Dinner links: Science. It works.

by David Alpert • July 6, 2010 3:54 pm

Photo by Tmuna Fish on Flickr.

Learning about yellow: Studies on yellow lights show that longer yellows don't get more drivers to stop; to the contrary, some drivers expect to be able to run the yellow and may hit cars that stop as they should. (Leslie Tamura/Post, Matthias)

Better models in San Diego: We, and many other urbanists, constantly criticize conventional traffic modeling, which generally assumes more car trips than in reality for mixed-use and walkable areas. EPA commissioned development of a better model, and San Diego's Association of Governments has officially adopted it. Will our COG/TPB follow? (Kaid Benfield/Switchboard via Streetsblog)

Gas taxes lowest in a long time: As a percentage of income, Americans pay the least gas tax since 1929 (40¢ per $100 of income); by distance, it's the lowest since 1975 ($19 per 1,000 miles). (USA Today)

Not the death spiral: When ridership dropped at Green Mountain Transit Agency in Vermont, the agency responded by cutting fares and adding service rather than the reverse. (Times Argus Online)

Should DC better use triangles? Can it?: Rachel Ryan suggests that DC better program its triangular parks, such as with cafes, as Paris does. But Matt Yglesias notes that Paris is about five times denser than DC, despite still being mostly low-rise. That means Paris has five times the customers for those cafes.

No sculpture, no seating: When the controversial sculpture for 18th and Columbia was canceled, the corner also lost immediate hope for some seating, which the corner sorely needs. (Lydia DePillis/City Paper, Stephen Miller)

Suburban scholars and museums: Suburbs have become a large part of American life, obviously. It's therefore little surprise that some schools are creating departments of Suburban Studies, and Johnson County, Kansas is creating a National Museum of Suburban History. (Seattle PI)

Advantages of urban living: All together, "a suburban lifestyle costs about 18 percent more than living in the city" in New York, the New York Times found ... and NYC children are only half as likely to die of injuries as peers in the rest of the country, largely because they use public transit rather than driving. (NYC Dept of Health, Matthias)

Have a tip for the links? Submit it here.

17 comments

Tags: Adams Morgan, affordable housing, California, DC, density, France, gas taxes, Kansas, links, LOS mentality, MWCOG, New York, Paris, public health, retail, ridership, road safety, San Diego, street furniture, suburbs, traffic lights, transit, Vermont

David Alpert is the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Greater Greater Washington. He has had a lifelong interest in great cities and great communities. He worked as a Product Manager for Google for six years and has lived in the Boston, San Francisco, and New York metro areas in addition to Washington, DC. He loves the area which is, in many ways, greater than those others, and wants to see it become even greater.

Comments
Add a comment »

That NYT article on urban/suburban living contained a massive assumption about the housing choices. It's a 2BR apt in the city vs. a 4BR house in the burbs. They did houses of comparable price, not size, so really isn't a person choosing based on their needs. Once that decision is made, it's no surprise the costs are higher, because there's higher transportation costs involved.

by ah on Jul 6, 2010 3:58 pm

The USA today article is another plant from the road-pricing lobby.

Gas is cheaper than 1929? or 1975? That has nothing to do with gasoline taxes and everything to do with underlying economic conditions and inflation.

Raising gas taxes so the average cost of gas is $5 would be beneficial. Taking the extra money and rebating it back as a reduction in withholding taxes would also be good, although families might not come off well.

I'd be all for taking the extra money and investing in more road infrastructure. Do we need new models and new ways to think about reducing congestion: yes. Do we need to look at how corrupt road builders are and why are roads are so poorly maintained: yes. But do we need more money for roads - yes.

DC is a great selling point about how transit can reduce the number of cars on the roads and average miles driven. However, the rest of the country still thinks of transit and moving poor people who can't afford cars.

by charlie on Jul 6, 2010 4:06 pm

@charlie

The article says that Americans pay less in GAS TAXES than in 1929 (as part of income) or 1979 (per 1,000 miles driven).

by MLD on Jul 6, 2010 4:13 pm

@MLD; exactly. So, really, what you are measuring is the CPI since then, and also the average income.

Both are very flawed measurements.

When you go the pump, and pay $60 to fill up, you don't say, gosh, I have it so good my great-grandpappy would be jealous. You bitch like a bike racer about how much it costs.

Articles like this are just excuses to talk about road pricing rather than the easy, sensible and fair alternative of just raising the gas tax. It also avoids the issue that a large percentage of gas tax revenue isn't being spent on roads.

Interesting article from the UK. They found the UK gas tax was heavily subsidizing the rest of the government (b/c it is so high) and letting a private firm road-price would save money. Reverse argument, same lobbyists.

by charlie on Jul 6, 2010 4:27 pm

While I think MY is generally right that Paris supports more cafes due to ts higher densities, I think his use of the 9,776 people per square mile is misleading. Paris is more uniformly dense than DC is. There are no Parisian Spring Valleys or Chevy Chases to bring their density number down. A more relevant statistic would be the area density around any one particular triangle park. Sure, it helps to have widespread density to support a particular cafe, but the density immediately around it is probably more significant to it's success.

by Reid on Jul 6, 2010 4:46 pm

Paris also has very few 2-story homes, and (from what I remember) virtually no single-family dwellings.

