in travel time on the whole line, that still doesn't do much for me. That trip from end to end is still makes you budget an hour for your trip. It still gets caught up in lights and there are way too many stops because of crossing streets. Same with the N, same with the L etc.
I know you all have probably heard me complain about this before, but here is the basic comparison and reason for my angst on this subject.
I live by the 24th and Church J Stop. It's exactly a half mile from my door to the 24th street BART. Now, in the morning going to work, I walk down the hill to BART and get on a train. They come every 4 minutes to Oakland which means I almost never have to wait very long. I take the train 18 minutes (almost never changes) to the 12th street station and walk up the stairs to my office. That trip of 11 miles takes me 30 minutes every day. That means I'm going 22 miles per hour.
Now let's say I'm going to Union Street to watch the game. I watch Next Muni to see when the J is coming, I go and hop on the J and take it to Church and Market. At Church and Market I switch to the 22 trolley bus which then travels down Fillmore. This whole trip is three miles and takes about 40 minutes.
Here's another trip I take. Take the J downtown then get on the 45 or the 30 to go into North Beach to meet friends. That trip takes me 40 minutes as well. That's about a 4 mile trip made faster by the Market Subway but I still have to crawl through Chinatown on Stockton Street. That is about 6 miles per hour.
But imagine if we had a subway. That trip to Union Street would take about 15 minutes. Wow. That would be amazing! I wouldn't have to budget an hour each way just in case a car stopped in front of the bus or the signals were having a bad day. It would be the same time every time we took it. I could go to the Richmond for Dim Sum or North Beach for Italian deli meat.
This is not Houston or Austin where we can say, 'we're not as dense as San Francisco or New York'. We ARE San Francisco. The city IS dense. We should have a Metro system just like DC or Vienna or Prague. I realize its expensive but so will be cleaning the air and allowing people greater mobility. Imagine not having to worry about places to park ever! When we make people have to budget an hour for what should be a short trip, we are making them choose thier car. Because our streets are narrow and we need to start thinking about giving bicycles and pedestrians space as well, our precious street space should be used for that and surface transit with many stops, and people should be able to get across town in a timely fashion underground. Just my opinion.
Today was an awesome day on the North end of the city that started with Texas(5) beating Oklahoma(1). I watched from a bar on Union Street with about 200 Texas exes and friends. Then I went with some friends to watch the Blue Angels fly over San Francisco at varying angles. All of this was great and made me pretty tired but glad I got out today. It was an amazingly beautiful day.
On the other hand. It was an epic epic Muni FAIL. In my first year here. I made the mistake of driving the 3 miles North to watch the football game during fleet week. Bad idea. No parking (when is there ever?) and traffic you wouldn't believe. The last few years, I've decided to take Muni which I try to do as much as possible. This morning I would take my usual J to 22 connection. But it started out badly. When I left my house, the NextMUNI webpage said 3 and 15 minutes for the J at 24th and Church. I got to the stop and the 3 min J was just leaving. I felt that was ok. 10 minutes wasn't bad and I would be a little late to the game but no problem right?
Not right. I waited 25 minutes for the J and the driver was chatting away with what seemed like a supervisor with a yellow MUNI vest. I was already annoyed that they were 15 minutes late and the talking really wasn't doing much harm, but because they were late more people had gathered meaning more people had to pay as they entered which always slows the whole process down. And why they have so many stop signs on Church I'll never know.
So i get to Duboce and Church where I would hop on the 22 and the next one comes in 12 minutes. It's already 9am and the game starts at 9am. I wait 12 minutes and off we go. The 22 gets there and I'm responding to texts from my friends telling them I'll be a little late but not too bad. Then some crazy stuff happens. The driver decides that at stop lights he'll read the SF Chronicle. And at one point he hops out of the bus at a stop and walks into a store to pick up a sandwich. What?!
Obviously I was annoyed. I was already late because of Muni. But this was ridiculous. So what would have taken me about 15 minutes in a subway or a car took me an hour on Muni. I know this is the reason people drive. It annoys the heck out of me that we can't get it right. Between the late train and the crazy bus driver...it was enough to make me almost declare war on Muni.
The way home pretty much sucked as well. So much traffic on Van Ness (I walked that way to see the ships from Fort Mason) I decided to go back to the 22. Well I got passed by three full buses and ended up just walking the 2 miles to the J. It was ok though. I got to take some pictures on Union Street. But for the once in a while rider, that day would probably kill your riding for about a year. Cabs it is!
