Measure AAARRRR

It doesn't look very good down there. Given California needs 66% of the vote on these types of measures (dumbest rules ever) everyone pretty much has to be on board except for the always wacko. What happens then is one constituency can hold the whole process hostage to get what they want. That is what happens in the state legislature all the time for the budget. A few people get to hold the rest of the state hostage. It will be interesting to see how this pans out. If this goes down, I don't see a replay in a year like Seattle. And it will be a long time to wait and much more expensive for important projects like the Subway to the Sea.

Want to Live the Pajama Life?

Streetsblog SF is looking for an editor. SF Bike Blog has more.

Pushy SF1

I always find the opposition to more density and urban neighborhoods quite perplexing. Even more so when its backed up using vulgar libertarianism. Bill Fulton discusses the issue of libertarians and thier exceptionalism on single family housing trumpeted through a recent article in the OC Register.

Most amusing of all, however, is the way the Register conflates the free-market idea of what people want with the socially conservative idea of what people should want. Simply put: Despite its supposedly free-market orientation, the Register can’t imagine a world in which some people might answer their derisive question –“Want to live in a condo by the tracks?” – by saying yes.

This is a pretty common theme by urbanists who aren't trying to get rid of people's choices, just give them more. In fact Ryan posted on an Atrios comment today as well:

It never ceases to amaze me how angrily people react to advocates of pro-urban policies, as if the very idea of improving such places is equivalent to war on the suburbs and the people who inhabit them. It’s also strange to be told how people don’t like to live in cities by folks seemingly incapable of grasping the fact that some people don’t like living in suburbs.

I've said this before but I believe if there were more urban neighborhoods in cities, more people would be able to afford to live in them. I understand why people live in the burbs. I grew up there and it was a great experience. Right now though, I'm liking my urban neighborhood in San Francisco. And it sure has helped me save gas money.

United States Fixed Guideway Capital Costs Estimated

A report called Jumpstarting the Transit Space Race was released today by my day job organization about the backlog of capital fixed guideway transportation projects in the United States. The total capital cost for almost 400 subway, commuter rail, light rail, streetcar and BRT projects is estimated at $248 billion dollars. If that seems like a lot of money, it is. In fact, under the current capital funding mechanism of New Starts, this would take 77 years to fund if projects were funded 50% locally and 50% federally. That's a pretty messed up system.
Here are a few select quotes from the report folks might find interesting:

Americans took 10.1 billion trips on transit in 2007, saving 1.4 billion gallons of gasoline – the equivalent of a supertanker leaving the Middle East every 11 days.

“We’re loving our transit systems to death today,”(4) Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-OR) told the U.S. House in a debate early this summer.

Roger Snoble was among those to testify. “In its efforts to exercise due diligence over federal funds, the Federal Transit Administration has developed a system so complex, so replete with reports and analyses and so fraught with delays and schedule uncertainties that it now obstructs
one of the agency’s fundamental goals to assist urban areas in building critically needed transit systems in a cost-effective manner,” Snoble told the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.

A 2005 survey conducted by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the U.S. Census Bureau found that only 54 percent of American households have access to bus and rail transit, and only 25 percent have what they consider to be a “good option.”

TOD Webchat on Planetizen

If anyone wants to livechat with me (day job Jeff) and Professor John Renne of the University of New Orleans over at Planetizen about TOD you'll soon get your chance. We'll be taking questions and typing as fast as we can on October 20th at 11am Pacific.

Related Comedy

Elaine:

Think about that. This is nothing. No, it's not nothing, it's something. It's a nightmare! Help me! Move it! Com'on move this fu(beep) thing!! Why isn't it moving?!? What can go wrong with a train!?! It's on tracks, there's no traffic! How can a train get stuck. Step on the gas!! What could it be? You'de think the conductor would explain it to us? 'I'm sorry there's a delay we'll be moving in 5 minutes'!! I wanna hear a voice. What's that on my leg?!! *Lights in the train go off*

Magical Density Machine

In a recent email exchange on one of my numerous listserves, a bus booster has been trying to downplay the impact of light rail and streetcars on new development and shaping growth. If this is really the case, I have to wonder why those in opposition to such lines are always so worried about them changing the neighborhood. In a local Milwaukie paper (Milwaukie, Oregon not Wisconsin) a citizen worries about the density and character changes that will come with the rail line.

...all are part of a thrust by the regional government to dictate the forced density they advocate. Light rail is basically a density tool, and Metro’s vision of Milwaukie is as one large Transit Oriented Development hub and over-populated switching yard.

Much like the Berkeley regressive progressives (TM), its understandable that people are worried about change. But I believe this mans fears are unfounded.

As they expound on the wealth that density and rail will bring to Milwaukie, the throngs of people who will come to shop, the jobs that will be created here, I cringe. They have it backwards. Our valuable downtown property will be converted into park-and-rides or jam-packed transit-oriented developments with inadequate parking; the shoppers and jobs will go to Portland, along with the money. Remember, all roads lead to Rome.

Anyone who would take valuable land and turn it into a park and ride doesn't really want to make money. Also, regional centers don't drain to the downtown and the constant worry about parking belies a autocentric thinking that is all too common in this country. I would be surprised if Milwaukie's downtown didn't turn into a vibrant center.

If I were in opposition, I would just do what all opponents do, say the next lowest mode on the totem pole would be better and cheaper. This would effectively kill the density and the transit project keeping the status quo, just like the Nimbys want.

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.

Transit Not Stadium

Richard is right. We should be building transit, not sports stadiums. Even if stadiums did help districts, the investment in one place for games eight times a year is a waste compared to daily linear transit lines that can have the affect of changing the city, instead of one district. Not to mention in 20 years, stadiums are obsolete according to team owners.

UTA Ridership Up

JMD covers the surge in ridership at UTA. The new commuter rail line and light rail lines have been good investments. The expansion of five more lines will give the region an even better access and mobility.

It is clear that the investment in TRAX and Front Runner is paying off. Despite there being only two TRAX lines it carries 34% of UTA's ENTIRE ridership. Add Front Runners numbers into the equation and it is at 40%. When you consider the bus system covers six counties and a couple of hundred routes, it truly shows how well TRAX and Front Runner is doing.

Trax - 51,849
Front Runner - 8,250

Here's the official map they have recently put up on their website for the expansion: