Posted on

Transportation Options Redux

A while back, I did a series on transportation options. I recently stirred the pot (as I’m wont to do) on Facebook and that discussion generated enough activity to warrant another post here.

What got this discussion going was an observation that the new proposed bus rapid transit line (EmX) in Eugene would result in approximately the same number of bus trips on the road as currently exist. But it would end up being one bus every 10 to 15 minutes instead of four bus routes running every half hour. And it has proven to increase ridership. Having ridden both the regular bus lines and the EmX, it seemed to me to be much more efficient and convenient than the system that currently is in place.

This, of course, generated a flurry of comments and opinions. I do have a group of Facebook friends with widely differing views on many topics, even this one. I enjoy this, because it generates lively discussions and topics to write about here.

I’m also going to make my comments here in the framework of the triple bottom line. The TBL concept is one that, I believe, we can apply to most any topic, especially one related to transportation. And it’s an easy format for me to use. So I will talk about my opinions related to the EmX in the context of economy, environment, and equity.

ECONOMY
Some of the comment related to the EmX discussion are centered on economy. The new line infrastructure will cost about $95 million. Yes, that’s a lot of money. About $75 million will be from Federal funding and the remainder from State funding. LTD (Lane Transit District) has already factored the additional operating costs into their budget.

It’s sometimes hard to separate thoughts and ideas into three simple categories, too. As I often say, “everything’s connected.” So there are some economic equity issues, too, but I’ll save some of those for the other sections of this post. So bear with me as I try to categorize my thoughts as best I can.

Aside from the initial costs of EmX, the impact on businesses during construction is also a concern often raised. And while I think it is a valid concern, I also believe it’s still worth it. In the current two EmX lines that have been constructed, not one business has gone out of business because of the EmX. I also have noticed that none of the current businesses along existing EmX lines have joined the “No Build” sign war currently going on along the proposed route. It would seem to me that if the EmX resulted in such an adverse impact on businesses along the routes, those businesses would be joining the fight. But they aren’t.

With all the concern about cost and the complaints about traffic congestion along the West 11th corridor, I wonder what impact simply widening the road would have and how much that would cost? Businesses would still be affected by the construction. Even more right of way would have to be obtained from private land owners. And I think we’d just end up with six lanes of congestion instead of four.

Historically, the EmX is more efficient for LTD to operate and will inevitably increase ridership. Both are win-win situations.

ENVIRONMENT
I have always been a strong proponent of protecting the environment. Transit systems are inherently more efficient and create less pollution (by about 95%) than single occupant vehicles. Simply, if you have 55 people (seated) in one bus, versus 55 vehicles, there is less air pollution, congestion, etc. And the EmX buses are hybrid electric, using less fossil fuels.

One point to make, too, is the proposed EmX route will also upgrade bike and pedestrian connections along the route. That benefit seems to get lost in all the hoopla and hyperbole. We have a decent bike route along the new EmX route, but it has some major gaps. We also have a marginal sidewalk system along the route. The proposed extension also upgrades those. Options.

EQUITY
This one is where I have the most passion. We have a society and transportation system that relies heavily on the automobile. So much so that we have effectively legislated a culture that requires you to have a car to get around. And yet we have many people (including friends of mine) who don’t own a car, can’t afford a car. And some can’t ride a bike.

When you think of this, if we have a society where a car is pretty much required to get to a job, how are those who can’t afford a car supposed to find and keep a job? And if the bus system is inefficient, requiring long waits to transfer, that keeps the husband away from his wife or the single mom away from her kids even longer (just as an illustration). We are perpetuating a cycle of social inequity and injustice.

I’ve had some say the EmX conversation is pitting the “98% against the 2%.” In reality, according to the US Census, 64% of Eugene residents commute by single occupant vehicle, 8% carpool, 5% bus, 7% walk, 11% bike and 5% work at home. EmX is trying to even out these numbers to make transportation more equitable for people.

SUMMARY
Change is often difficult. Investing in our future is also hard. It forces us to think and plan beyond the “now.” And as a culture, we’ve gotten away from that. We have developed a mindset of the immediate. From fast food to streaming movies on the internet to text messaging, we have placed unrealistic expectations on our culture. We have also become selfish. If I’m part of the 64%, why should we spend all that money on the others? After all, it doesn’t directly affect me.

But it does. There are societal issues we are facing (poverty, crime, dissent) that, I believe, are a direct result of us not considering the impacts decisions we make have on anything or anyone other than myself. And that’s where I fear we may miss the mark.