In any event. This needs to be improved. And the TEP would really do almost nothing to change that trip. BRT on Van Ness could possibly help that trip but honestly there needs to be an east west and north south subway. I should be able to get anywhere in a 7 mile by 7 mile city in 30 minutes. That should be the goal. That would be quite impressive mobility for here and guess what, more people would take transit!!!
Here are some pictures and movies. The first one shows the final seconds of the game at the Blue Light bar. Pretty exciting.
The following pictures are of the Fleet Week traffic...
Van Ness
Lombard
North Point Street
People Traffic and Ships!
Marina Street - They would be dumb not to put the future F Line extension to the presidio in its own lane when you see this:
That was a sign held up at a rally in Arlington for transit. Northern Virginia Republicans have been trying to press John McCain to support the Dulles Extension if he is elected. Unfortunately, the Amtrak/Metro vote was telling with McCain voting against basically calling it pork that other transit agencies didn't get. So now he's trying to be equitable to all transit? Hardly.
A statement from the McCain campaign, however, targeted the Metro funding as well as Amtrak. "Senator McCain strongly objects to earmarks in the bill such as a $1.5 billion earmark for the Washington . . . Metro system and questions if this money is warranted above the needs that may exist among other mass transit systems in our country," the statement says. "With the serious financial situation facing our nation, this [multibillion-dollar] commitment of taxpayers' dollars can [be] dedicated to addressing far more important national priorities."
I'm not sure what other national priorities he's talking about. But it seems to me transit is pretty important, but maybe that's just me.
for a more transit friendly administration. For too long cities have been ignored, as has transit. It seems as if Baltimore should really be building a full Subway system like its southern neighbor Washington D.C., but the editors of the Baltimore Sun will not go for BRT. But they hope a new administration will help. From the Baltimore Sun:
Some civic leaders will no doubt object to this. It would certainly alter life along parts of Edmondson Avenue that would have to share the road with light rail trains. And despite putting most of the 14-mile line on the surface, it still might be too expensive to qualify for federal funds. That's because the FTA formula weighs construction and operating costs against the impact on congestion (too often giving short shrift to such factors as the effect on urban redevelopment or vehicle emissions).
But the proposal is probably on the right track - if further tweaks are made. The state doesn't have to choose a preferred option until next year, but this ought to be the centerpiece of conversation between now and then.
Meanwhile, the next president and Congress would be wise to invest far more resources in transit. With higher energy costs and the threat posed by climate change, the need for spending more on sensible public transportation has never been greater. But that, too, would no doubt require some compromise.
"Amtrak loses $2 billion a year subsidizing food," Mr. Coburn said. "There are a lot of great reforms in this bill, but you're missing $2 billion. Nobody's going to not ride Amtrak because a beer costs a dollar more."
I have a feeling it has to do with his hate of rail transit. I'm sure like his other colleagues he doesn't mind subsidizing roads. He's also blocking Metro funds. Never seen that before from him.
Steve Munro as usual has the plan. Again, as I said before, they are spending more money on transit in this one city than we do through the federal new starts program. Priorities?
A subway under Geary downtown and through the Western Addition, surfacing at Steiner Street, was proposed as early as 1936. It would have used conventional streetcars, and, had it been built -- at a then-projected cost of $13 million -- it might have forestalled the automobile expressway.
How much would a similar subway cost today? In the billions of dollars. It's needed but expensive. If we don't do it sooner, it will have to be done later, and at an even greater expense. Such is the cost of waiting. If we had done it before, the tunnel would be there for good and we wouldn't have to lay down billions.
Mr. Galipeau said the city has been fixated on short-term bus solutions for years, when the long-term answer is to build rail to major population centres. "Buses are a Band-Aid solution. I think they're dead-set on buses. I don't think they really believe in light rail," Mr. Galipeau said.
Nothing of big interest. The next quarter is going to be where the sparks fly. But Portland and San Diego are at 113,000. Not bad for 3 line systems. Imagine 6 lines and a streetcar network. Then we're getting somewhere closer.
According to statistics, China plans to build 65 urban rail lines with a total length of 1,700 km through pouring a huge sum of CNY600 billion into UMT construction through 2015, In light with its near term UMT development layout. In the past several years, the three Chinese metropolises of Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou all have advanced in a rate of building 30 to 50 km annually.
50km (31 miles) annually?? Per city?? Imagine if we built 50km of subways annually here. Obviously they have some issues with environment and antiquities but this type of investment and movement is surely amazing to the United States which takes ten years to build a line.
