Cascadia Report

Sprawl likely to foil B.C.'s growth plans

Economic incentives in British Columbia are likely to stimulate more sprawl around Vancouver, contrary to the province's stated goals of reducing pollution, according to an series this week in the Globe and Mail.

One of the chief culprits is the province's ambitious "Gateway Project," a package of roads and bridges designed to accommodate increased trade. As in Seattle and Portland, there are few economic reasons to favor transit and dense development over development in the ever-expanding suburbs.

Leadership on green industry from California

One surprising advocate of incentives to encourage cleaner industry is California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. I finally got around to reading this succinct interview in the latest Fortune magazine.

The intro makes the case that Schwarzenegger is one of several Republicans who are working on programs to develop environmentally sound business. It puts it charitably: "The Republican party has not recently been associated with asertive environmental policy."

A few choice passages from the interview:

I know the American mentality when it comes to finances is to look at the quarterly returns. But there are decisions you will make today, right now, that will take you in a different direction if you think ahead. I have to think, How is California, with its population growth, going to get its energy supply in 50 years?

Does the GOP get this?

No. There are people in both parties who don't get it, but I would say I have a tougher time selling those things to the Republicans.

There's a billboard in Michigan accusing me of costing the car industry $85 billion. [Sponsored by Republican Congressman Joe Knollenberg, the sign says, ARNOLD TO MICHIGAN: DROP DEAD! The message refers to the damage that detractors say the new emissions standards will cause the U.S. auto industry.]

Those people look at this in a narrow way rather than really studying the subject and recognizing that this actually gives us an opportunity to create a whole new industry of clean cars and clean engines and components to build those engines. In California, what we call clean-tech industries are exploding left and right.

Won't there be losers with stricter pollution standards?

Only as much as the auto industry or any industry has to make changes to adapt to the behavior of customers. You have to react quickly. Even if we don't do anything about it, the Japanese will, the Chinese will, the Germans will. Detroit is struggling with it, yes, because they are behind.

Taxpayer bailout of rural areas to continue

The U.S. government is about to bail out the finances of dozens of counties in Cascadia that depend on the depressed timber industry. It needs to look for a longer term fix instead.

The latest proposal would spend billions of dollars over the next five years to compensate rural areas nationwide hurt by cutbacks in logging. The funds would forestall cutbacks in schools, roads and other public services that could paralyze much of the West.

So far, so good. At a time when the U.S. apparently has money to fund war in Iraq, cut taxes and subsidize corporations, why not bail out areas that have depended on timber for generations?

The problem is that there's little sign those areas will be weaned from the subsidy when the next five years of funding ends. Instead we should be working toward a system where costs are carried more by those who benefit (for example, commuters pay congestion pricing, companies pay their way and rural areas become more self-sustaining).

The worst outcome would be to spread taxpayer largesse beyond the current list of recipients, sustaining areas where economic growth can't. The Albany, Ore. newspaper editorialized for a change in the subsidy system, but its solution is more logging in federal lands. Never mind that the land actually belongs to everyone, not just residents of counties closest to them

Portland may get into bicycle business

Portland, already known for being pedestrian and bike-friendly, may get into the bicycle-rental business.

Apparently inspiration for the idea comes from France, where nearly 21,000 bicycles will soon be available for public use in Paris alone. Portland's proposal calls for advertising on the bikes to subsidize the program. The question is whether taxpayers, who gladly subsidize the cost of roads, will be willing to pick up the remainder of the tab.

Remove freeways, sure. And provide alternatives

Seattle's waterfront is in political limbo since voters this month rejected replacing the viaduct with new freeways either in a tunnel or overhead. Maybe the idea of a freeway itself is the problem.

Cities from New York to Seoul have replaced freeways without seeing massive traffic jams. In Cascadia, Portland opted for the first MAX line instead of building a new freeway. Vancouver has survived with almost no freeways, yet traffic and sprawl there isn't much worse than in many American cities.

One of the comments on this article correctly points out that cities should be in the business of providing incentives and new options, not eliminating them. That's why adding transit and building more pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods is important.

To get there the author suggests congestion pricing, of course, and a "parking cash-out" system. Here's his definition:

Businesses could be required to give employees commute allowances instead of free parking. Employees could use the allowance to pay for the parking they used to get for free, they could use it to pay for transit, they could keep part of the allowance if they car-pooled to work, or they could keep the entire allowance if they walked or bicycled to work. It is estimated that this policy could reduce commuter traffic (and peak demand for road space) by about 20%.

Air travel to Europe may get easier

Getting to Europe from Cascadia may become cheaper and easier, thanks to an agreement between the U.S. and the European Union approved today.

The deal essentially lets airlines fly between any two points across the Atlantic, and opens London's Heathrow Airport to more carriers (currently it's limited to United, American, British and Virgin Atlantic).

That means more competition at Heathrow and connections between more cities across the ocean. For example, KLM is likely to replace flight slots at Heathrow currently filled with small turboprop planes flying to Europe with lucrative flights to the U.S.

The agreement should be seen as just a start. The U.S., which wants to protect its strapped carriers, successfully blocked plans to allow foreign airlines to take passengers between points inside the U.S. Imagine how service might change if Americans were allowed to fly British, Air France or Lufthansa from New York to Seattle instead of Delta. Hopefully increased competition across the Atlantic will encourage consumers to support allowing more of it close to home. The next step could be allowing service and price -- not regulations -- to dictate choices.

Cascadia cities need a safety valve

Sure there's healthy rivalry in Cascadia among Vancouver, Seattle and Portland. But between Portland and Vancouver, Washington?

Willamette Week explores the idea that smug Portland benefits in many ways from the Vancouver on the other side of the Columbia River.

Strict growth rules have helped make Portland into what's widely considered a development model. Maybe Clark County, Wash., which has nearly doubled in population since 1990, now functions as a safety valve for Portland?

What if the region's success at controlling growth while still maintaining one of the nation's more robust economies is because of...Vancouver? Or more specifically, because Vancouver has fewer land-use laws and limits on growth? Has Vancouver become a convenient place to handle Portland's overflow, for those who wanted to live, work and play in the area, but who also wanted a bigger yard, lower taxes and a house on a cul-de-sac? All this so Portland could build its light rail, trams and condo towers.

The point is just as valid around the Puget Sound area and in the Lower Mainland. Dense development makes transit and the infrastructure to preserve open space feasible. Where is the safety valve for the region?

An 'Olympic push' to ease border strain

The New York Times weighed in today on proposals to ease the security bottleneck at the U.S.-Canada border well in advance of the 2010 Olympics:

Canadian officials say they worry that some United States citizens will decide against visiting Canada out of concern that getting back into their country could be difficult. And officials in Washington State worry that visitors to the Olympics might decide not to extend their visit into Washington.

The article mentions the Washington plan to offer enhanced drivers licenses as a security measure instead of requiring passports. It says that officials in North Dakota, Michigan and New York support the initiative.

What else will it take?

Portland transit fans set example by uniting

Transit supporters in Portland seem to have learned that improving transportation isn't necessarily a question of one technology over another.

Fans of extending light rail have joined forces with supporters of expanding the streetcar system to secure funding for both. The alliance is noteworthy because the projects had been viewed as competitors for "a limited pool of financial and political capital," according to the Portland Tribune.

Seattle area needs regional planning agency

Proposals in the Washington legislature could finally give the Puget Sound area the kind of government that has long helped Portland and Vancouver meet regional transportation needs.

The legislation, based on recommendations late last year by a study group, would create a new board with authority to prioritize, plan and finance transportation projects in four counties. Best of all, the proposals would make someone accountable for transportation plans in an area where six agencies currently overlap.

Streamlining transportation planning shouldn't interrupt the series of projects currently in the pipeline, such as the package of roads and extending light rail that will be on the ballot in November. It's worth noting that there is a lot of transportation work being done in the area -- despite criticism from the right. Unfortunately it's not bearing results fast enough because there's little coordination with development patterns.

