Cascadia Report

When congestion is your friend

Vancouver's congested streets can be maddening but at least they near-gridlock makes it easier for pedestrians and bicyclists, as Hugeasscity writes.  I've got a couple quibbles.

For one, I will definitely drive in Vancouver again. SkyTrain is great but only if you go where it goes.  My recent trips took me to UBC or on detours between Whistler and Seattle.

The clogged street grid doesn't necessarily make the case for congestion pricing. Seattle's hills and water are a much better testing ground for combining a) alternative forms of travel with b) tolling that varies with usage.

Maybe we're not so 'livable'

Here in Cascadia we're used to hearing that this is among the world's most livable places.  But what about opportunity?

Vancouver regularly tops international rankings and Portland is a media darling for its hipster qualities and great refreshments.  One shared feature of supposedly "livable" cities is that not many people live in them, points out FT columnist Michael Skapinker.

Less than 2 million people live in Vancouver, Portland and Seattle combined (the city of Seattle just topped 600K) and none rank among the top cities based on global business.  I'd prefer to encourage more economic and cultural growth within Cascadia's cities since without clear benchmarks it's unclear how much progress we're making.

None of this takes away the joy of nerding-out over top-cities listings.  Monocle magazine's list of top 25 ranks Vancouver as 14 and includes just one U.S. city (Honolulu at 11). Tokyo (3), Fukuoka (16) and Kyoto (22) make the list -- but there's no Osaka, Yokohama or Sendai, which are just as comfortable.  Try to explain that.

See also: Decisions that made a great city

How do we get better art

I've been meaning to post this for days: why is Vancouver's art scene better than Seattle's?

Is writer Jen Graves right?  Honestly I'm not sure how much of it is just the "grass is greener" thing, but the provocation is much needed.  She offers a few sensible suggestions, starting with celebrating our region IN our museums:

The Henry should step up its game by exhibiting all six short listers rather than just the winner, while the Seattle, Tacoma, and Portland art museums should all start reconceptualizing the meaning of "regional," like the Henry is doing, and quick. (The "inclusion" of such places as Idaho and Montana in Tacoma Art Museum's biennial, for instance, reflects a fake constituency and has fake results. Art is now and has always been a city game. The art "region" is along or connected to the I-5 corridor, and in most ways, Seattle has more in common with Los Angeles than Spokane.

Cutting Amtrak at exactly the wrong time

It looks like the Canadian bureaucracy is STILL dragging its feet on adding needed rail service between Vancouver and Seattle.

Meanwhile in Washington, legislators are planning to cut improvements that would make Amtrak faster and more reliable, while allowing more trains in the future. Seattle Transit Blog has the story in detail. 

Every dollar is important in tough budgetary times like these. So why are improvements to I-5 going ahead -- even without tolling mechanisms to lower the implicit subsidy for roads and private automobiles? We should be adding tolls in areas with "freeway" improvements while investing to make rail travel more competitive.

Instead travel options are limited. Canada wants U.S. taxpayers to cover the cost of a Canadian customs agent, despite the expected financial windfall a second daily train would bring to B.C.  For now it looks like a second train will cross the border each day during the winter Olympics -- but not after.

No tax increase by Port of Seattle

The Port of Seattle Commission recently reversed itself, voting to not increase its property-tax levy on the homeowners throughout King County. Why?

The Seattle Times credited testimony by the Municipal League and individual taxpayers at a Commission hearing. This op-ed had previously appeared in the paper:

Port of Seattle: Don't increase tax revenues

By Bradley Meacham and Bruce Carter

The Municipal League of King County recommends the Port of Seattle commission reduce the $8.1 million increase in the proposed 2009 real estate tax levy.

A league committee monitoring the affairs of the Port of Seattle has concluded the increase is not warranted, especially considering the financial meltdown that is dramatically afflicting business activity and real property values in King County.

Argument against another Seattle airport

Sea-Tac's third runway just opened , after two decades and a billion dollars. Now some say the Seattle area needs another airport.

