The Antiplanner » News commentary

Category Archives: News commentary

Tax Subsidies to New and Old Urbanists

By | | News commentary, Regional planning
8 Comments

The subsidies mentioned in yesterday’s post about Denver were in the form of tax-increment financing (TIF). For those unfamiliar with the term, tax-increment financing is the principal method of funding urban renewal. An urban-renewal agency draws a line around an area to be renewed, and for the next twenty or so years all property taxes collected on any new improvements in that district — the “incremental” taxes — are used to subsidize the renewal program.

Usually, the agency estimates future tax revenues and then sells bonds to be repaid by those revenues. The bond revenues might be used for infrastructure such as streets, improvements such as parking garages and parks, or they might simply be given to the developer as seed money for the project.

Continue reading →

Portland Not the Only Place Subsidizing New Urbanists

By | | News commentary, Urban areas
5 Comments

New Urbanism, as everyone knows, is morally superior to old suburbanism. So New Urbanists are clearly entitled to huge subsidies to support their environmentally friendly lifestyles. Such as subsidies for parking garages near their subsidized high-density housing.

The Antiplanner has covered such subsidies to Portland developments. But other cities subsidize them as well. An op ed by Jennifer Lang in Saturday’s Rocky Mountain News describes some of these subsidies in the Denver metro area.

This parking garage in downtown Denver was built with a $2.1 million subsidy that planners said was needed so the New Urbanists living in subsidized downtown lofts would have a place to park their SUVs. Photo by the Antiplanner.

Continue reading →

Junk Science Week: #2 – Density & Congestion

By | | News commentary, Regional planning, Transportation, Why Planning Fails
14 Comments

I’ve previously discussed the myth that density relieves congestion, yet it persists. Most recently, planners in Fairfax County, Virginia say they want to put thousands of high-rise apartments in Tysons Corner in an effort to increase the density and relieve congestion around proposed rail stations.

Planners claim that Ballston, a rail station on the DC Orange line, proves that this strategy is successful. The opening of the Ballston station in 1979 led to a lot of transit-oriented development, and today many people in the area walk or take transit to work.

However, planners fail to mention that a major freeway, I-66, opened at about the same time, and it probably did more to stimulate development than the rail line. At least, other stations that were not close to new freeway interchanges failed to develop as planners hoped.

Continue reading →

A Billion Here, a Billion There, Pretty Soon You Are Talking About Real Money

By | | News commentary, Transportation
8 Comments

Portland-Vancouver are debating the replacement of the Interstate 5 bridges crossing the Columbia River. Cost estimates are now as high as $6 billion.

“The bridge is probably a billion,” says the project manager. “The transit piece, similar.” Plus various extras; it all adds up.

The original Columbia River bridge was built in 1917, and a duplicate bridge was added in 1958.

Continue reading →

Judging Planners by Their Intentions

By | | News commentary, Urban areas
15 Comments

A group called Sustainlane has ranked America’s largest cities for their sustainability. Which is number one? Why, Portland, of course.

But I have a few questions about how they calculated their rankings. Most of their data are based on secondary sources. Take public transit, for example, which, they say, is based on the “2003 Texas Mobility Study.” Based on whatever this study is supposed to say, Portland gets a greenish score of 20 while Honolulu gets a yellow 28 (apparently, smaller numbers are better).

Continue reading →

GAO Adds Transportation to Its “High-Risk Series”

By | | News commentary, Transportation
30 Comments

The Government Accountability Office (which I still think of by the easier-to-say and more accurate name of General Accounting Office) has identified a number of federal programs that are “high risk due to their greater vulnerabilities to fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement.” This year, it has added transportation to this High-Risk Series.

“Revenues from traditional funding mechanisms may not keep pace with demand,” says the GAO. This problem is compounded by “the absence of a link between federal grant funding levels and specific performance-related goals and outcomes, resulting in little assurance that federal funding is being channeled to the nation’s most critical mobility needs.”

Continue reading →

Two-Way or One-Way?

By | | News commentary, Transportation, Urban areas
10 Comments

Burnside is a major street in Portland, notable for dividing north Portland from south Portland. West of the Willamette River, Burnside carries tens of thousands of cars each day on its four lanes moving in both directions. A block away, Couch Street is a much narrower, two-lane one-way street and moves only a few thousand cars each day.

Portland proposes to replace Burnside’s four fast-moving lanes with two slow-moving lanes.

Portland is proposing to turn Burnside and Couch into a one-way couplet. That is, Burnside would carry eastbound traffic and Couch would carry westbound traffic.

Continue reading →

Spotters’ Guide to Rail Transit

By | | News commentary, Transportation
9 Comments

The Christian Science Monitor has another puff piece about streetcars and how Portland’s streetcar attracted “around $2.5 billion” worth of development. I don’t need to repeat again that this development was really attracted by other subsidies.

The article quotes Urban Land Institute researcher Robert Dunphy, who says that streetcars are not transportation but “amenities.” The article says that “most streetcars operating today — with the exception of those in larger cities such as Portland or San Francisco — fall into that category.”

But San Francisco doesn’t have any streetcars (unless you count cable cars, which are quite a different beast) and Portland’s streetcar is clearly an amenity. I suspect the writer is confusing streetcars and light rail. Another recent article about the wasteful San Jose BART extension confused light rail with commuter rail.

Continue reading →

The Problems with Infill

By | | News commentary, Regional planning
11 Comments

For many years, Salem — Oregon’s capital — was a sleepy, slow-growing town. The legislature met in the capitol building (designed, some say, to look like a tree stump) only six months every two years. So the city did not attract a lot of the high-powered lobbyists that you find in Washington, Sacramento, or other capitals with full-time legislatures.


Oregon’s capitol building in the state capital of Salem; photo from salemoregon.com.

Continue reading →