The Antiplanner » Home Page

Free Transit Boosts Ridership by 16 Percent, Maybe

By | | Transportation
3 Comments

Bloomberg reports that, when Utah Transit (UTA) eliminated transit fares on a trial basis in February, weekday ridership grew by 16 percent. Overall, the latest data show, average daily ridership was only 18 percent greater than it had been in January. That compares with 25 percent for the nation’s transit systems as a whole, suggesting that free transit may not have been the reason why ridership increased.

Utah Transit buses have an average of 36 seats but carried an average of just 5 passengers (that is, they carried 5.0 passenger-miles per vehicle mile) in 2019 and just 3.6 in 2020. Photo by Paul Kimo McGregor.

Considering that passenger fares brought more than $48 million into UTA’s budget in 2019, such a small boost in ridership hardly seems worth the loss of that revenue. Transit agencies, however, desperately need reasons to justify their heavily-subsidized existence. Offering free fares may boost ridership, if only by a small amount, but more important it insulates agencies from ridership fluctuations. If the agencies are solely dependent on taxpayers to keep their buses and trains running, then all they have to do is convince taxpayers or appropriators that transit is somehow vital to cities even if hardly anyone uses it. Continue reading →

Americans Prefer Single-Family Neighborhoods

By | | Housing
2 Comments

Many surveys have found that the vast majority of Americans, including Millennials, prefer or aspire to live in single-family homes. But surveys rarely ask whether they prefer that single-family home to be in a low-density neighborhood or if they would mind living next to a bunch of apartment buildings.

Would you want one to move next-door to your single-family home? This is real affordable housing, by the way: one of these condos is currently selling for $527 per square foot.

However, a polling firm called YouGov recently asked Americans whether they thought low-density neighborhoods were better than high-density ones. Specifically, they were asked whether low densities meant more or less congestion, more or less crime, and were better or worse for the environment. Planning advocates, of course, claim that high densities mean less congestion, are better for the environment, and have less crime because there are more “eyes on the street.” Continue reading →

America’s Volatile Housing Markets

By | | Housing, Policy brief
Leave a comment

After adjusting for inflation, the nationwide median price of housing exceeded median prices during the 2006 housing bubble for the first time in early 2021, according to home price index data published by the Federal Housing Finance Agency. Zillow agrees: though Zillow says its price index is for the “typical” house rather than the median home, its inflation-adjusted price for single-family homes peaked in November 2006 at $295,000, then fell below $200,000 in 2012. The typical price then crept above $295,000 in December 2020. As of March 2022, it had grown to $338,000, an inflation-adjusted increase of 22 percent since the beginning of the pandemic.

Click image to download a four-page PDF of this policy brief.

Out of 660 metropolitan (areas with more than 50,000 people) and micropolitan (areas with populations of 2,500 to 50,000) areas tracked by Zillow, March 2022 housing prices exceeded the inflation-adjusted 2006-2008 peak in all but about 170. Major urban areas where prices had not yet reached the peak of the bubble include New York, Chicago, Washington, Baltimore, Minneapolis-St. Paul, and St. Louis. But prices in Atlanta, Charlotte, Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio are all well above their 2006-2008 peaks, not that any of these regions experienced much of a peak.

Continue reading →

It Takes Money to Lose Money

By | | Transportation
3 Comments

Just before the pandemic, Amtrak proudly announced that it lost only $29.5 million operating passenger trains in 2019 and expected to make an operating profit in 2020. Of course, that didn’t happen thanks to the pandemic, and what’s more, it was lying about losing only $29.5 million; its actual losses were closer to $1.4 billion, a mere 46 times more than it claimed.

Amtrak spent $2.5 billion on new trainsets for its high-speed Acela. These were supposed to go into service in 2021 but are now expected to begin service no sooner than 2023. Photo by Fan Railer.

Now that Congress has flooded Amtrak with money in the infrastructure bill, however, the agency no longer even cares about whether its passenger trains come close to covering their costs. Like any good soviet agency, it recently released its five-year plan, and it projects it will lose more than a billion dollars a year for almost every year in the future. Continue reading →

Liberal or Far Right?

By | | Housing
8 Comments

A French politician who wants to prioritize housing for French residents, as opposed to Middle Eastern immigrants and refugees, is considered extreme right. But a Canadian politician who proposes to ban purchases of homes by foreigners is considered a liberal.

Foreigners occupying low-income housing makes less subsidized housing available for French residents. Of course, if the government liberalized land-use laws, there could be plenty of housing for everyone with fewer subsidies.

