Fiscal Urbanism

Ryan Avent links to this post at the American Prospect on why conservatives should choose urbanism and transit:

In fact, one doesn't have to be concerned about climate change at all in order to support such policies; values of fiscal conservatism and localism, both key to Republican ideology, can be better realized through population-dense development than through sprawl. Tom Darden, a developer of urban and close-in suburban properties, said Wednesday, "I'm a Republican and have been my whole life. I consider myself a very conservative person. But it never made sense to me why we would tax ordinary people in order to subsidize this form of development, sprawl."

This is something I've always thought, if so concerned with fiscal conservatism, why is sprawl so pervasive? Part of the problem perhaps was communism in the 50's. Whenever you read opposing blogs or "conservative" thought in the comments, you always hear communism. I often wonder, if Moscow and Eastern Europe didn't have high rises and expansive transit networks, would we hear a different argument for sprawl? Probably. But who knows.

I do know that Representative Mica has been pretty supportive in the past. And its heartening to hear his comments. The FTA isn't helping.

But the federal government is a hindrance as often as a help, Mica admitted, throwing years worth of bureaucratic red tape in front of states that want to construct light rail lines. "As the federal government, we're a very unreliable partner, and we haven't decided what our policy is," Mica said, adding that he has been working since 1989 on building one light rail line in his central Florida home district, and expects to see grandchildren before the project is completed.

This is what causes cost overruns. Of course things are going to go up in cost when it takes 10 years to build a light rail line. You should blame that on the FTA and the political appointments of Bush, rather than the transit agencies that want it done quicker.

Affordability and Harvesting the Green Dividend

I want TOD to be more affordable, I really do. I think that it's important not to push people out and very important to allow people to have an opportunity to use transit and save money by living by it. There's only one problem right now, rail transit is so limited in this country, no one can reasonably expect developers that see a market to not try to build to what they can get. The non-profits and foundations can come in and figure out a way to capture the value created so that some of it goes back into the community. Portland did this by harvesting value from the Pearl District and the Twin Cities is looking to harvest the green dividend as well.

But they can't do it alone. TOD needs transit. It needs a well connected network, one that most cities don't have. I think that TOD in cities with good transit has proven its worth. New York, Washington DC, San Francisco. But we can't expect cities to have inexpensive TOD everywhere when its a niche super hot market that is under built and there is no T. It's starting to look promising since the space race is heating up, but there's a long way to go.

This post was a reaction/commentary on Steve Hymon's TOD posts.

Related Comedy

Hitchhiker's guide to the Galaxy.

This is Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz of the Galactic Hyperspace Planning Council. As you will no doubt be aware, the plans for development of the outlying regions of the Galaxy require building of a hyperspatial express route through your system, and regrettably your planet is one of those scheduled for destruction. The process will take slightly less than two of your Earth minutes. Thank you.

Oh, there’s no point acting all surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display in your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for fifty of your Earth years. You’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint, and it’s far too late to start making a fuss about it now.

Ridership Away!

Light rail is up 12% from a year ago, higher than all other modes.

Find your light rail city here.

Find your heavy rail city here.

Find your commuter rail city here.

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.

Babies and Bathwater

Jim Rowen discusses County Supervisor Scott Walker's gameplan on rail.

Walker told The Milwaukee Journal in a 1999 story that it would be OK with him if multiple, major transportation projects in a package that might include Milwaukee rail had to die together to keep light rail from being built.

Black Background and White Text

I know that the white text is a bit hard for some to read and have thought about how to fix it without changing the look of the site. For those of you who like to read lots of blogs and want black text on white background, you can subscribe to the blog in your reader. Also, i put a link to my feed at the top right so people can read recent posts from the feed in black and white.

I'll think of other ways to help folks out in this way. I'm sympathetic. But I also like the black and red.

Opposition Pundits on Parade

Ron Utt of the Heritage Foundation is worried. So are all the other anti-transit pundits out there. The newly minted interest in transit is encroaching on their road loving ways. A recent AP article on rising transit ridership captures Utt's opinion, proving that balanced transportation and oil independence means nothing to the conservative crowd.

Ron Utt, of the conservative Heritage Foundation, said transit is "inconsequential in terms of reducing congestion or greenhouse gases" and that people who want to use transit should simply pay more. Citing the example of a Washington-area commuter rail, Utt said: "If more people want to use that and more people have to stand, I don't know why that should place a financial burden on people in Iowa."