The proposal doesn't mean that a new regional government body should force projects on neighborhoods. Accountability is a key gripe with the system in Vancouver, where proposals for a planning agency covering a larger area are criticized for overlooking local concerns. A regional approach also definitely doesn't mean Seattle should be forced to accept a new elevated freeway, editorials in the Seattle Times to the contrary.

The devil is in the details, of course. The version passed in the Senate would create an 8-member board (with 8 elected) and begin operation this year, raising questions about how existing projects would continue. A House version would study how to implement a regional transportation body this year. While neither is perfect, a compromise could be a step in the right direction.

The fact is the Seattle area needs far more transportation projects than it can pay for with taxes, tolls or congestion pricing. In order to keep the region functioning, someone needs to set priorities to develop a more efficient system.

Road plans ignore election results

Seattle and state leaders said they heard the voters' refusal to replace the viaduct freeway with a tunnel or new elevated freeway. So why did they okay a $175 million project that would enable either?

The question is important for anyone who cares about the vitality of Seattle, which is critical to Cascadia's economy. As debate around the recent election showed, people far outside the city have strong opinions about the waterfront because it is one of the region's centerpieces.

Unfortunately plans call for immediate fixes to parts of the existing viaduct that will make it harder to be creative with the space in the future. Plans call for fixing the Battery Street tunnel and the overpass that connects to the existing viaduct. This is a step in the wrong direction. Any investment along the corridor should be to alleviate congestion -- to move people and freight -- not simply stabilize the status quo.

The state should instead begin designs to lower the roadway through the Battery Street tunnel and on Aurora Ave. -- steps to help accommodate transit to the waterfront and reconnect streets near the Seattle Center. Along with new streets and interchanges south of downtown, these changes would lay the foundation for a better waterfront.

It's official: Vancouver is sprawling

Vancouver, with its gleaming downtown and light rail projects, may be an urban planner's dream. But new census data show its growth is similar to that south of the border.

Over the last five years, Vancouver's population has grown in line with the overall province's rate and more than half has gone to the new supply of housing downtown. Meanwhile Surrey has grown by nearly 14 percent as residents chase affordable family dwellings. The pattern makes it hard for even ambitious transit projects to accommodate lifestyle patterns and relieve the cost of living or the environment.

Similarly, Seattle is a shrinking part of the metropolitan area. Both cities are examples of why development incentives and transportation infrastructure need to be in sync.

Cascadia closer to licenses for border crossing

Washington is close to approving a test project that would provide security along the international border without stifling trade and tourism. It's a big step toward capitalizing on Cascadia's growth before and after the 2010 Olympics.

Both houses of the legislature have approved legislation that would authorize an enhanced driver's license to serve as proof of citizenship. The state and British Columbia would test screening driver's licenses at the border with scanning technology that is supposedly cheaper and easier than a passport requirement proposed by the U.S. federal government. Here's the House version.

Assuming the legislation passes, Washington and B.C. will simply have to convince the federal governments to lay off with draconian border-tightening measures.

Viaduct rebuild defeated. Now what?

In an election Tuesday on how to replace Seattle's viaduct freeway, city voters decisively said no to both a new elevated freeway and a costly tunnel.

The tally is a relief, yet the impact is far from clear. Here are a few quick observations:

-- There's no agreement on what it means. On KIRO radio, the leader of the campaign for a new elevated freeway said "the election was rigged." Bizarrely, he said the 70 percent of voters who rejected the tunnel actually wanted a rebuild and pledged to fight anything but a new viaduct. Voters were against both choices but still want something to be done.

-- Several key politicians lost. Gov. Chris Gregoire insisted on holding the election but then tried to force a bigger elevated freeway, damaging her standing in Seattle. House Speaker Frank Chopp is out of step for fiercely pushing the plan, though voters in his district overwhelmingly opposed it. And Mayor Greg Nickels' pet tunnel was rejected soundly. Except for Councilman Peter Steinbrueck, who helped lead opposition to both, members of the city council look weak for not taking a stand.

