Thinking for the Future
Posted by Leah Harnack
Associate Editor, Mass Transit
“We hate sprawl and despise density”
The audience laughed as Greg Nickels, Seattle’s Mayor and co-chair of The U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Task Force, made that statement at APTA’s Sustainability and Public Transportation Workshop during his opening address.
We all laughed at his wit, though we all know what we’re up against. How do we convince political leaders and communities that public transportation isn’t just beneficial, it is necessary for the future of our communities? How do we ensure transportation is integrated with land-use planning? With all of the emissions transit agencies reduce by reducing the number of cars on the road, why aren’t they receiving credits from cap-and-trade programs?
Of course some communities are further along than others.
During a later presentation, John Inglish, UTA general manager/CEO, mentioned that he remembers the “social period,” when the bus was considered for poor people or people that didn’t own a car. Past tense? As uplifting as it is to realize there are places where this is the case, it’s disheartening when I realize I’m one that lives in a city that still holds on to the “social period” belief.
One of the great things about the conference was realizing that the questions I’m often challenged with were the same questions others were asking so that we could all be better prepared to face them. I often hear from people that the “environmental concerns are exaggerated” or that “it’s just a natural process for the earth to go through temperature changes.”
Thank you to Paul Marx for raising this concern to Ron Sims, county executive, King County, Seattle, Wash. Sims, a captivating speaker whose passion and emotion left the audience standing in applause at the end, gave a simple response. His response was basically yes, the world has gone through dramatic changes before, but scientific evidence shows that it has never been at this accelerated rate and that human emissions of greenhouse gases are causing temperatures to rise so quickly. He also questioned why people wouldn’t think that reducing our emissions to have clean air wouldn’t be reason enough to demand change.
The other question I face in my community is not only how do you make people aware of the changes they could make, but how do you convince them that it is something they need to do. It was across the room from me, but I believe it was Ron Tober who brought up a similar concern asking how one gets his or her mayor to support the U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. Nickels responded that each community is different and you have to find the local drivers that get the community on board. He acknowledged that it is easier in some parts of the country than others, but with cities signed on to the Mayors Climate Protection Agreement in every state, he maintained that it can be done.
His response really can apply to anyone; community members, politicians, family or friends. Find the local drivers and get them on board. Some are easier than others. Convincing my husband to take a bus to O’Hare so we don’t have to deal with parking and sitting in traffic isn’t a difficult battle. Convincing people in my community that the local transit agency isn’t just a “government-run organization” that wants to “waste tax-payers’ dollars” isn’t quite so simple.
I’ll keep trudging along, doing what I can, working with others that are trying to better our communities. It’s conferences such as these that inspire motivation and incite my determination.
Actually, there was one more question I had after the conference. How many other attendees took Metro’s 194 from the airport to the conference?
-Leah Harnack
leah.harnack@cygnusb2b.com
August 3rd, 2007 at 9:26 am
YEP, MOST EVERYONE DISDAINS SPRAWL, BUT FEW WHO LIVE IN SUBURABN AREAS WANT ANYTHING TO DO WITH INCREASED DENSITY. THEY SEE IT AS WHAT THEY LEFT OR DON’T LIKE ABOUT “THE CITY.” ADDED DENSITY IT IS SEEN AS REDUCING THE PRIZED QUALITY OF LIFE. AND TWO OR THREE STORY BUILDINGS THAT HAVE TOO MUCH PARKING BUILT INTO THEM ARE NO BETTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT THAT A STRIP MALL, SO YOU REALLY DO NEED ENLIGHTENMENT. IT IS A RARE SKILL TO SELL ADDED DENSITY. WHEN I TELL PEOPLE THAT “DENSITY IS GOOD” I GET FEW POSITIVE HEAD SHAKES.
August 3rd, 2007 at 9:49 am
Some people can’t use transit because they make mutiple stops off line or they work irregular hours that don’t coincide with transit schedules. To convince those who could use transit and have yet to decide to give it a try, transit providers must promote that transit delivers the following benefits:
1. economic development
2. traffic congestion relief
3. energy efficiency as measured by BTUs
4. emergency management redundancy
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:20 am
I entirely agree with Mr. Auchincloss comment (August 3rd., 2007, at 9:49 am), but I think he did not produce the complete picture about transit.
