Where the Dem Candidates Stand on Transport

This is the best review so far I've seen of where the democratic candidates stand on transportation issues. It's not completely correct since it says that Richardson introduced light rail in New Mexico even though it was commuter rail. If you scroll down past the CAFE standards info you'll get to the public transit and smart growth section. So go check out the link to Daily Kos.

My favorite quotes from some of the candidates...

Edwards

...will create incentives for states and regions to plan smart growth and transit-oriented development with benchmarks for reductions in vehicle miles traveled.

Richardson

Bike and walking trails. Support metro area governments that create useful, safe bike trail infrastructure and bike parking in appropriate regions of the country. Create tax incentives for companies, universities, and governments to encourage bicycle commuting. Smart growth planning.

Provide state-level planning grants to allow coordination of planning functions and policies encouraging energy and water conservation, transit-oriented development, and other commitments to planning that reduces energy demand.

Obama

Reform Federal Transportation Funding: As president, Barack Obama will re-evaluate the transportation funding process to ensure that smart growth considerations are taken into account. Obama will build upon his efforts in the Senate to ensure that more Metropolitan Planning Organizations create policies to incentivize greater bicycle and pedestrian usage of roads and sidewalks, and he will also re-commit federal resources to public mass transportation projects across the country. Building more livable and sustainable communities will not only reduce the amount of time individuals spent commuting, but will also have significant benefits to air quality, public health and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Clinton

Link federal public transit funds to local land use policies that encourage residential developments that maximize public transit usage. Over the next 25 years, a large percentage of the buildings we live, work, and shop in will be rebuilt or newly built. This presents a significant opportunity for the federal government to encourage sensible residential and commercial development that are linked to, and encourage, public transit usage. Local areas seeking large federal investments in public transit are already required to have land-use plans and policies that make investing in a high-density transit system worthwhile. Today, these requirements are focused mainly on commercial developments and not enough on residential considerations. Hillary will encourage the sort of dense residential concentrations needed to support public transit systems by better linking public transit funding with residential land-use policies. This will help to discourage sprawl and fight congestion.

They talk a good game. I still wonder who will deliver.

Those Who Do Not Learn From History...

Are Doomed to Repeat It.

Two big elections tomorrow. Charlotte and Seattle. This will determine the future of two regions. If I lived in either region I would vote for the transit.

Charlotte

The city is trying to change its development paradigm. By building an extensive transit network that includes streetcars, light rail, commuter rail and rapid bus, the region will certainly change the way it grows up. It's up to the citizens to decide whether they want to be a regional city or a national metropolitan area. Since the City of Charlotte has the tools to develop the right way around transit, there is no doubt that if the transit tax is retained, the city will continue to change.

Seattle

The Seattle region is a bit different from Charlotte. Chalk full of environmentalists that like to shoot their own feet and the usual car obsessed road warriors, this region just needs to get started. They've been fighting about this transit decision since the 1960s and still haven't gotten what they so desperately need, a core rapid transit system. But if you need proof that this should get done, one only need to look at the same thing being discussed 40 years ago. This is going to keep coming up, it'll also keep costing more. Start already will ya?

Bloomberg and The Carbon Tax

I'm starting to like this guy. He gets it. Obviously its good that he's independently wealthy so he doesn't have to worry about special interests which makes him able to make tough decisions. He recently announced his support for a National Carbon Tax. The only question I have about this tax is who it will benefit. Some folks are going to want it to lower their taxes. Transit providers are going to want a share due to their obvious carbon reduction benefits. And with the highwaymen always want more funding and are possibly looking at a new sources for their addiction. So we'll have to see where the conversation goes before we can get too pumped up about it. But as of now it seems to be going in the right direction.

Why Not Build Both?

The LA Times has an article about planning for the Subway to the Sea. They've decided to not only study a route on Wilshire but on Santa Monica. When you look at the ridership on both lines it seems to make more sense to put it on Wilshire, and the property owners in neighborhoods along the line are stuck in the stone age. But here's a crazy proposition. Why not build both lines!? It seems to me that both routes would be good and will be needed in the future. It's interesting that people look at what ridership is now, because bus ridership doesn't tell you what the rail ridership is going to be, especially with the density and amount of young people in West Hollywood who would probably ride a train but not a bus. Another issue is the distance that people would have to travel from Union Station to get to the Sea if they used the Subway. But it would be shorter for people from the North. So really wouldn't it increase ridership on both if they built both. As Houston showed with its network effect, the sum is greater than the parts.

