I thought I was in the Twilight Zone this morning when I read this editorial in the News and Observer cautioning against selling land that has been acquired to support long term transit planning.

Linking fast-growing Wake, Durham and Orange counties and beyond with fast, cheap (and less-polluting) mass transit realistically is a when, not an if. But the only revenue now set aside for a system is a 5 percent tax on car rentals.

From its start in 1998, the tax has raised far less than expected or hoped for -- just $7 million last year, for a project whose total cost has been put at $810 million. Yet state Sen. Neal Hunt of Raleigh, for one, says collection of the tax probably should be halted until a new plan is adopted. He also suggests that the authority sell some of the land it has bought for rail stops and development around them.

Good news paving contractors! A new "report" by an "expert" at the John Locke Foundation says the answer to the Triangle's long-range traffic problems is . . . you guessed it:

Build more roads!

Go read the silly "report" by ex-Puppet Christopher Goff and see for yourself what myopic, short-term, simplistic "thinking" looks like.

A few weeks ago, I was lamenting the fact that the media seems to be under a false impression that just because gas prices were historically low during the 90's, that the current price level must some how magically drop to the mid $1 range in the near future. This obviously flawed logic was leading the "journalists" to conclude that now is the best time to start a long commute/ buy a gas guzzling SUV, since the prices of far out houses and Hummers have taken a nose dive. Because who wants 10 miles to a gallon when a gallon is going to cost over $3?

If you track the rhetoric of government haters at the John Locke Foundation, you know that one of the things they hate most is planning. Just ask their "expert" from Houses R Us, an objective group of homebuilders who think nothing should stand in the way of them throwing up more houses wherever they want. These folks are fundamentally opposed to smart growth because it costs more than stupid growth. Imagine that! Well, hold on to your hat, because stupid-growth advocates are also hot and bothered about transporation planning. Consider John Hood's silly column today.

Foolish or dishonest advocates of transit argue that there is a huge pent-up demand for bus or rail just waiting to be tapped if only those skinflint conservatives would get out of the way. More sensible advocates realize that building transit must be only part of a far-larger agenda of transforming the way most of us live, work, shop, and recreate.

What Hood doesn't understand - on purpose I assume - is that no "responsible advocate" has a far-larger agenda of transforming jack shit. "Responsible advocates" understand that the path we're on is leading over a cliff. From global warming to dependence of foreign oil to the massive loss of productivity resulting from poor transportation systems, the costs of our current development model are unsustainable. And we can't wait until the the problem is acutely destructive before we act.

from
http://www.mountainx.com/news/2006/0719news.php

The City of Asheville has unveiled three new programs aimed at increasing bus ridership in the city to help address air pollution, parking and traffic congestion problems. Council members Bryan Freeborn and Brownie Newman hosted a July 11 community meeting to present the city's plan.

The first piece of the plan has already begun, with six evening routes that reach 45 percent of city residents, running from 7:30 to 10:30 p.m., Monday through Saturday. "In every transportation forum or public discussion we have held, evening routes are the number-one request from residents," Newman told the audience.

I have seen a plethora of articles like this one on MSN proclaiming that now is the best time ever to jump into an SUV. The articles invariably point out the low price point and their prediction that gas prices will go down to "normal" levels in the future, which in turn makes SUVs less costly. Of course, these articles completely ignore the why the price of SUVs are so low and how exactly gas prices are going to go back down.

The simple economics explanation for the low SUV prices is that demand has dropped. And an economist would assume that people were acting rationally and decided that the costs of an SUV were not worth the benefits. Of course, markets can be wrong, but a basic presumption of all economics is that markets work efficiently. The price is set by what the collective society values a product as. It is true that emotion (something economics struggle to grasp) can disrupt markets and many of the articles point out negativity towards SUVs now, but there is no evidence that this emotion is what is dragging down prices. In fact, it is pretty clear to me that emotion was artificially boosting SUV in the past; people were feeling patriotic about driving Hummers, and SUVs were the new it product. Regardless there is no credible evidence that SUV prices are going to rebound in the future; the entire argument rests on the assumption that current prices will trend back to past prices over time, but this assumption is fundamentally flawed, just ask anyone still looking for tech stocks to hit 2000 highs.

Below is a letter to the editor that I sent to the N&O following their story on I-40 congestion that failed to address any alternative transportation options. They responded that they would consider publishing it if I cut down the length in half. Three reasons that I do not want to do this: 1) I did not spend much time at all on it and do not want to put it in print if I horribly missed something; 2) I do not think that I could that many cuts and still have a good piece; and 3) I can put it up here and probably have the same number of people actually read it (and I like you guys better). But go ahead and try to edit it down if you want, or even use the ideas to write your own LTE.

N.C. Senate votes to ban cell phone use for teen drivers, but they still think it is okay for the rest of us. Despite this factoid from a bill supporter, Austin Allran (R):

“I think it’s a good idea. Cell phone use while driving … increases your chances of a wreck four times.”

While the teens are faced with a violation for talking on their cell phone while driving, the guy next to me is only face with the possibility of either ki

A new website has popped up to fight the making of I-540 toll (and to promote a candidate for NC Senate) called stop540toll.com. Gerry Bowles (D) is trying to unseat first term Republican senator Neal Hunt by jumping on the toll issue. As I have posted before, I hate the idea of toll roads for mainly local traffic, unless you are talking about a crowded downtown area.

However, Crosstown Traffic at the N&O has noted that Bowles does not even live in the area that would become tolled. Also, despite the fact that I support Bowles' cause regardless of where he lives, I do not know that the running for NC senate would be the forum that would best address it; there are many other transportantion and planning boards that could be a more effective outlet for this issue.

The TTA has just reached an agreement with Norfolk Southern that ensures that they have access to all 28 miles needed to complete the proposed Triangle Regional Rail Line:

The agreements with Norfolk Southern gives the TTA access to the corridors necessary to build the 28-mile rail transit system, which is schedule to have 12 stations connecting Durham, Research Triangle Park, Cary and Raleigh.