Central hubs for TODs

This is a photograph I took in Ballston in Arl...

More: people, vehicles, cost, etc.

Benefits are very questionable for coercing people into transit station areas.
Economic Development—while improving some areas, it can take capital and resources away from other areas; in other words redistribution. Areas that became “cheap” become more affordable to offer opportunity for investment. TIFs can take away future government revenue from normal services. Additional retail sales or similar in one area will mean less spending elsewhere. Read more of this post

Advertisements

Selling Waste: Big Projects for Something to do Nothing

Tucson, Arizona, with the Santa Catalina Mount...

Downtown in center. U of A behind. Connect the 2 w/century old tech.

There’s a new project for Tucson, a bus that goes on steel, with nor tires. It’s called a streetcar, or a neat swell name of light rail, like balloons that way many tons. This mini-LRT is short and has very small ridership projections. No part of Tucson has even 10,000 ppl/sq.mi. It’s patterns are dispersed and only has 1and1/2 interstates (no other freeways). Good grid street structure, but traffic only goes fast and not conditions for frequent mass transit. The over-budget amount, alone, would pay for the buses for this route. Why should non-users pay for the several 1,000 riders on this route? It would also impede other traffic. Read more of this post

Taxing for Transporation Costs

Paying for regular consumer goods, is pretty straight-forward, going to a store (or online, mail) and paying the listed price. Transportation is intricate; there are huge wants, but paying by each use, and through general tax means, is tricky. The BART lengthening, from Fremont to San Jose, is supposedly really wanted, but paying is difficult. The ticket price will be far from covering it, which is a pattern for projects.


Is it just,  to charge the whole Bay Area & even the nation, for rail that would be used by <3% of the commuters in 2 counties? There would be other riders too, perhaps each resident riding an average of 1/month. How about charging full price on each ticket?
Read more of this post

Transit Choices are more than Points A &, _ thru Z

Mobility is obviously needed to reach destinations. Star Trek transporter technology is not here & should be left on the fiction scrap heap. The dream of public transit, meeting all needs, for each person, is almost as far-fetched. The depiction at the right, shows absurdity, in driving a car. Yet people often claim that it’s too bad, that a car is needed for most residential places. One of the absurdities about that, is the fact that the area surroundings are known, before the choice is made, to make a home. How do you choose which transport method? Walking is only good for short distances, and that includes from transit stations, which is often neglected in promoting transit—the facts that wherever you need to go, needs to be near a station, preferably less than about 1,000’ (2-3 blocks), at times, up to double that, a little over 1/3 of a mile. Sure, cars are great, but mostly expensive. Why do people choose their mode? Read more of this post

Transit use amount

Should people use more transit? Yes, many think, but not me, the other person should. How many actually do use transit, in the US? How does that compare to other countries? Read more of this post

Transportation Policy in Bay Area

Public transit in the Bay Area is widespread, but for access, from homes, based upon %, and the distance to walk to a station, is limited. For destinations, it’s even more limited, because it’s unlikely that your place will be on the route. Transit use, as a portion of commuting [based on 2000 Census] is about 9% for the whole Bay Area, 31% for San Francisco and 4% for Santa Clara County.Yet the overall transportation budget has a large majority going towards trnaist, rather than roads. The MTC (Metropolitan Transportation Commission) decides where all the money collected is to be spent, among the many agencies. Read more of this post

Travel Times for Various Modes & Urban Layouts

It would be great to have most places, that you want to go, just blocks away, being able to walk there. That is highly improbable, even in Manhattan, at a density of 65,000/sq.mi. Even with transit all over, journeys to various places, can take a while. There is a big impetus to reduce travel times. However the methods used, usually increase times , through holding back on new roads, putting more residents on existing roads (increasing density), relying on public transit, and other methods.  Read more of this post

Walkability is over-rated

Transit Oriented Development and Renewal of No...

Walking to & from a station is not real goal. Origination at home, near destinations is.

Cars are great, but at the light you wait. People are out of shape, eating more than a grape. Transit is late, while congestion makes one irate. Would it be nice if destinations were real close? How realistic is that goal? One chooses the location of their home, and then seem to want to have more businesses locate near them. Sounds selfish and devoid of a realistic reality. How about finding a location with plenty of businesses?  Read more of this post