It is important to consider also the contribution of transit to the following aspects of urban mobility:
1)Pollution reduction;
2)Reduction of urban land requirements for mobility purposes;
3)Minimisation of the “barrier” effect of expressways;
4)Reduction of costs associated with personal mobility, especially when single occupant trips come into consideration;
5)Availability of a mobility alternative for the very young, the old, the sick, the non-car-owning segment of communities or, simply, those who refuse to waste their time, money and patience in recurrent/increasing gridlocks.
Yes, it is about time to convince the mainstream about the rationality of transit who, in turn, will convince elected officials in charge of providing mobility to urban populations.
Will gladly engage in a more detailed discussion of these aspects.
Cesar Cavalcanti
National Association for Public Transport - ANTP Brasil
Vice President
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:29 pm
Here’s the problem: Mass transit is plain too slow and most people prefer to drive to work because it’s much, much faster.
I tried riding the bus to work a couple of times, however it took me three times as long as it does to drive over the exact same route that the bus uses. My experience on every bus trip was a nothing more than a repeated “Go And Stop” routine to pick up or drop off passengers on practically every block. I looked out the window and I noticed that cars were sailing along and leaving the bus far behind.
Let’s face this reality: Mass transit relies heavily on buses that are constantly stopping just to pick up or drop off riders and that’s an inevitable flaw that makes the whole concept unworkable. Although moderate to high speed commuter rail works quite well, most people still have to ride a bus to get to get to and from the rail station.
To attract people who now drive, agencies should try spacing bus stops every three blocks and also use express service on those lines that run to and from a rail station.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Infrastucture rehab emergency now is on our minds, instead of hollywood follies…
How about the transit leadership, boards and employees’ unions get on the same page with this bridge rebuild saga and bring rail freight, transit, and BRT into the planning as we go forward. These are crucial priority corridors, and now is an opportunity to rehab & redesign bridge projects with alternative transport lanes/tracks.
Most bridges built after 1960 had no provision for transit, mixing buses with too-heavy trucks and leaving bicycles and rail out of the design completely. The re-focus of long-haul freight to rail will go farther to prolong highway bridge longevity than any other single thing we can do.
If you claim to be “Thinking For The Future, then you already know about “The Association For The Study Of Peak Oil & Gas” & “Postcarbon.org”. Newbies- look up individual topics: “Jay Hanson”; “Matthew Simmons”; “Matt Savinar”, see Rep. Roscoe Bartlett’s presentation to Congress, download copy of the Robert L. Hirsch Report On Peaking Oil” & the 2007 update.
The people who are employed in public transportation are receiving income from taxes and fare revenue. It is not asking too much for these same, plus the consultancies, equipment & parts suppliers and lobbyist organizations including the transit lip-service groups to get savvy on Peaking Oil. Like, being well-schooled in your craft. Alternative transport, mobility to complement & substitute for, the petroleum-consuming automobile is no small thing. You gotta know the territory!
As practicioners of energy conservation, we should know our stuff, and that includes knowing what Peaking Oil is all about. We need to be fluent on EIOER issues regarding transport mode comparisons and sustainability over the long term. The idea of “Thinking For The Future” means getting some employee volunteers to the City Council Meetings, Chamber of Commerce & Town Haul Meetings, and getting the word out on the twin challenges Peaking Oil & Climate Change pose to mobility and the economy.
Obviously, the fancier the title, bigger the paycheck, etc, the greater the responsibility to be the Peaking Oil expert in the room! The future starts with being prepared.
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:37 pm
I am a commuter-intercity charter driver. I serve a large white middle-class population that is so ignorant of public transport. They look for seat belts on the bus. They and their children are are loathe to ride. The children say that “buses are not cool.”
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:43 pm
My carrier is hurting for more daily passengers. Yet, I see the same people sitting in traffic on major arteries into NYC. They deserve to be flogged in Macy’s window at the Thanksgiving Day Parade. These people feel that they are too good to ride a bus or train. Then, there are PANYNJ administrators who grew up the same way. They are running the bridges, tunnels and the PATH. They have MBA’s and MPA’s and never rode or operated public transport.
keithsy@masstransitmail.com