According to the 2006 Canadian census, 25.1 percent of workers in Vancouver and 16.5 percent of Vancouver-area workers take transit to work. This puts Vancouver transit in a league with San Francisco and Washington DC, and ahead of every other U.S. urban area other than New York. By comparison, according to the 2006 American Community Survey, only 12.6 percent of workers in Portland and 7.6 percent of Portland-area workers take transit to work.
So naturally, Vancouver planners want to make Vancouver more like Portland. Specifically, University of British Columbia planning professor Patrick Condon proposes that, instead of building a relatively fast subway line, Vancouver should spend billions of dollars replacing moderately fast, flexible buses with slow, inflexible streetcars. The big advantage of slower transit, says Condon, is that it would “support a long term objective to create more complete communities.” In other words, if people can’t get anywhere very fast, they will be more likely to shop within walking- or tram-distance of their homes, and so retailers and other service providers will be more likely to locate in neighborhoods throughout the city.
Condon’s paper has a whole page full of charts showing that he has fallen for Portland’s development-oriented transit lie. Apparently, he never bothered to find out that developments along Portland’s streetcar line received hundreds of millions of dollars of subsidies. And even with the subsidies, the developments are not exactly thriving.
Silagra works instantly against the erectile dysfunction medication at least half an hour before any cialis canada no prescription sexual activity. Severe gout attacks can cause severe pain and intense generic viagra burning sensation leaving the affected parts inflamed, raw and hot which couldn’t even bear the slightest of touch. Note: This medication is only for men who have an uncircumcised penis should wash under the foreskin with soap and cialis canadian prices water and applying a mild disinfectant. Medication levitra prices canada Class and Mechanism: Sildenafil Citrate is a phosphodiesterase sort 5 (Pde5) inhibitor. But what really makes the Antiplanner eyes roll is the notion, discussed in detail by this somewhat skeptical transit blogger, that slow transit is better because it promotes accessibility, not mobility. This is the old Robert Cervero argument (subscription required) that — if only cities were properly designed — people could access most of the things they need without getting into their cars.
Here’s the problem: As long as people have access to fast cars, transit is not going to succeed by going slower than it already goes. Even in Vancouver, nearly 58 percent of workers commute by car, and when non-commute trips are included, transit probably carries less than 10 percent of all travel in the city. Anyone who thinks that replacing a fast bus with a slow streetcar will promote urban redevelopment simply lives in a fantasy world. (For what it’s worth, Portland’s streetcar didn’t replace a fast bus; it was built on a route that was not previously served by a bus at all.)
Even if planners could somehow force people out of their cars and design a city in which everyone was within walking or tram distance of the shops and other services they use, it would not make a very livable city. As the Antiplanner has noted before, shops that serve a pedestrian-oriented community will be small and expensive. Automobiles give people access to multiple retailers who are forced to compete. Autos also give employers access to a more highly skilled work force, thus increasing worker productivities and incomes.
I don’t think Vancouver should build either a subway line or streetcars, either of which will require gigantic subsidies. Instead, it should promote user-funded transportation systems, whether that means cars or buses. But the real question is: How do we rid our cities of the pernicious influence of those who want to slow us down and reduce our mobility?
“How do we rid our cities of the pernicious influence of those who want to slow us down and reduce our mobility?”
Just throw in the towel and move to the country.
How do we rid our cities of the pernicious influence of those who want to slow us down and reduce our mobility?
Eliminate mendacious ideologues who falsely insist there is more than a handful of people who want to slow us down and reduce our mobility.
DS
Creating limited access in and out of cities is what suburbs do: they cut off traffic and limit connectivity. Condon is wrong in his assertions. Relating cities to environmental ecology, the interaction between different species and ecosystems is critical to their success.
What the antiplanner has neglected to mention is that if you include those who walk or bike in the statistics on how Vancouverites get to work, the number jumps up to 40%. This is only possible because the density of the downtown and surrounding areas allows for this kind of commuting.
On top of this, the city of Vancouver has recently removed one lane of automobile traffic off of the Burrard Street bridge, and converted it for bicycle only use.
http://vancouver.ca/projects/burrard/statistics.htm
The affect was that bicycle and walking trips across the bridge were up, accidents down and automobile traffic generally unchanged. Furthermore, it has been generally well-received among the public and more bike lanes into the city are being carved out of existing auto lanes.
Although, I am not completely convinced by all of Condon’s ideas, I do think that these two statistics show that speed is not the primary motivator behind all commuting decisions. We should accept the fact that a significant plurality of commuters are choosing a slower way to commute (ie- not cars) and design our cities to allow people to choose this way.
I was recently in Sacramento at a conference, held one block away from that city’s light rail line. During breaks I took the opportunity to walk the line for a distance that allowed me to visit several of the downtown station areas. I was amazed to see vacant storefronts along the line and at stations in this area. The station area with the highest vacancy rate appreared to be along a pedestrian mall just blocks from the state capital.
Light rail does not seem to be bringing vitality to downtown Sacramento.
I’ll br the first to admit that my evidence is anecdotal. Do any of you readers have statistics on Sacramento.
I used to live in Sacto for approaching two decades. There are several issues with the town, including lots of willy-nilly and far-flung homebuilding on speculation, for when Bay Areans and Los Angelinos cashed out of their ATMs…er…houses and bought bigger homes for less money. So structurally the region’s economy was weak in the first place.
Second, the LR is a set of compromises to developers – I had an undergrad planning class at UCD way back when and we used it as a case study for our transportation section – and has several structural issues, including a serious ‘final mile’ problem as N-S movement in the area is restricted by few and narrow crossings of the American R. Not to mention the Greek Club kneecapping LR at every turn. And downtown having a poor evening economy.
Nonetheless, Denver Realtors report opposite outcomes.
DS
Dan wrote:
> Second, the LR is a set of compromises to developers – I
> had an undergrad planning class at UCD way back when and
> we used it as a case study for our transportation
> section – and has several structural issues, including
> a serious ‘final mile’ problem as N-S movement in the
> area is restricted by few and narrow crossings of the
> American R.
Did you, by chance, take a class in Transportation Sociology atUC Davis from the late Professor J. F. Scott?
No, just a lecture series with Mark Francis and a course with the only non-PhD teaching there, don’t remember the name. Wasn’t my undergrad major.
DS
jwetmore:“Although, I am not completely convinced by all of Condon’s ideas, I do think that these two statistics show that speed is not the primary motivator behind all commuting decisions. We should accept the fact that a significant plurality of commuters are choosing a slower way to commute (ie- not cars) and design our cities to allow people to choose this way.”
ws:If you got into the argument made by the skeptical transit blogger, you’d realize that the streetcar is competing against walkers and bikers, whereas fast transit is competing against highways.
http://www.humantransit.org/2010/04/is-speed-obsolete-.html
I can attest for the fact of the matter that Portland’s streetcars are not very fast compared to bicycling and not very fast compared to walking either considering the headways they run at.
“Nonetheless, Denver Realtors report opposite outcomes.” -DS
How do those prices compare to comparable apartments built during the same time period that aren’t located within a quarter mile of LRT stations?
IIRC this was discussed last time this was brought up about this phenomenon in Denver. The Post stated the values overall near the stations for all dwelling units were higher.
DS