Comments on: Cities See Population Gains — But What About Political Power? http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/07/01/cities-see-population-gains-but-what-about-political-power/ Covering San Francisco's livable streets movement Sat, 11 Feb 2012 18:38:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: marcos http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/07/01/cities-see-population-gains-but-what-about-political-power/comment-page-1/#comment-10441 marcos Thu, 02 Jul 2009 15:10:19 +0000 http://sf.streetsblog.org/?p=3221#comment-10441 @Dave, the cost to put into place viable rapid transit from the suburbs to urban job centers would be many tens of billions of dollars, similar to the cost of statewide HSR. In a democracy, how do you expect for us to get from where we are now to a place where folks can reliably get to and from work on transit? This notion that we can take shortcuts and write off the costs of getting to work on people's free time because transit sucks is democratically a non starter. Transit should lead development, in that the model for the development of the Bronx via dense subway coverage before first day ridership was measurable worked. Transit capacity should also be a cap on development, in that it is irresponsible to build new housing in areas with transit service that cannot support those new residents. When barriers to transit use are higher than barriers to private auto ownership and commutes, then most folks will simply take the path of least resistance. I see more barriers being put up to transit use through budget problems and few barriers being put up to commuters to high wage jobs keeping their cars. Until that equation is brought to a favorable equilibrium, we're not going to see changes reflected in the political position expressed at the MTC. There is no free lunch. -marc @Dave, the cost to put into place viable rapid transit from the suburbs to urban job centers would be many tens of billions of dollars, similar to the cost of statewide HSR.

In a democracy, how do you expect for us to get from where we are now to a place where folks can reliably get to and from work on transit?

This notion that we can take shortcuts and write off the costs of getting to work on people’s free time because transit sucks is democratically a non starter.

Transit should lead development, in that the model for the development of the Bronx via dense subway coverage before first day ridership was measurable worked.

Transit capacity should also be a cap on development, in that it is irresponsible to build new housing in areas with transit service that cannot support those new residents.

When barriers to transit use are higher than barriers to private auto ownership and commutes, then most folks will simply take the path of least resistance. I see more barriers being put up to transit use through budget problems and few barriers being put up to commuters to high wage jobs keeping their cars.

Until that equation is brought to a favorable equilibrium, we’re not going to see changes reflected in the political position expressed at the MTC. There is no free lunch.

-marc

]]> By: Dave Snyder http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/07/01/cities-see-population-gains-but-what-about-political-power/comment-page-1/#comment-10411 Dave Snyder Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:13:24 +0000 http://sf.streetsblog.org/?p=3221#comment-10411 Here in the Bay Area, the strongest political powers are where the population is, and that's suburban. The transportation policy decisions reflect those powers. The MTC's most innovative idea for new funding: allowing single occupant vehicles to use carpool lanes as express lanes, for a fee, is a sprawl-inducing plan that will make it easier to drive in the suburbs, add congestion to urban freeways, and provide nary a dime for urban transportation improvements. Here in the Bay Area, the strongest political powers are where the population is, and that’s suburban. The transportation policy decisions reflect those powers. The MTC’s most innovative idea for new funding: allowing single occupant vehicles to use carpool lanes as express lanes, for a fee, is a sprawl-inducing plan that will make it easier to drive in the suburbs, add congestion to urban freeways, and provide nary a dime for urban transportation improvements.

]]> By: DaveO http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/07/01/cities-see-population-gains-but-what-about-political-power/comment-page-1/#comment-10401 DaveO Thu, 02 Jul 2009 04:32:30 +0000 http://sf.streetsblog.org/?p=3221#comment-10401 The analysis is terrible. While it's true that cities like NYC and Chicago are growing faster than previously (or at least, not shrinking), the statistics cited represent less than 1% growth for both cities. Overall nationwide population growth from 2007 to 2008 was 303 to 306 million, or just about 1%. Though NYC and Chicago might be growing, it is at a slower rate than the nation as a while. The analysis is terrible. While it’s true that cities like NYC and Chicago are growing faster than previously (or at least, not shrinking), the statistics cited represent less than 1% growth for both cities. Overall nationwide population growth from 2007 to 2008 was 303 to 306 million, or just about 1%. Though NYC and Chicago might be growing, it is at a slower rate than the nation as a while.

]]>