Posted on

Envision Eugene

I recently wrote an op-ed piece for our local newspaper, The Register-Guard. here it is in its entirety:

The Envision Eugene draft document, which is poised to create “A Legacy of Livability,” is open for public comment; a public hearing is scheduled for Monday before the City Council. I know some have expressed frustration that we aren’t jumping in and drawing lines and getting to the details faster. As one who has lived in Eugene almost all of my 54 years, I’ve observed our community’s ups and downs and would like to offer my perspective on this process.

While the original mandate from the state Legislature was for cities to identify and establish a 20-year supply of buildable residential land, our city’s officials decided this was an opportunity to carry the process further and with more depth and completeness than just meeting the legal minimums. We had not performed such a comprehensive analysis since the 1980s, and it was long overdue.

These two goals — accommodating the next 20 years of growth and creating a livable, sustainable future for our community — are outlined in the draft Envision Eugene document.

What this meant was taking a few steps back to see the big picture and establishing some goals that went beyond just the mandate. And it means taking a little longer for the process. We must come to grips with the concept that everything is connected. Land use, transportation corridors and many other elements are inextricably dependent on each other.

Past planning decisions have not always recognized this. Plus, we also have a community that is known for its very diverse views on how to approach solutions, sometimes leading to no decision.

A Community Resource Group was formed by John Ruiz, our city manager. This group represented people with a broad range of interests, backgrounds and opinions.

What I observed with the CRG and other listening sessions was a bringing together of diverse members of our community in a way that started with our common thread. Then, the sessions took the common threads our community agrees on and used those as the foundation to build our collective vision for what we’d like Eugene to look like over the next few decades.

And that intentionally must start with general concepts before we delve into the details; we have to decide and agree on our destination before we choose the method of how to get there. That is what the whole Envision Eugene process, the seven pillars and the strategies and tactics attempt to do: provide the framework for actually “drawing the lines.”

Those seven pillars are objectives set out to: 1) provide ample economic opportunities for all community members, 2) provide affordable housing for all income levels, 3) plan for climate change and energy uncertainty, 4) promote compact urban development and efficient transportation options, 5) protect, repair and enhance neighborhood livability, 6) protect, restore and enhance natural resources, and 7) provide for adaptable flexible and collaborative implementation.

In short, these pillars address at least one aspect of the “triple bottom line” regarding the economy, the environment and social equity within a framework that allows flexibility and adaptation in the coming years.

As an architect, whenever we design a project for a client, we first require them to go through what we call a programming phase. This is where they lay out and establish what their goals are with their project: what their needs are, what they want it to feel like, look like and cost. Until those things are established, we won’t start designing or drawing lines. And when our clients have done a good job of thinking through their needs, goals and resources, our design and the end result for them is always successful.

I believe it will be the same with Envision Eugene. If we are patient enough to really establish and articulate our goals as a community and resist the urge to prematurely dive into drawing lines, we will have a much better result, a much more livable Eugene and a framework we can use for decisions in the future that will achieve the goals of our community.

Posted on

Deep Green – Movie Review

“All I know is, I’m alive now and I can do something today, and I can’t in good conscience wait for somebody else to do it. I think the time is now; for me the time is absolutely now. It’s the only time anybody has”. Kathy Bash, Architect with DMS Architects in Portland, Oregon. Of all the people and quotes and sound bites from the film, this is the one that stuck with me the most.

Deep Green, a documentary from Matt Briggs, is not so much about the problem, but about solutions. In his description of his film, Briggs says: “Other films have done a great job of showing us the problem. We wanted ‘Deep Green’ to be about solutions.” And the film does just that. In an hour and 40 minutes (which, in my opinion could have been about 20 minutes shorter), Briggs focuses more on the ways people around the world are addressing ways to reduce their footprint and live a little lighter on the planet than on the problems with our lifestyles. Briggs himself has retrofitted his own home with numerous energy-saving, sustainable features. And he’s apparently still at it, adding some solar here, some composting there; yes, he’s living it.

The film starts out with some basic background data on global warming and climate change, but doesn’t stay there. It dives right in to what’s happening around the world in the areas of clean energy, high-speed rail, sustainable buildings, agriculture and out-of-the-box thinking. Briggs shows how everything is connected and “we all live downstream.”

What I appreciate about the film, enjoying its Eugene, Oregon debut (Briggs is a University of Oregon alum), is it does concentrate on what’s good out there, what we can do and how it makes environmental sense and economic sense. Too often, I think, filmmakers of this genre zero in on the gloom and doom aspects of climate change. We are so close to the tipping point, or have passed it, that the message gets lost in the futility. And that is what sets this film apart from the others. It was a bit long (I would have shown less detail on the clean coal segment and been a little less enamored with China), but still worth the watch. You won’t come away from this film discouraged, downcast or brow-beaten.

