Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Transit... again. Last time. Promise

With all the talk about CATS, the “situation” will either begat a positive outcome or bring a dismal downfall of the transportation situation in East Baton Rouge. I say dismal because the Parish has a poverty rate of 30%, and includes two major universities. Both of these populations find it difficult to own a car (especially in a state with the highest insurance premiums).

You have the negative view of transit, especially in the baby boomer generation. This was the generation of the automobile: the suburbs, drive thru, etc. All while urbanization was seen as a bad thing, as crime was an urban thing. and the suburbs a dream land (with a little white flight thrown in). At least this is what sitcoms and car commercials portrayed in the 70s and 80s

Then the baby-boomer had kids, they bore Seinfeld and Friends. So while transit was (and still is) a necessity to the lower income, the new generations isn't linking transit to crime and poverty like our parents. Because not only are major urban areas reemerging, but their theories of functionality are trickling down to small and midsized cities. I won't bring up Portland, Charlotte, Austin, and Denver, because we obviously aren’t these places (as people will point out). However, there’s a reason why these places prospered over the last decade. Even in the economic downfall. Specific principals were incorporated into the functionality of life… one of which was the amount of choices that people had. This didn’t include just transportation choices, it included shopping, housing, and entertainment choices. So most places are realizing that all these choices are important when it comes to the prosperity of their place (regardless of city, suburban, or rural). If places don’t start providing consumer choices now, they will lose the next generation of people.

Of course we can all cry foul on the “socialistic” side of transit. It’s the only form of transportation that seems to have a huge amount of attention spent on the tax payers’ subsidy. Of course every form of transportation is subsidized in this country. And while studies show that each is form of transportation is incredibly subsided by local, state, and federal taxes, I can’t find a simplistic study which ranks these subsides. Obviously because this isn’t a simplistic study. So at the end of the day, when people cry socialism on transit, I discard the claim  because our entire transportation system is socialized. And until I see comprehensive numbers backing up the fact that the transit system is more socialized than automobile and air travel, the socialist cry isn't warranted.

But at the end of the day we view the road system as “our right”, and the transit industry as “subsidized”, and air flight as an “economic generator”. So when the recent Baton Rouge Comprehensive Land Use Plan emphasizes transit, it’s hard for the masses to buy into.

What’s the solution? Stop focusing on transit only, auto only, rail only, flight only, bike only, walking only plans. Put them all together into one transportation plan. The Capital Region Planning Commission produces these plans. The problem with these plans is they are separate from one-another, and follow the status quo by stating how many people currently use each system, and use historical patterns to project growth. The plans aren't comprehensive, and do not try to change the status quo to avoid the ultimate outcome of over building. In their defense, they are currently keeping up. I mean when it takes five years to add a lane to a three mile interstate stretch (when it would take most place two years top), it’s gonna take a while just to keep to pace with just the interstate system. So how can we ever catch up with the entire system?

So those are the flaws to our transportation system. Our commercial and residential market has been solid compared to the rest of the country. Thus, a lot of Baton Rouge’s development inefficiencies come down to their transportation infrastructure (well after crime, but that’s another post). That’s what makes me envious to my hometown’s IndyConnects plan. The city has spent the last decade upgrading their interstate system. The system was gravely inefficient, and for the most part every stretch of interstate has been upgraded. So the next step is to reduce trips (which is the only other way to improve traffic congestion issues). However, the plan is suggesting that a tax package be brought to the local municipality as an all or nothing deal – sidewalks, roads, busses, and rail. (I do view it as a little hypocritical because they just spent hundreds of millions of federal dollars adding eight and ten lanes to their interstates, but apparently the local municipalities have to fund alternative methods, but whatever).

So if Baton Rouge really wants a transportation system, make it all inclusive. The Green Light Project sales tax passed. So why not include a more comprehensive look so everyone’s interest is included. At first the Green Light Plan angered me because it only included signalization and widening intersections. But now they are using the funding for all transportation projects. The only problem is the plans run on a yearly schedule. Why not broaden the vision, instead of doing it project by project based on numbers?

Monday, February 7, 2011

Transit Socialist?

Not to dwell on a pet peeve of mine, but the roadway system does not pay itself. Believe it or not, but the forty-some cents per gallon we pay in "gas tax" does not pay for our road way system. I only bring this up because of recent comments on newspaper user boards. I mean, people really think they pay for the multi-billion dollar infrastructure they drive on everyday through their gas tax. The system runs on a growing $600 billion dollar deficit. While I'm not well read on the actual cost per trip for transit, I am not going to sit around and classify the automobile infrastructure as "sustainable". At least I'm paying a user fee to use a transit system.

So I really wish people would stop rationalizing an auto-centric transportation system. Because not only is the infrastructure being subsidized extremely, so is the gas harvest. And yet, with all those subsidies, I still have $300/month set aside for gas, maintenance, and insurance. Fortunately that is $200 less in the recent months because I paid my note.

The short story, I don't understand why the government is subsidizing the least efficient form of transportation... well, next to the airline industry. But I'm willing to pay a luxury to be shoved in a small, camped, tube, that may or may not be on time.