But we're better off encouraging a single major airport (especially if it's conveniently connected to high-speed rail for Vancouver-Portland travelers). Consider Heathrow and this letter from the Economist:

SIR – The Economist noted that since 1990 the route network at Heathrow has decreased, while transfer traffic has increased (“The right side of the argument”, November 8th). However, the subsequent claim that transfer passengers are of limited economic value is incorrect. It is in fact evidence of the market forces caused by a capacity-constrained airport.

Slots at Heathrow trade for up to £25m ($37m), clear evidence that given new capacity, the network would grow. Until Heathrow is permitted additional capacity, airlines will understandably make the rational, economic decision to focus the limited slots available to them on the most profitable routes. This is tenable in the short term, but over the long term Britain’s economy will suffer from not being able to offer direct links to cities in the growing economies of India and China. Around two-thirds of routes at Heathrow are supported by transfer passengers who make up 25-40% of the people who fly on them. Without these passengers, major business destinations such as Bangalore, Chennai and Seattle would all disappear.

It is naive to think transfer passengers do not offer any wider economic benefits—the direct, global links that these passengers support are Britain’s gateway to the world economy. Heathrow is Britain’s only hub airport and a vital economic asset. If Heathrow is to stay in the global league, then a third runway is vital to keep it, and by extension Britain, competitive.

A call for better bus service

It's been a while but I can't stay quiet any longer. The reason? There's a report out today with a couple dozen recommendations to improve Metro Transit. 

The biggest deal is calling for a Metro -- which serves the 1.9 million people of King County -- to design its service around where people live and work rather than outmoded political compromises. Currently 80 percent of new service is divided among south and east King County, with the remainder going to Seattle, which has more demand and transit-oriented development.

The report was produced by a citizen committee organized by the Municipal League. (Yes, I'm biased since I'm League chair.)  It's just in time, too, because Metro needs more funding in order to meet soaring demand.  Most of the debate over transit around Seattle has been about light rail, streetcars and ferries. We also should get a better return on investment from our main existing transit service.

Much of the stuff in the report should be obvious: Metro needs more transparency about route performance, costs and accountability.  Hopefully shining a light on the agency and calling for the basics will help.

Extend the streetcar line now

I stopped by a forum on the proposed extensions of Seattle's streetcar yesterday afternoon -- and heard more objections to the idea of a citywide network than vision to make such a system work.

At question is the idea of extending Seattle's stunted 1.3-mile line to actually go somewhere. It could be a viable transportation system that would encourage development and make owning and driving a car in the city less essential.

Sure, financing and design are legitimate obstacles. The city should solve those obstacles and then start building. Public support will follow -- just as in Toronto and countless other cities where streetcars are commonplace.

What we shouldn't do is talk this issue to death at endless public forums. I didn't hear one concern that couldn't be met. Losing parking on local streets? More people will take streetcars and walk. Cannibalizing bus service? We need to invest in more, better bus service too. One man talked about efficient express bus service in Vancouver as an example of what we should do. Fine, but that and streetcars aren't mutually exclusive.

By all means, get citizen input on the route and design. Then let's build it.

The best way to get more, faster Web access

Just after paying my $145 monthly telecom bill, I noticed this Wall Street Journal story about how cities nationwide are trying to promote faster broadband Internet service.

The problem is that much of the U.S. is falling behind other industrialized economies in terms of Web access speed and cost, which potentially hinders innovation -- not to mention convenience. How is it that high-speed Internet is just a quarter as costly in Japan and even Canada has faster service?

Washington in particular lags behind. See this post. Tacoma has a municipal network and this year Gov. Gregoire signed a law to begin planning broader system. But those seem like very small steps.

Several U.S. cities are investing in their own networks, against the wishes of powerful telecom firms that nearly have a stranglehold. According to the article, telecoms seem to have two main arguments. The local projects are an unfair competitive threat, they say, and the projects will be more costly than local governments project. (Here's the latest from Qwest.)

Should local governments here be doing more to help?

Which buildings should we save

It's easy to argue that one of Seattle's darkest days was when the Music Hall theater was destroyed downtown to make way for a parking lot.

But it's usually harder to define what buildings deserve protection. There are a few ideas in this article in the Seattle P-I.

One point in the comment thread made sense to me:

Rather our approach to "preservation", why not adopt a simple "ancient light" law. If a window has had sunlight for 50 (let's say) or more years then that sunlight can not be taken away. Period, it works in other cities.