What’s the difference? Mainly that Canada has approved the ban while polls show that the “extreme right” candidate is likely to lose. I guess if you call yourself a liberal you can get away with a lot that leads people to demonize conservatives. Continue reading →

Five Solutions That Won’t Work

By | | Housing
11 Comments

Sightline Institute researcher Michael Andersen offers Willamette Week readers “five ways to make [housing] cheaper.” Sounds good, except none of them will work.

Here’s a duplex in a Portland single-family neighborhood. According to the Sightline Institute, this was supposed to make housing more affordable, but nobody seriously thinks that it will, so now they are upping the ante for even more density. Photo by Mark McClure of the Sightline Institute.

Andersen starts with the erroneous assumption that “the main factor driving the rising cost of all housing in Portland is the cost of building new housing.” In fact, the main driving factor driving the high cost of housing in Portland is the cost of land, thanks to the region’s urban-growth boundary. Everything else about housing, including high construction costs, is derived from that, so housing will remain expensive until Portland abolishes the growth boundary. Continue reading →

February Driving 97.1% of Pre-Pandemic Miles

By | | Transportation, Useful Data
Leave a comment

Americans drove almost 236 billion miles in February 2022, according to data released yesterday by the Federal Highway Administration. This was 97.1 percent as many miles as they drove in February 2020, the last month before the pandemic began to affect travel. February 2020 had one more day than February 2022, so if they both had the same number of days, February 2022 probably would have seen more miles driven than in February 2020.

Driving remains well ahead of other modes of travel while transit is furthest behind in its recovery from the pandemic.

The published numbers indicate that February driving in Delaware almost doubled from February 2020 levels, which may be due to an entry error. Otherwise, the largest increases in driving were in Louisiana (18%), Rhode Island (17%), Kentucky (16%), Arkansas, Hawaii, and South Carolina (all 13%), Florida and Indiana (both 12%), and Connecticut (11%). The largest decreases, relative to February 2020, were in Washington state (-21%), Kansas and North Dakota (both -18%), Minnesota (-17%), and Illinois (-12%).

Property Rights and the New Feudalism

By | | Regional planning
4 Comments

The war in Ukraine has forced people of the “West”—a term that has come to mean most of Europe, the United States, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Australia, and New Zealand—to confront a social system that we have pretended went extinct hundreds of years ago: feudalism. While feudalism has mostly disappeared from the above-named nations, it is thriving in Putin’s Russia, as well as many other places around the world.

Click image to download a four-page PDF of this policy brief.

“Broadly defined,” says Wikipedia, feudalism “was a way of structuring society around relationships that were derived from the holding of land in exchange for service or labor.” A classic example is when William, the Duke of Normandy, conquered England in 1066. Prior to the conquest, people in England could buy and sell land, a system left over from when the Roman Empire ruled Britain.

Continue reading →

Twelve Ways to Destroy Cities

By | | City planning, Transportation
2 Comments

Kimberly Nicholas, an associate professor of sustainability at Sweden’s Lund University, says that automobiles are killers and offers twelve ways to get them out of our cities. Typically for sustainability advocates, she completely ignores the benefits provided by automobiles as well as ways in which the costs of automobiles could be reduced without reducing driving.

A typical street in sustainable Stockholm. Photo by European Institute for Sustainable Transport.

Her twelve ways include reducing the amount of parking, charging more for parking, closing parts of cities to automobiles, and charge a fee to drive automobiles into city centers. All revenues from such fees, parking, fines, etc., should, in her opinion, go to fund “sustainable transport,” which means any kind of transportation other than automobiles. Continue reading →

70% of Seattle Light-Rail Riders Don’t Pay

By | | Transportation
6 Comments

Sound Transit, Seattle’s light-rail agency, has a goal of collecting enough fares to cover 40 percent of operating costs, yet it is collecting just 5 percent. That’s partly because of COVID-depressed ridership, but mainly because the agency makes almost no effort to collect fares. As a result, the agency estimates that 70 percent of its passengers are riding without paying.

Not getting much use: a Sound Transit ticket machine. Photo by Evan Didier.

Like other light-rail systems, Seattle’s operates on an “honor system,” meaning people are expected to pay before they board, but there are no turnstiles to keep them from boarding if they don’t pay. Like other light-rail systems, Seattle’s used to have “fare inspectors” who would hand out tickets to people who didn’t have proof of payment. But then someone pointed out that minorities were getting most of the tickets (maybe because they were most likely to not pay?), so this was deemed inequitable. Continue reading →