-- Voters are rightly upset. The election cost roughly $1 million yet generated no clear result. Citizens correctly expect representatives to take a stand and know they can express their approval or disgust with their representatives' decisions when they're up for election. Voters should remember who forced this wasteful vote on them.

-- Compromise may finally be possible. Maybe all the political players are so wounded that they can check their egos in order to develop a new solution that costs less and concentrates on moving people and freight instead of vehicles.

I'm afraid the outcome will be more gridlock. Imagine a small earthquake shifting the existing viaduct a few inches and a state engineer declaring the highway unsafe. Then the highway would be closed and Seattle would have to cope without either the improved transit or street system that we could have begun developing by now.

Celebrating the viaduct vote

The defeat of both a new viaduct freeway and a costly tunnel along Seattle's waterfront was celebrated at at least two parties downtown on Tuesday night. Here's the scene at the second, as captured by The Stranger's camera:

Whistler business hit by shooting

The first-ever shooting in Whistler late Friday night is a side effect of the resort's growing reputation for a party. The question is whether it will have any lasting impact on business there.

Shops in the Village reportedly were still closed on Saturday afternoon, 18 hours after the deadly shooting that followed a dispute outside a night club. The incident had Whistler officials doing PR about how safe the town really is.

Burner wants rematch with GOP Congressman

Darcy Burner, who narrowly lost a Democratic bid for Congress from Washington's 8th district, appears to be running again. It's not clear why she thinks she'll win this time.

Burner filed preliminary paperwork for a bid on Friday and sounded like a full-blown candidate Sunday night on David Goldstein's show on KIRO radio. She repeated the themes from her last campaign: the country's going in the wrong direction, President Bush is a failure, Rep. Dave Reichert is a rubber-stamp who's out of touch with the voters in the suburban Seattle district.

There are plenty of reasons to vote for change, yet I haven't heard any convincing reasons to vote for Burner. It's possible that a wave of support for new national policies could carry the election in November 2008. More likely 8th district voters, who have consistently sent Republicans to Congress, will need a reason to toss out a two-term incumbent. There's at least one movement afoot to find a candidate who might provide that gravitas.

Seattle viaduct debate goes national

The Seattle-based online environmental magazine Grist is running a short series on why the debate over how to replace the viaduct freeway is a national issue. My post on their blog mentioned there's a disconnect between two Seattle ideas: building a new highway (even in a tunnel) and trying to curb emissions linked to climate change.

Here's the jist from another post on the blog:

In some sense this is a local decision, of course. But in an age of climate change, such decisions are never purely local. Every transportation choice made by a big U.S. city will either lock in or avoid hundreds of thousands of tons of GHG emissions over the coming decades. What governs the choice?

New Vancouver terminus could boost traffic

Moving the terminus of Seattle-to-Vancouver trains to Surrey would boost tourism and make adding to the timetable more feasible, according to a report in a Canadian paper.

Vancouver transit planning may go regional

A package of reforms could make Vancouver's transportation planning even more regional.

Under a new plan, the elected 12-member board of directors of TransLink -- which already leads planning for the metro area -- would be replaced by a three-tiered system of appointed and elected leaders. The area governed by the agency would expand, reaching from Pemberton to Hope.

The proposal apes ideas under consideration for the Seattle area,where at least six agencies control transportation. Sound Transit, the most visible, has an 18-member board made of 17 elected officials from the region and the state transportation secretary. None is directly accountable for transportation issues across the entire region.

The revamped Vancouver agency would have greater power to direct development around transit infrastructure and hopefully more efficiently manage the growing population. Critics question the accountability and funding mechanisms. But the key lesson is that politically fractious metropolitan areas need a regional government that can make regional decisions.

Small steps toward climate, housing goals

Seatle Mayor Greg Nickels called for curbing climate change and adding affordable housing during his State of the City speech this week. But his policies are only small steps in that direction.