Sure Ron, that's why almost a million people per day take Metro in DC. I have a really great idea, how about people pay the true cost of gasoline or roads or airlines. Let's also make people pay directly for air traffic controllers and the highway patrol. And why should I pay for a rural road in Iowa? All transportation is subsidized, let's stop the favoritism towards one mode and pretending that cars pay for themselves.

Typewriter Typewriter Typewriter!

Then there is our favorite cipher, Randal O'Toole. His most recent call is to cancel the Denver Fastracks program claiming it's bad for the environment and social engineering. You know, the usual junk.

Environmentally, light rail is a disaster for the region. For every passenger mile carried, light rail consumes four times as much land as Denver-area freeways. It also uses more energy and emits more greenhouse gases, per passenger mile, than the average SUV.

I don't know where he gets this one. But as Mr. Setty at PublicTransit.us reminds us, transit actually reduces passenger miles overall. Randal's twisted logic lumps in the construction of the line when he never talks about the construction losses of highways and the vehicles that drive on them. What about the construction of all those parking garages?

O'Toole, many academics and other anti-transit activists understandably do not wish to discuss the wider, systematic impacts of transit on transportation patterns and land use. One key study estimates that for every passenger mile on transit, slightly more than two urban vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is suppressed or foregone. This study documents the connection between transit and lower vehicle usage that has also been documented in dozens of other studies. This effect is particularly significant when less than 40% of U.S. residents have easy access to transit at the present time.

But what annoys me the most is that stupid no one rides transit argument. Well no one has the option to take it! New York City has transit, people take it. Washington DC has a rather good subway system, people take it. But when the green argument for him fails, he can always fall back on social engineering. You know, the kind that took place from 1950 to the present when cities built roads only and subsidies were funneled to development related to roads.

The other support for FasTracks comes from those who want to socially engineer Colorado lifestyles. They use light rail as an excuse to build tax-subsidized high-density housing projects on properties taken from their owners by eminent domain near planned rail stations. Yet few Americans aspire to live in such dense housing, and such compact development makes little sense in a state that is 97 percent rural open space.

Hmm. No one in Colorado wants open space, just build on it. I'm sure John Denver wouldn't mind. And no one wants to live in high-density housing projects, that's why TOD commands such a low price premium with buyers. No one ever wanted to live in LoDo right? What about all those road, pipe subsidies.

Cars Cars Cars. Sprawl Sprawl Sprawl. Sounds like Drill Drill Drill.

Epic ADA Fail

see more pwn and owned pictures

How many of you have seen this type of bad building in your cities around transit? This example above isn't directly transit related, but it shows how sometimes we just aren't doing it right. I took a class in college where my professor discussed universal design, whereby we create places that are accessible for people with disabilities, without having to make special accommodations. It's as easy as making the front door level with the ground without putting in a step.

In the transit world, this means low floor buses/trains and lower ramps. The Portland streetcar and its ramp is a perfect example, it doesn't take a huge lift to get wheelchairs into the vehicle, and it doesn't take 10 minutes to load someone up either. As far as I know, low floor light rail vehicles are now the norm rather than the exception. Some places are even ultra low floor such as this Siemens ULF in Vienna I got to ride.

California HSR Could Go Green

If it passes. I'm fairly optimistic that people will see through the bs that a lot of the opposition is peddling but there are some that are already being pushed by their right side. Apparently the California Chamber is coming out against the bond measure. I never thought it was out of the realm of possibility that the line could be run completely green, but its good to see on paper.

A leading energy specialist has reported to the California High-Speed Rail Authority that the state's proposed high-speed train system can run with zero greenhouse gas emissions. The zero emissions strategy report was presented by Navigant Consulting Inc, a leading consultant on the energy, electric power and natural gas industries at the Authority's most recent board meeting held in San Diego. At the meeting, the Board adopted a renewable energy/zero emissions strategy for the high-speed train project.

Drilling for Typewriters

Thomas Friedman has been on a roll when discussion transportation, energy and other issues lately. Today he was on Meet the Press with Tom Brokaw and made a comment that the Republicans saying Drill Drill Drill is like saying Typewriter Typewriter Typewriter during the internet and personal computer revolution. Sure people still need typewriters, but only until they get replaced with something better. Here's the video:



A lot of people I have talked to seem shocked by this whole focus on oil when things are coming forward that would allow us to help the environment and save us money, or at least keep the money we spend in the local market. This in a way can be related to what Joe Cotright said Portland experiences in their green dividend.

H/T Think Progress