Giving praise where it's due

If you're curious about what kind of development will shape Seattle's future, increasingly the one place to turn for free, timely information is The Stranger's blog.

At a time when metropolitan dailies like The Seattle Times are almost giving up on coverage of neighborhoods, the blog is a huge help to anyone who cares about Cascadia's biggest city but can't be a full-time gadfly.

Here a few random recent posts:

Today's examines plans for major growth along the new light rail line.

Coverage of in-fill in single-family neighborhoods.

A glimpse of an iconic tower that may alter the skyline.

Coverage of the design for one of the city's first "subway" stations.

Dubious plans for Amazon's new headquarters the booming South Lake Union neighborhood.

B.C. may boost exports of trash

Vancouver wants to dramatically boost its Washington-bound exports of one product it has too much of: trash.

And why not? Canadians would pay more to cover the cost of sending trash trains to a landfill on the Washington side of the Columbia River Gorge, helping the economy of rural Klickitat County, according to the Seattle P-I. At the landfill the trash would be turned into sellable energy.

The shipments would begin just ahead of the supposedly eco-friendly Olympics and, predictably, the idea is already riling residents who live along the prospective route of trash trains. Whistler and Seattle already export their trash elsewhere in the region and other reports suggest there may, in fact, be other B.C. alternatives.

But the richest part of the P-I article is the appeal to regional sympathy by one of the proponents:

Marvin Hunt, a councilor in Surrey, B.C., and chairman of the Metro Vancouver Waste Management Committee, said the garbage shipment is just temporary until a new facility is ready in the province.

"This is the Northwest. We feel like this is all family here in Cascadia," Hunt said.

"We have a little problem right now, and when you have a problem, you ask your brothers and sisters to help you out."

While I've been away

This site has been on temporary hiatus recently while I've been spending time with the Municipal League of King County, a nonpartisan group that aims make public policy in the Seattle area more efficient.

Check out me wearing my Municipal League hat in this interview on Comcast:

The event I mention is the League's annual Civic Awards. This year's is at the Olympic Sculpture Park on April 24. Tickets are still available.

It's time to charge for road use

I published an op-ed in the Seattle Times today advocating variable pricing for roads as a method to lessen congestion.

The idea of charging more during crowded times and less when fewer cars are on the road is nothing new to me (see this and this). But it's a big deal that the Municipal League, a venerable nonpartisan good-government group, is now on board. Here's from the piece:

In the past, tolls have been imposed to support construction of major projects. We at the Municipal League of King County support a broader use of tolling to increase traffic flow through congested corridors, while at the same time recovering costs from those using the roads. This is how we price other goods and services when there is limited supply.

As I mention, there are plenty of details to be worked out. The key, as I wrote, is providing alternatives so that additional fees are fair and that everyone benefits. That means adding enough buses, making them faster and more frequent so that transit is a viable alternative.

The key is balancing the market so that transit is a realistic option. Right now we're massively subsidizing travel in single-occupant vehicles. A smart pricing system would make better use of infrastructure and have the positive benefits I mention in the article.

Hooray for the carbon tax

This week British Columbia passed North America's first carbon tax, a big step toward tying sustainability, transportation and market forces. Why can't the rest of Cascadia build on the example?

The tax has been in the works for a while but I missed the passage until I arrived in Vancouver Friday night and noticed it was all over the papers and TV. Looking back, I can't find a single reference in mainstream Seattle-area media.

This policy is huge news because it stands to begin discouraging emissions while making taxation more progressive. Here are some interesting first takes:

-- There are some links to more details and praise for the potential environmental impact here.

-- The business community is glad that there's finally a law, according to yesterday's Globe and Mail.

-- The Tyee looks at whether the tax is fair, here.

-- Progressive Economics points out some flaws yet ends up praising the idea here.

Coming soon: Seattle-Northern B.C. connection

Seattle is about to get its first nonstop flights to northern British Columbia -- another step toward integrating Cascadia.

Alaska Airlines will fly to Prince George, a city 500 miles north of Vancouver at the heart of B.C. timber and mining industry. Unless you like looong drives, the only way to get there now is on the three daily Air Canada flights from YVR.

