Light Rail Follies #1: State Troopers Ride Max

We have a spate of light-rail follies this week. First up: Crime on Portland’s “MAX” light rail has gotten so bad that, in November, Oregon’s governor directed state police to ride the rails regularly to protect passengers from assaults. “I am absolutely adamant that its citizens feel safe at all times in using a fine mass transit system,” said the governor.

Grateful representatives of TriMet, Portland’s transit agency, expressed confidence that the troopers would be able to solve the gang-related crime problems that have plagued the light-rail system. The troopers “will allow us to better work out a long-term solution with local law enforcement people,” said TriMet’s public services director.

While potential passengers might look upon this action with relief, the only problem is that it happened in November, 1988. When TriMet opened the light-rail line in 1986, it eliminated its transit police because it did not have enough money to both operate light rail and offer passenger security. The light rail gave drug dealers and other inner-city criminals easy access to the suburbs, and soon they were intimidating and assaulting riders.

Continue reading

Transit Agency Head Feels Sorry for Taxpayers

The head of St. Louis Metro, Larry Salci (previously) says he feels “disappointment for the taxpayers” because he lost a multi-million-dollar lawsuit over cost overruns against the company that built his latest light-rail line. I’ll bet he does.

If he cares so much about taxpayers, why is he asking them to pay an additional half-cent sales tax so that he can build more light-rail lines (which will no doubt have their own cost overruns)? It is not as if the recent line is all that successful. As the chart below shows, the opening of the line in 2001 was followed by a decline in bus ridership but virtually no increase in rail ridership.

Click for a larger view. The thin red line represents route miles of light rail. The black line is miles of driving.

Continue reading

Anti-Sprawl Planners Caused the Housing Bubble

Easy credit fed the flame of the recent housing bubble. But, as a paper published today by the Cato Institute shows, the flame that inflated the bubble was first ignited by anti-sprawl plans that created artificial housing shortages in many American cities and states. If planning had not boosted median housing prices to several times median family incomes, few homebuyers would have had to resort to sub-prime mortgages.

Click to download the report.

The Cato paper shows that a housing bubble really only took place in a dozen or so states. In the remaining states, increases in housing prices were relatively modest. For example, from 2000 to 2006 prices in California and Florida grew by more than 130 percent, while prices in Texas grew by only 30 percent.

Continue reading

Where Did Transit Ridership Grow in 2006?

I’ve played with the 2006 transit data (previously) some more. The summary file now breaks down trips and passenger miles in each urban area by the main modes: buses, trolley buses, light rail, heavy rail, and commuter rail.

I then transcribed these numbers to my rail transit data file, which includes data from all rail urban areas dating back to 1982. This file also includes miles of driving, but the Federal Highway Administration hasn’t published 2006 data yet. The file also lists the number of route miles of each form of rail transit, but I wasn’t able to interpret the “fixed guideway” file that came with the 2006 data, so I didn’t fill these numbers in for many cities.

Still, we now can compare trends in transit ridership and passenger miles in the various rail cities. Here are the results.

Continue reading

City Plans Fail Market Test

The Portland suburb of Wilsonville wants to see a mobile home park redeveloped into “workforce housing.” A buyer made an offer on the park, but the deal fell through when the city’s prescriptive plans proved to expensive for the developer.

The city wanted “five- to eight-story buildings with structured parking underneath,” says the developer. Such construction “requires concrete and steel construction,” which is expensive. As a result, “affordability goes out the window.”


View Larger Map

Continue reading

Want to Save Energy? Take a Van

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has published “provisional” data for 2006, including transit ridership, passenger miles, operating costs, energy consumption, and similar numbers for almost every transit system and mode of transit in the country. The data tables are not exactly straightforward, so the Antiplanner has compiled a summary showing the most important numbers by agency and mode and totals by urban area. Don’t say I never did anything for you.

Earlier this year, the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), the transit industry’s lobby group, was thrilled to report that 2006 transit ridership exceeded 10 billion trips for the first time in 49 years. As exciting as this sounds, it was only 2.9 percent more than in 2005, even though 2006 fuel prices were a lot higher than in 2005.

Continue reading

Subways Going Down the Tubes

Rail advocates sometimes claim that we can ignore the high cost of building rail lines, because “once they are built, they are there forever.” Yes, forever, or about 30 to 40 years, whichever comes first.

Which is why the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART), Washington Metro, and Chicago Transit authority are all looking at roughly $10 billion each in rehabilitation expenses in the next few years, little of which is funded. Of the three, BART is in the best shape, saying it needs $11 billion for rehab, slightly less than half of which is funded. The remaining $5.8 billion is still a lot of money just to keep the system going.

Continue reading

The Planning Solution Is Wrong, As Usual

Speaking of housing (as the Antiplanner was doing yesterday), San Jose State University economist Edward Stringham gave a great lecture at the Preserving the American Dream conference in San Jose a couple of weeks ago. Dr. Stringham’s presentation (3.7MB PowerPoint file) focused on inclusionary zoning, which is the traditional urban planning solution to high housing prices.

Keep in mind that urban planning is usually the reason why prices are high in the first place (though there are a few exceptions, such as Las Vegas, where land shortages are the result of the government owning most of the land in Nevada). But the planners try to deflect the blame to greedy developers. Their solution is to require those developers to sell or rent a fixed share — usually 15 percent — of new homes at below-market prices to low- or moderate-income families.

Continue reading

The Atlantic Makes War on the Dream

Homeowners do a better job of maintaining their homes, are more likely to vote and participate in civic life, and work harder to improve their neighborhoods, admits Clive Crook in the current issue of The Atlantic Monthly. But he still believes that homeownership is “bad for America.”

Homeownership: Good or bad for America?

What is his case against homeownership? He really has just two points. First, a study in Britain “found that homeownership makes workers less mobile, which brakes economic growth and worsens unemployment.” What Crook doesn’t say is that British housing has that problem because anti-sprawl planners made housing so unaffordable that no one who already owns a home can afford to move.

Continue reading

No Density for Boulder

A Boulder citizens’ group managed to gather more than 9,000 signatures in just 18 days to stop the rezoning of some land to allow high-density mixed-use development. Under the law, the Boulder city council must either reverse the rezoning or allow the entire city to vote on it.

Boulder residents march together to present their petition to city hall.

The land at issue is a former elementary school, which was closed due to the declining number of school children in Boulder — no doubt because most families with children can’t afford to live there. According to this news story (written before all the signatures were gathered), the rezoning moved the boundary between an existing high-density zone and a low-density zone by 48 feet, so that more of the former school site is zoned for high densities. The city also reduced parking requirements, leading residents to fear that people will park in their neighborhood.

Continue reading