Which brings me back to Kathy Bash’s remarks. I know Kathy as a colleague and respect her as a fellow Architect. She has a passion, yet practicality in her view of sustainability. Which makes her opening quote so profound. I am responsible for what I can do. We must take responsibility for ourselves; if we all would do that, we would move forward at breakneck speed.

Posted on

Empty Buses and Mass Transit – Part 3

Social Equity and Culture

I briefly talked in my last post about the free-market and bus fares of $15 and $10-a-gallon gas. I wanted to expand that some more here.

Even though we are in a culture where most people own cars, there are still those who do not. So what about them? How can or should they get around? And even if everyone DID have a car, how would that affect our street and road system? To answer that, if you live in or visit the Eugene-Springfield area, just drive out West 11th most any time of day or Beltline Road any weekday afternoon after about 3:30 pm.

Building and widening roads is not the answer. You can find all sorts of evidence that transportation options (cars, buses, bikes, walkability) all contribute to a more livable community and greater social equity. When people have options, are able to walk or bus or bike or drive, then the financial impact in their life becomes more of a choice than a burden. And I hear people complaining that LTD is cutting routes and services while wanting to spend money on the EmX route. The problem with that is the monies come from different sources: regular routes are largely payroll taxes and constructing the EmX is largely Federal funding. If we don’t spend the Federal money on the EmX, the Feds will spend it somewhere else. It can’t be used for regular service; plus Bus Rapid Transit such as the EmX is much more efficient.

I’m fortunate enough that I could afford to drive my car every day to and from work. It’s a nice car and gets relatively decent mileage. I can afford to pay the regular service on it and all that. But when I discovered my transportation choices, it has done several things in my psyche.

First, when I ride my bike, I get exercise and fresh air and my metal attitude when I arrive at work is much calmer. Multiple benefits.

Second, when I ride the bus, I can read a book or strike up a conversation with a new acquaintance and broaden my circle of friends. Multiple benefits.

Third, when I drive, I can have the option of not having to plan my day quite as tight. Multiple benefits.

But some people don’t have all three choices. And the most expensive of those three options is the car. While there may be many who ride the bus because they want to (and I think there are; after all, I’m one of those), there is also a segment of our society who need the option of mass transit in order to make their monthly budgets work.

Do we really care about our neighbors?

Posted on

Transportation Options

Lately I’ve been exploring transportation options. I’ve largely been a car driver for most of my life and a recreational bicyclist. But almost a year ago, I took the Business Commute Challenge held annually here in Eugene and last month took the Bike Commute Challenge. The first challenge, I “discovered” our local bus system; the second one I did something I’ve done for a while: biked.

But this all really started last fall in my Sustainable Building Advisor class I took through the NEEI. One speaker, a transportation specialist from Portland, Oregon, said something that resonated with me and stuck. You know how it is when a phrase or idea hits you right between the eyes and you have one of those “aha” moments? That’s what happened to me.

He stressed the issue of having two or more transportation options wherever we live or work. And that’s not to say the automobile is a bad option. It seems many times when we talk about transportation, the car is the evil method and everything else is better. Not necessarily.

CARS
Cars have been around for quite a while. And I think they’ll be around for quite a while more. It is true that the automobile has created a lot of the problems we have today (suburban sprawl, air pollution, CO2, etc), but I think the biggest thing the car has caused is complacency. It’s easy for us, we don’t really have to think or plan and for most of the developed world, it’s within our budgets.

But what my class speaker pointed out and what really stuck with me was how some people say when we advocate alternative forms of transportation, we’re trying to “legislate lifestyle”. How many of you have heard that? If we try to encourage bus transportation, we are accused of legislating lifestyle. When we push for more bike lanes or paths, we are trying to legislate lifestyle. But what he said gets to the heart of this: when we only provide one viable method of transportation (cars), we are by default, legislating a lifestyle.

If the option of taking the bus isn’t viable, I’ll drive. If biking isn’t safe, I’ll drive. So with planning policies and transportation policies that ONLY favor cars, we are legislating lifestyle by removing options.

THE BUS
So back to the Business Commute Challenge. I made a conscious decision to try the bus. I had preconceived ideas that it was much slower, inconvenient and was populated primarily by that “shady element” of our society. I wrote about that earlier.

Our local bus system, Lane Transit District, works quite well, is almost as fast as driving (especially when you factor in finding a place to park), is populated by very normal people and often full (my ride home the other day was standing room only).