The convenience almost makes me pine for the days when I was a reporter covering Weyerhaueser and the cross-border timber industry.

More importantly, it suggests that there's demand for this sort of regional travel. The news slipped by while I was dizzy about new nonstops to China, Germany, Mexico and France.

No news south of the Canadian border today

Americans hear almost nothing about politics in Canada. Maybe it's mutual.

I found just one story in B.C. media about today's caucuses in Washington. There's some explanation of the arcane process but little about what the race means for the region:

University of Victoria graduate student Jeremy Wood, wearing a "Canadians For Obama" T-shirt, said "my friends and I came here to see if our support for Obama was based on rock star adulation or if there was something more to it. We arrived at 6:30 in the morning and talked to people lined up. One 17-year-old kid told me he had never been interested in politics until he heard about Obama.

"I've never seen a lineup like this for a political event. It's a social movement. We Canadians had Trudeaumania. But this is something else," said the 36-year-old masters of public administration student.

What Super Tuesday meant for Cascadia

The quasi-national primary on Tuesday puts votes from the Northwest in play far more than anyone expected.

For one thing, the split Clinton/Obama results make Washington's caucuses this Saturday meaningful. The Web is aflutter with news of impending visits and campaign spin.

Here's the most interesting analysis of the longer term picture.

Now there's talk that even Oregon's May primary could make a difference.

Fed up with cattle class? Try yoga to China

If you like in-flight yoga, it's a good day. You'll soon be able to fly nonstop to China from Seattle on an airline that offers that amenity.

The new flight to Beijing on Hainan Airlines is the latest increase between the two countries and the latest of several new international offerings from Sea-Tac. This one is probably a boost for tourism and some business travelers.

But flights four times a week hardly makes Seattle the Cascadia gateway for the China market. Vancouver has daily nonstops to Beijing, Shanghai and Hong Kong -- with 30 a week to Hong Kong alone.

What happens to Cascadia when U.S. wanes

I missed President Bush's State of the Union speech tonight because I was reading about how much the world has changed since he took office.

It's worth reading this article from the Sunday New York Times Magazine, which shows how the world is dividing into three superpowers (U.S., China and the E.U.) that will increasingly compete for the growing "second world" countries like India, Turkey, Brazil and Vietnam. There are plenty of statistics and anecdotes showing how this trend accelerated during the past eight years and will continue to do so.

I find myself thinking immediately about what this means for Cascadia. If the bellicose behavior of the U.S. over the last several years hurt America's stature, and if Canada is so small as to be irrelevant globally, what about our region? Apparently there's more trade in the Japan-India-Australia triangle than across the Pacific and more Chinese study in Europe than the U.S. Does it mean no more booming ports in Seattle and Vancouver; fewer Chinese professionals who fondly recall living in the Northwest during school?

The article offers a series of ideas for the next couple of presidents. But this region needs leaders who appreciate the examples of other countries and our peer metro areas around the world. It needs vigorous diplomacy on a regional level. And it needs more-sustainable development here to insulate us from potential global shocks through more efficient transportation, better use of resources and improvement of the cultural draws that make this part of the world a desirable place to live.

I'll try to work this out some here in the coming months. What ideas am I missing?

Making room for people and vineyards

Planners in the Portland area are divvying up land for long-term agricultural use and for development. The idea is to get beyond arguments over the region's growth management boundaries.

Farmers and developers -- often at odds on land-use issues -- say the change could provide long-term stability by preserving large blocks of the best farmland while making it clear where cities will grow.

"Once Metro adopts urban reserves -- boom -- we know where growth is going to occur," said Jim Johnson, land use and water planning coordinator for the state Agriculture Department.

Gee, why don't we trying something similar here? Instead the top story in today's Seattle Times is about a sweetheart development deal in rural King County. It seems like forcing development -- without local buy-in or a way to pay for infrastructure -- is bound to backfire.

We have money -- but no good way to send it

Sending money between the U.S. and Canada ranks with border delays and underdeveloped transportation infrastructure as obstacles facing regionally minded Cascadia citizens.

