Rail Opponent Cliche Fest

Ryan points out the dumb comments the Post starts its article out with:

"Despite its substantially higher cost"

He goes on to comment:

Despite its substantially higher cost, I ordered the delicious steak the other night, instead of the potted meat. Despite its substantially higher cost, I bought a nice bottle of wine instead of a plastic jug of horse spit. Despite its substantially higher cost, I opted to burn a pile of money, rather than shell out for a copy of the worthless Washington Post.

I'll do you one better! How about all these wonderful anti rail cliches from US News and World Report:

Democratic bleeding hearts

social engineering program

nice thing to have. But

at a fraction of the cost, buy swank new buses

half the cost of light rail, build a dedicated "bus rapid transit" system

riders of the proposed Purple Line already take mass transit to work

proponents are actually hurting the cause

Who thinks US News should stick to college rankings?

Walk & Train

Ryan says:

It's easier to support a carbon tax if you have a grocery store within walking distance and can take the train to work.

Absolutely. I would likely be skeptical if I were living in Austin still and knew that I had to drive to get most places. Now that BART and the Grocery store are a half mile in each direction, I don't worry about it anymore. I fill up my car maybe once every month and a half, sometimes even longer. Think about if everyone was able to move from once a week to once every two months. More money for local business, more money for alternative energy and more money for housing near transit. Winners all around.

Reframing a "Highway" Bill

We need to stop calling it the "Highway Bill". It should never fund mostly highways ever again. It's just like the needed reframing of the "Farm Bill." Michael Pollan has called for it to be called the food bill.

Doing so starts with the recognition that the "farm bill" is a misnomer; in truth, it is a food bill and so needs to be rewritten with the interests of eaters placed first. Yes, there are eaters who think it in their interest that food just be as cheap as possible, no matter how poor the quality. But there are many more who recognize the real cost of artificially cheap food--to their health, to the land, to the animals, to the public purse. At a minimum, these eaters want a bill that aligns agricultural policy with our public-health and environmental values, one with incentives to produce food cleanly, sustainably and humanely.

If we follow this logic to its transportation end, we should be calling the transportation bill something else entirely. Livable mobility bill? This means that the bill should be written with livability placed first. Is that so hard a goal? Let's try Michael's paragraph replacing the food words with transportation words.

Doing so starts with the recognition that the "highway bill" is a misnomer; in truth, it is a livable mobility bill and so needs to be rewritten with the interests of people placed first. Yes, there are people who think it in their interest that driving just be as cheap as possible, no matter how poor the quality. But there are many more who recognize the real cost of artificially cheap driving--to their health, to the land, to themselves, to the public purse. At a minimum, these people want a bill that aligns transportation policy with our public-health and environmental values, one with incentives to move us cleanly, sustainably and humanely.

Sounds pretty good huh? If you have something better than the livable mobility bill, let's hear it.

Streetsblog SF

Check it out. They're up and running.

Smashing

People are mad. I'm not happy about it either. But why smash stuff that has nothing to do with what happened on that BART platform? Becks has posted another person's story about how things got out of hand, and hotter heads prevailed. It's unfortunate that a few need to be hooligans and vent anger that exists in this way. Here's a commentary I agree with to a certain extent.

No question that Oakland is a full-on bonfire, soaked in gasoline and just waiting for a match or two. Chronicle columnist Chip Johnson and reporter Henry Lee have provided readers a long running and deep image of a city off its moorings, from hapless (or absent or corrupt) government leaders to rampant homicide.

This has been boiling for a while. Oakland seemed a bit sleepy for a while but Dellums being the absent professor isn't helping and no one has really taken a leadership role in the city of late. I'm not afraid but rather sad. The city has such great potential but seems to have a bit of a complex. Always overshadowed by San Francisco, Oakland developed an identity related to the bad things that have happened. But it has great qualities. It has great bones.

Working downtown has given me some perspective, but I don't understand most of the dynamics. The underlying issues need attention. And I don't think anyone in the leadership of the city is paying enough attention to what is going on deep down to actually fix it. I don't know the answer, but hopefully someone will think outside the box on this. The shooting was just one event, but so was the killing of Franz Joseph. It's a powder keg in Oakland and we need a solution. Where's the leadership summit? Where are the bright minds and big hearts? This is a cycle that must be broken.

Restructuring Property Tax to Land Alone

I don't remember posting this when it popped up, but its something I remember a classmate discussing in grad school and I just found it again after the break. At the ULI blog:

How about restructuring the property tax across America to install a two-tiered system? More tax on those horizontal pieces of empty land and asphalt, less on the buildings. That is, reduce the tax rate on homes and other improvements, and substantially increase the rate on the site value. I think such a system would induce more compact development and more infill work.

Pittsburgh has used the system for years until problems arose with the way assessments worked out, as my colleague and former Pittsburgh Mayor Tom Murphy has told me. Nonetheless, if assessments are fair, the higher land tax would bring vacant or woefully under-used central sites into use, giving new life to inner cities and reducing sprawl. It would also stem land speculation, which is the big engine behind house price escalation, thus stabilizing neighborhoods and keeping sale prices and rents more affordable. The land tax returns to government--the values it creates with bridges, roads, and other infrastructure--helping to pay for maintenance and necessary improvements.

I think this is a very interesting idea. This would keep large swaths of downtown land from continuing on in life as parking lots. But it might also have the effect of having something built, but not quite to the density that it really should be over the long term.

Did Anything Really Change?

Apparently Dulles is a go. But Ma Peters made a comment:

"We wanted to find a way to make this a good project. It's a better project than it was a year ago."

Peters said the most significant improvement made by project managers was to strengthen the proposal's finances and contingency budget. The rail line's costs have spiraled in recent years, and the project was at risk of failing federal transit cost-efficiency standards. That risk is now gone, Peters said.

Did anyone think to ask them if the reason that costs were spiraling out of control was because they kept delaying the project? Then the hurl inducing comment of the week:

"God bless Mary Peters," said U.S. Rep. Frank R. Wolf (R-Va.), who, along with Kaine and recently retired U.S. senator John W. Warner (R) led state efforts to revive Dulles rail.

You mean the lady that almost single handedly killed the project. Thank you sir may I have another?

Slow Ride

The time frame for all transit projects are too slow in this country. Why would the Subway to the Sea be any different?

Greedy DOTs Just Following Orders?

Wow, this is a lot of nerve and if true, would be really really disgusting.

Transportation leaders missed an opportunity to jump-start mass transit in Florida and to repair existing roads and bridges, he said. "The problem is our transportation leaders do not have vision," said Ashwell. The department defended the request. DOT spokesman Dick Kane said Congress requested the stimulus funds be tied not to mass transit but highway and bridge projects that can start within 90 to 120 days. "The whole idea of the stimulus package was to have projects ready to go," he said.

Looks like Florida has about $13 billion in transit projects at some stage. You can't tell me that some of these can't be ready to go. Sounds like excuses to me.

Singles Use Energy

Anyone seen this? Says singles use more energy. I wonder if they controlled for city living vs. suburban living.