I have a park and ride near my house (not within walking distance, unfortunately) and I get dropped off just a short walk from my office. Total bus time: 36 minutes; driving is about 15 to 20 minutes. Bus cost: $3 for a one-day pass; driving: $5 (assuming a 50¢ cost per mile). Plus I can meet people on the bus or have time to read a book. (I don’t recommend reading a book while driving).

MY BIKE
I’ve been a bike rider for a while. We have a wonderful bike lane/path system in Eugene, Oregon, my home town (NOTE: Eugene has the highest bike commuting percentage of any city our size or larger at 11%. Woo Hoo!). I’ve commuted to work often over the last couple of years, logging about 1,700 miles to date.

I’ll have to confess, I’ve been to date a fair weather cyclist. But now I have rain gear and rode home in the rain the other day. And it wasn’t that bad. What I do like about riding in Eugene is I can ride from the same park and ride (I live on a steep hill, whole other story) to my office in 30 minutes. Bike cost: virtually nothing. Added benefit: exercise, fresh air and my mental attitude when I arrive at work.

Part of the mental attitude is probably due to the fact the last half of my 6.5 mile ride is along the beautiful Willamette River on part of our amazing bike path system in Eugene. Riding in the cool, morning air, sunshine (sometimes), greeting people along the path with a “good morning” — all contribute to better mental health and fosters community. And it’s good physical exercise (I drop about 10 pounds each summer season when I ride).

OPTIONS
Which brings me back to options. I have three viable options to get to and from work. Sometimes I drive my car (I had a meeting in Salem the other day, so bike or bus weren’t good options). Sometimes I ride the bus. Sometimes I ride my bike. But I’ve found that now I have “discovered” some options, I take advantage of those choices.

My commuting tally for September 2010: Car: 8 days, Bus: 3 days and Bike 9 days.

Sounds pretty balanced to me. It was a good month.

Posted on

Just Take a Deep Breath – Part 2

So now you may be wondering about how I went from an LTD bus to a coffee cup? Well, aside from wanting to put in a shameless plug for my favorite coffee shop (Full City, thanks Michael for a great cup of coffee), there are two things I wanted to build on from my last post. Those are Margins and Perspective.

MARGINS
We don’t tend to build margins into our lives. We leave ourselves no margin for getting stuck behind that slow driver, no margin for a task taking a little longer than we had planned. And in doing so, we pressurize our lives.

thesimpleHOUSE is about “living a simple, sustainable lifestyle.” Pressurizing our lives makes things more complex. We rush here and there, often running late, blood pressure rising. The American Heart Association estimates about one third of the US adult population has high blood pressure. They say the cause in 90-95% of the cases isn’t known. I would submit it might be the lack of margins in our lives.

Slow down. Give yourself a little more time. Walk, ride the bus or a bike. I’m amazed at how much calmer I am when I bike or bus to my destination. And there are fringe benefits to all this.

When I walk or bike, I get exercise, which in turn, increases my healthiness. The Mayo Clinic has tips on walking for exercise. (I’m actually a little disturbed that we need instruction in walking…). When I ride the bus, I make new friends, have the opportunity to read a book (remember books?) and save $$ on gas and maintenance on my car. ALL reduce my carbon footprint.

PERSPECTIVE
The coffee cup actually is an example a friend of mine, Van Clements, uses. And I have reused this example many times.

We are seeing one side of the cup in this picture. Someone on the other side of that cup will see something else. There is no logo on the other side of the cup. How do I know? They shared that observation with me; and I listened. You see, that’s where perspective comes in. We have to be willing to listen to another’s perspective and realize they’re still looking at the same cup. We’re just getting a different perspective of that cup. It’s still the same cup for both of us and neither one of our perspectives is right or wrong; just different.

Right now, in our country, we are tearing ourselves apart because we are’t willing to listen to one another’s perspective. And I mean listen. We ultimately don’t have to agree (although I believe if we listened more, we’d find out we agree on more than we disagree on), but we absolutely need to listen. For our society and our culture to survive, this is critical.

If we truly listen to each other, find our common goals and start there, we can repair our society and our culture. I would submit most all of us want clean air, clean water, good health care, and the like. And there may be very different perspectives of getting there. And you know, either or both paths might actually work.

But until we are willing to see the “other side of the cup”, we won’t get anywhere except into a life without margins, with high blood pressure, disintegrating as a culture. I don’t want that, and I don’t think any of you do, either. For a truly simple, sustainable lifestyle, lets step back, take a deep breath, commit to giving ourselves some margin and be willing to hear one another’s view of that coffee cup.

For only then will we see the entire cup.