Recently I tried to pay a bill in Canada by sending C$113 from Seattle to Victoria. Apparently I ran afoul of post-9/11 inconvenience, anti-money-laundering worries and maybe even technology. I can accept some confusion, but there's got to be a better way.

When I went to a Washington Mutual branch asking for a money order, payable in Canadian funds, the teller looked at me like I was crazy. Bank of America said they could order a money order in about a week. Western Union was willing to help me for a hefty fee, but only if I wired the cash to an individual, who then would have to pick up the cash at another Western Union outlet.

Desperately seeking a good money changer, I called the Canadian consulate in Seattle. Here's what happened: the single main phone number leads to choices in the automated system that all lead to a dead ends. After nearly three minutes of messages in English and French, I picked tourism. Then the message said there is no longer a tourism office and suggested calling immigration. The immigration line said they no longer take telephone inquiries.

My solution was to find a friend who happens to have an account in a Canadian bank -- a move he took post-9/11 in order to handle details related to his Whistler rental. He says his bank puts a 45-business-day hold on USD checks (even if he writes it to himself) so he's resigned to simply planning way ahead. It's nearly enough to keep us on our respective sides of the border.

Rail deal a big step toward mobility

The Seattle area took a big step toward better mobility with a deal to put a railroad line through the Eastside under public ownership.

The old freight line is the only unused corridor straight through the booming suburbs, so preventing it from being sold in pieces was step one. Now there needs to be a plan to add transit and a trail, in conjunction with tolling on the existing roads.

Most important, the region needs to encourage future demand for transportation to grow around this corridor. Transit shouldn't simply serve the density that exists now. After all, today's Eastside grew up around structures that were planned in the 1950s.

Don't think the rail route would work as transportation? A project in Bellevue was announced just this week that would locate thousands of residents and workers within walking distance. In Renton the route could be connected to the Sounder trains, light rail and density near Southcenter. In the north, the corridor serves Woodinville and Snohomish -- booming areas where focusing development around transit infrastructure makes more sense than massive new roads.

Consider this report about one way transit could be added sooner rather than later.

Doing right thing for the waterfront (finally)

Politicians and media appear to be coming around (finally) to the idea that Seattle's waterfront viaduct shouldn't be replaced with another freeway.

Cascadia Report made the case last winter for a combination of transit and comprehensive street improvements to replace the earthquake-damaged eyesore. Gov. Gregoire and Mayor Nickels were among those who poo-pooed the idea by insisting that any replacement had to accommodate the same number of vehicles as the current viaduct.

Now, Gregoire has changed her mind. Several agencies have pledged to work together for a comprehensive fix. Today even the Seattle Times editorial board -- a mostly suburban group that generally supports roads over transit -- came out in favor of transit + road fixes.

It's about time. Now let's get to work on a long-term fix that values the waterfront heart of the region's biggest metro area.

Death and life of great cities

A few weeks ago, during a long weekend in New York, I found myself wandering Manhattan on a Monday. All the usual museums were closed so I tried a small gem of an exhibit on the life and accomplishments of Jane Jacobs.

Jacobs is the activist who helped save swaths of Manhattan from freeways and urban renewal through the 1960s. She's often credited with the basic idea that walkable neighborhoods inhabited by residents are healthier than impersonal housing projects on "super blocks."

It's a great lesson that's been internalized by planners worldwide. But I couldn't help think the pendulum has swung too far. Instead of protesting for strong neighborhoods it seems neighborhood activism -- often under the guise of Jacobs' lessons -- is simply against development, period.

This describes Seattle, where investment in new buildings in a close-in neighborhood is scorned. The Seattle P-I wrote in sympathy of neighbors of a University District coffee shop who didn't want a parking lot developed because a new building would cast shade on a patio! Never mind the benefit of more residents, workers or customers in the neighborhood. Of course, there's also some backlash to development in Portland and Vancouver.

Even in New York, the protest and NIMBY movement is strong. I choose to remember the row of old two-story buildings being torn down in favor of the Santiago Calatrava-designed transit hub. Instead of hand-wringing, the New York Post brushed off concerns of the tenants, calling the buildings "scuzzy."

So where's the middle ground? I'd vote for transparent development rules and design review. But most important is leadership that can make a clear case for what the city gains from development.