Nickels wants a six-lane tunnel to replace the viaduct, which would maintain vehicle capacity without adding transit or incentivizing fewer car trips in the city. Meanwhile his administration has so far shied away from challenging Seattle's restrictive zoning, which sets aside more than two-thirds of land for single-family homes. Limiting supply drives up costs so that workers have to live far from their jobs.

To be sure, Nickels has made some progress by promoting a package of bus improvements, building the beginning of a streetcar system and encouraging dense development downtown. The problem is that those moves aren't bold enough to bring the benefits that would convince naysayers. Frustration with the city will grow without a fundamental commitment to transit and more efficient development.

Union disputes need for more tech workers

Bill Gates told the U.S. Senate Wednesday that restrictions on the number of skilled foreign workers allowed into the country on H1-B visas are hindering innovation. The cap should be raised from 65,000 a year to maybe 300,000, he argued.

Such a move would keep wages down and some skilled workers here unemployed, the largest union representing tech workers responded. WashTech makes the same case every time someone proposes steps to expand the skilled workforce, either through better education or immigration reforms. Brier Dudley links to the union and has more on the issue on his blog.

New trains may get a step closer to Whistler

Plans for expanded train service between Seattle and Vancouver might be the first step toward extending the corridor north.

Relocating the current terminus from downtown Vancouver a few miles southeast to Surrey would be a start. The change would eliminate the need to rebuild a bridge, cut the total travel time to Seattle and save more people in the metropolitan area a trip downtown to board, according to a local newspaper report Tuesday. SkyTrain would still provide a link to downtown.

Most importantly, serving more people in the area would build public support for trains. That's critical since funding for improvements would come from Canada. The new station could spur transit-oriented development in the area and eventually boost ridership from the Vancouver-area by 7 percent, assuming five trains a day to Seattle, according to a report by the Washington transportation department (it's in Appendix E).

British Columbia has studied options to implement train service to Whistler that's competitive with driving. Though the cost would be high, it could become realistic as the financial and time cost of driving rises. The Washington study bases projections for future ridership between Seattle and Vancouver on a series of projected fares and similar calculations of return on investment could be made further north.

Start over on rail corridor deal

At least one person with authority over the proposed land swap involving an Eastside rail corridor is opposing it. King County Councilman Larry Phillips says the deal would shortchange county taxpayers for Boeing Field.

More importantly, he calls for a new deal that would explicitly spell out plans for high-capacity transit through the corridor:

Preserving the rail corridor that Burlington Northern Santa Fe wants to abandon is imperative. The corridor is a regional transportation connection that crosses two counties and eight cities, and is of statewide and federal significance. A study undertaken by the Puget Sound Regional Council envisions the ultimate configuration of the corridor as a recreational trail alongside a high-capacity transit corridor.

I wholeheartedly support co-location of rail and a trail in this corridor, yet the current proposal leaves that vision uncertain and unfunded. What asset will King County need to give away to pay for rail transit in the corridor? Harborview Hospital? Marymoor Park?

Seattle urged to cast blank ballots on viaduct

Seattle residents should return blank ballots in the ongoing mail-only election on how to replace the viaduct freeway, according to an op-ed article in the Seattle Times today by the Municipal League of King County. (Note: I'm a trustee of the league.)

My personal preference is to vote "no" on both options because neither does the job. Yet returning a blank ballot is a way for voters to express their disgust with the political process that got us to these poor choices. Blank ballots still get counted though defaced ones are discarded.

It's worth then sending an email to the city council, mayor, governor and House Speaker Frank Chopp demanding a real solution -- not a quick fix that will scar the city for generations. How about a combination of improved transit and surface streets to accommodate people and freight at lower overall cost?

Support in B.C. key to regional transport

It's easy to get carried away with dreams of improved train service across Cascadia. The latest example: the plans to add another daily train between Seattle and Vancouver.