I was actually thinking about this the other day. DC and Paris are in some ways very similar, and in others, we're worlds apart. (It wouldn't hurt if we looked at each other and learned a few lessons -- even though Paris has uniformly better transit options, the roads there are terrifying)

by andrew on Jul 6, 2010 4:53 pm

Anyone know how many of those triangle parks are NPS controlled vs. DC Park controlled?

by jeff on Jul 6, 2010 4:58 pm

Also, according to the New York Times article itself, "But the one big caveat in all the calculations is private schooling. If the city dwellers decide to send their children to private school Â— say when their children hit middle-school age Â— that expense would instantly make the suburbs a bargain."

by Miriam on Jul 6, 2010 5:02 pm

@Jeff: Smart commenter! All those triangles (since L'Enfant's day they have been called "reservations," and each is numbered) are National Park Service, except for the very few triangles where DC engineered a land swap to gain some measure of control or responsibility over the triangle.

If you know of a triangle, or reservation, that deserves a cafe, get to work engineering a land swap then getting the local ANC and BZA on board to reprogram it for commercial / retail.

If you know of a triangle, or reservation, that is in a residential neighborhood, then for God's sake, leave it alone and in the hands of the NPS! If it is swapped to DC government, in my experience, no agency of government (and certainly NOT DC Parks and Rec) will take control of it, because no DC agency or department has a budget for maintenance of that triangle.

The triangle shifts from the tender care of NPS to some kind of limbo where nobody in DC government feels responsible for park upkeep.

by Trulee Pist on Jul 6, 2010 5:44 pm

I'm going to assume the title pays some homage?
http://xkcd.com/54/

by Bossi on Jul 6, 2010 6:02 pm

@ah: People in the suburbs tend to live in bigger houses because space is cheaper in the suburbs - so basing the comparison on price makes a lot of sense. My 2 cousins were raised in a 2-bedroom condo on the Upper East Side. Had my aunt and uncle ever made the move to Westchester, they probably would have bought a 3 or 4 bedroom house. A houshold's "needs" are often determined by price (just look at all those folks on House Hunters buying 4,000 sq foot houses - nobody NEEDS 4,000 square feet, but if they can afford it they'll take it).

by Esmeralda on Jul 6, 2010 6:05 pm

I missed the article on the Vermont transit cutting prices. Bravo. Brave experiment.

However, it may take some time for news of a lower fare cut to seep into people's minds. And rail is different than buses.

by charlie on Jul 6, 2010 6:10 pm

letting a private firm road-price would save money

Really? I've got a river in Bolivia* to sell them!

Jes my way of saying maybe we've had enough privatization for awhile.

*Note: Existence of potable water is neither implied nor promised.

by ThresherK on Jul 6, 2010 7:56 pm

While gas prices remain relatively low, it is a perfect opportunity for Congress to reauthorize a transportation package that reinvests in American transportaton infrastrucutre. States should also increase their transportation taxes and implement bicycle registration fees dedicated to bicycle infrastrucutre. Maintenance of our existing infrastructure must be a priority over expansion. A modest 15 cent increase in the gas tax would help to bring in line with inflation and would finance the next generation of infrastrucutre projects. This should go hand in hand with the creation of a national capital budget that would separate government operating expenses from capital expenses, allowing for a balanced budget and vast economic prosperity. The first step is to elect a new political leadership that values economic prosperity and the future.

by Cyrus on Jul 6, 2010 9:52 pm

Re the density piece: The statistic that Matthew is quoting for Paris is on wikipedia, and specifically says that the land area "excludes lakes, ponds, glaciers > 1 kmÂ² (0.386 sq mi or 247 acres) and river estuaries." The effect of this is that the density of Paris appears higher than it actually is. DC's density would be higher, too, if you took 600,000 residents yet excluded the arboretum, Mall, tidewater Anacostia, and Rock Creek Park from the calculation. No doubt Paris' density is higher, but the comparisons made in this blog post are unfounded.

I'm getting a little peeved at bloggers' failure to present their statistics accurately. First the IBM "commuters" piece that doesn't measure commuters, and now a "density" piece that doesn't measure density. Matthew Yglesias should know better!

by Mark on Jul 7, 2010 12:32 am

Compare the lifetime earnings of a child who is educated K-12 in a decent suburban public school system vs. one who is educated in the public school system of any major US city.

Even if you control for race, income, etc, the differences will be stark and will more than make up for the higher cost of living in the suburbs.

by urbaner on Jul 7, 2010 11:04 am

@urbaner

If you have a citation that does control for race, income, etc, I'd love to see that study.

by Alex B. on Jul 7, 2010 11:05 am