A Sad Day in the Running Community

I'm sorry to report that US Marathoner Ryan Shay has died. My heart and thoughts go out to Ryan Shay's family. As many of you know before I got into this whole crazy transit thing I was a runner. And many of the folks I raced against are now running towards the ultimate glory of the Olympics. However sometimes sad things happen. It's unfortunate that such a young fit athlete could be struck with a heart attack, but for those who knew Ryan or watched him race, he pushed himself to the limit. I remember sitting in the bleachers watching him run away from the 10,000 field at NCAA's in 2001. No one was ever going to catch him that day as he was on fire, pounding away on the track towards his championship. It is a sad day in the running community and he will be missed.

Live Blogging from Rail~Volution

Here we are in windy and sometimes rainy sometimes sunny Miami for Rail~Volution. We start our panel in about an hour and a half. We're going to talk about visualizations for new transit projects. Also, there will be a discussion on how visualization is going to now be required for large federal projects. Then we'll talk about blogging. Check out Steve's page (Urban Review St. Louis) who is on the panel with me. He's really good about catching folks parking where they aren't supposed to park and talking about urban issues.

Update: 3:10 ET Effie Stallsmith is up from the Federal Transit Administration and Steve is live blogging over at Urban Review St. Louis linked above.

Update: 3:30 ET Effie discusses transportation departments taking their plans and meetings to myspace.

Steve pointed out a youtube about RSS feeds. A lot of folks know how this works so you don't have to watch it, but I thought it was of interested to folks out there who are tired of going to different sites looking for new content. Why not make it come to you?

Flexcar Merges With Zipcar

I think car sharing is important to transit orientation. Because automobiles will always be a useful tool in the transportation toolchest, having available cars for people who need to run an errand or go out of town to an area not served by transit is great. It also cuts down on needed parking spaces and creates an environment for using transit as a main mode of transport. I'm not quite sure what the merger means but other folks have been covering it so I'll let them do the commentary.

Orphan Road
Rebuilding Place in the Urban Space
Portland Transport
Xing Columbus

Rail~Volution, Earthquakes, and Hurricanes

I'm headed to Rail~Volution tomorrow to be on a panel about transit and blogging. Should be a lot of fun except there is a pending storm headed to Miami where the conference is being held. So there should be a lot of rain and perhaps some thunder and lightning which is one thing i miss about Austin. There isn't a lot of thunder in San Francisco but there are earthquakes. In fact there was a 5.6 earthquake tonight that I didn't feel because i was driving home from my Gramma's house. So as my mom always says, move anywhere in the United States, just pick your natural disaster.

TOD Reduces Auto Trips by 50%

This is pretty awesome research via Planetizen. The folks at PB Placemaking and Dr. Robert Cervero have done a study which shows that when built right, TOD does reduce auto trips by 50% compared to suburban development which is the basis for the ITE trip generation tables. Now we need to start calculating the reduction in carbon emissions and we'll be in business.

Developers Looking Down The Rails

An article in the Seattle PI Saturday was about developers and light rail. In some situations they aren't waiting for the line to come to build big projects because the market is already there for compact living. But what is interesting is that most of these guys have been snooping around the future station areas looking for other possibly plays. I'm not going to lie and say that these light rail lines don't help developers, but transit opponents complain that its a handout for developers I have to laugh. Mostly because isn't that what their precious roads are for? So that sprawl developers can build on the periphery? Yes.

But the first real surge in activity would come only after voter approval and could be restrained even then because of the transportation project's long timeline, he said. "I'm not necessarily in a position today to buy land I'm going to sit on for seven to 10 years while some massive public works project validates my assumption."

It just costs too much to buy land and hold it for a decade, until light rail comes along, Shapiro said. "Most people have to see that it's really happening. When the construction starts, then everyone takes it more seriously."

Once a light-rail route and station sites are finalized, Johnson said, property values would "really take off."

Transportation leads to access which leads to development. So the argument that its just for developers is really a non-starter because opponents development of choice is just not the development that is environmentally sustainable. And right now with the awareness of climate change, they are losing the war. Haven't you noticed the noise machine turning its volume up to 11? They are getting scared and like a caged animal are attacking with their backs against the wall. Thats when they are most dangerous. Thats also when they get ridiculous and start proposing toll tunnels under cities and super freeway expansions.

So when we are talking about light rail or streetcars and development, don't let anyone get away with the argument that its just a ploy for developers. There are always going to be good developers and bad ones on both sides of the coin. And yes they make a good amount of money, and they take a sizable amount of risk to make it. But if it is between sprawl and compact transit oriented development, I'm in favor of the access transit provides to build the compact stuff. Just don't forget to lower the parking requirements.