One key to making these transportation dreams come true is political will in British Columbia. Before any talk of things like Vancouver and Seattle jointly hosting World Cups, fans of regional integration will need to pry funding from B.C.'s Liberal-party government -- which has shown so little interest in investing in public facilities like trains. In multiple reports last week the B.C. transportation ministry spokesman explained that the latest deal is simply to add a single track in Delta, B.C. Clearly it's only a start.

Yet that's the true significance of the second-train plans, which will make travel more convenient for Vancouver residents. Hopefully this small project will build public support for the investment and the government will follow.

How to save the mix of residents downtown

Cascadia's cities have made housing unaffordable downtown over the years by cleaning up areas of old buildings. Unless they create incentives to boost the supply of housing, they will destroy the mix of people that makes being in cities desirable.

Substitute any city for "Portland" in this passage and it still works:

Portland's vaunted livability attracts people with money. But let's not end up like San Francisco, where dot-com money took over the city, driving the middle class to the suburbs and the poor to the streets.

The Oregonian article addresses laws to maintain affordability. Even more important is investing in transportation to relieve the costly burden of car ownership (insurance, gas, payments and parking) and make privately funded dense housing more attractive. Then allowing taller units near transit and requiring smarter development will increase supply and eventually cut the price of housing.

Deal to boost Seattle-Vancouver rail service

A second daily Amtrak train between Seattle and Vancouver will be added next year, thanks to a breakthrough deal that should build support for more service along the route.

British Columbia will help pay for a passing track in Delta, which should help relieve a major bottleneck. Currently the 30 miles north of the border accounts for nearly half of the four-hour trip between Seattle and Vancouver. Shortening the travel time from downtown to downtown will make the train far more competitive with driving or flying, especially ahead of the 2010 Olympics.

Adding a second train will make it possible to do a round trip from Vancouver in a single day. B.C. said it expects another 50,000 visitors to visit Vancouver in first year of the additional train.

Separately, Amtrak said ridership on the Cascades service between Eugene and Vancouver is up, with revenue rising 18 percent in the last four months. Additional traffic should build public support for further improvements along the corridor.

Oregon lawmakers doing their jobs

Lawmakers in Oregon appear close to doing their jobs. The people's representatives hashed out a tax package Wednesday designed to fund long-term investment in the state -- and they didn't simply refer the issue back to voters.

Even the lobbyist for the Oregon Business Association was impressed:

"To me it's a historic moment," he said. "We finally set partisan politics aside long enough to look at the good of the state."

But wait. On Thursday -- days before the tax plan is formally approved -- Republicans and an outside anti-tax group launched ads attacking Democrats for the proposal.

Vote 'no' and 'no' on the Seattle viaduct

Seattle residents should vote "no" and "no" on the mail-in ballot about how to replace the waterfront viaduct. Here's why:

If money were no object, a tunnel might make sense. But the "surface-tunnel hybrid alternative" falls far short of the ideal. This alternative would require considerable additional funding, yet shortchanges critical street improvements (such as around Aurora Ave. and to the Battery Street tunnel). A vote for this alternative won't encourage elected officials to pursue a smarter tunnel. It will muddy the debate.

The "elevated structure alternative" is totally unacceptable if the goal is creating an urban core that will continue to drive the economy of Cascadia, as Vancouver and Portland do. There are ways to move people and freight through downtown without building another viaduct. Preserving views from the freeway is also no reason to build another one. Seattle has prevented massive elevated freeways along Lake Union, along the northern waterfront through Interbay and through the Arboretum because the damage they would have caused far outweighed the benefit.

A combination of improved surface streets and transit would be a better choice than either on the ballot. Dedicated bus lanes could be set up quickly, dramatically boosting capacity and convenience to West Seattle, Burien, Ballard and North Seattle. Freight and through traffic could be met with improvements to streets and I-5. Simply adding capacity is not enough because the volume will always rise to match it. The region instead needs a full array of alternatives to move people and freight. No one prefers gridlock and, if done correctly, there's no reason this alternative should have that result.

This election is offensive becasue it is reportedly costing $1 million yet the result is a pair of poor choices and results that aren't binding anyway. It's still critical to vote -- to demand a better option.