Job Sprawl

Posted on by Andrew Smith
more sprawl
Suburban Sprawl in Florida, photo by .res

This recent paper from the Brookings Institute’s Elizabeth Kneebone on so-called “Jobs Sprawl” is both interesting and slightly maddening. The “Jobs Sprawl” analysis is an attempt to measure the percentage of jobs in an employment area located near downtown (within three miles of the “center city”, defined arbirtrarily), sort of near downtown (three to ten miles away) and not at all near downtown (ten or more miles away). The paper notes that since the last study, in 2001, more jobs are being located outside of downtowns nationwide.

Seattle ranks as the tenth most “decentralized” major employment center, that is, the major employment with the tenth highest percentage of jobs located ten miles or more from the city center. In 2006, the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue metro area had approximately 1,461,291 jobs, and 19.1% were within three miles of the center of the city, 24.8% were between three and ten miles away, and 56.0% were more than ten miles away. Seattle is also “rapidly decentralizing”, since the number of jobs being created more than ten miles away from the “center city” has grown much faster than the number of jobs within three miles of the heart of the city.

While that’s interesting, I have a serious problem with this analysis in that the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue metro area has more than one downtown. Any job downtown Tacoma or Downtown Bellevue, since both are more than ten miles away from Third and Seneca or whatever is the center of Downtown Seattle, are “decentralized”, which means “job sprawl” according to Kneebone. And similarly any job in the University District is more than miles away from that point and is thus not centralized or decentralized. Having many centers may mean Seattle is “decentralized” – in fact that may be the very definition of “decentralized” – but that’s a pretty crummy definition of “jobs sprawl”. A job in North Bend is sprawled-out, a job in Downtown Tacoma or Downtown Bellevue certainly is not. 

The Austin Contrarian has some other problems with the study, including a problem with the three and ten mile ‘polls’ used.

King County Funds Its Own Projects

Posted on by John Jensen

Sometimes we hear about Seattle and King County getting all of the transportation money from the rest of the state. Of course this sort of politics of resentment we might expect from the rest of the state, but is it a fair criticism? No:

By the most comprehensive measure, for every $1 King County residents contribute in taxes they’ll get a buck back through investments by the state, county and cities in the county between 2004-2017.

Pew, that’s a relief! I’m sure Rep. Roach is over it by now.

Olympia vs. Sound Transit

Posted on by Frank Chiachiere

This post originally appeared on Orphan Road.

In most normal, semi-sane democracies, politicians see something popular and trip over themselves to get behind it. “There go my people, I must find out where they are going so I can lead them,” goes the old saying.

Indeed, as one examines recent light rail successes in the American West (Phoenix, Salt Lake City, Denver), a pattern emerges: the state governments in all these cities saw their role as a willing partner to the urban transit agency. They chose to help it, to foster it, not to thwart it at every possible turn.

But as Andrew documents in great detail, this is simply not the case when it comes to our state representatives and Sound Transit. You’d think they would have got the message by now that their constituents love Sound Transit (“North Korea-style margins” is one of the funniest phrases I’ve read in a while) and want more of it. Bizarrely, this has not been the case.

When East Link is finally built out, and the ST2 map is complete, the resulting constellation of connected stations will resemble nothing so much as an extended middle finger, pointed South toward the capitol building that tried endlessly — and failed — to strangle it in the crib.

Amtrak Stimulus plus HSR Preview

Posted on by Andrew Smith
Niantic River Railroad Bridge
Niantic River Bridge, photo by DM Coxe

The Associated Press reports that Amtrak is spending $50 million on projects in the Pacific Northwest. The majority, $35 million, will go to a new maintenance facility and a new storage and employee building near King Street Station. You can see the full list nationwide list, totaling $1.3 billion here at Amtrak’s website.

The bulk of the money nationwide, 57%, is going to the Northeast Corridor Acela line. The most expensive project on the list is a $100 million bridge over the Niantac river in Connecticut. The current bridge is not aging well, and replacing it is the only way Amtrak can maintain its current 100 mph speed there. $40 million is going to a new commuter rail tunnel between New Jersey and New York.

Later this month, the Federal Railroad Administration will release a plan documenting how they plan to spend the $8 billion in high speed rail cash from the stimulus package. A couple preview videos below the fold:

Continue reading “Amtrak Stimulus plus HSR Preview”

Is the Problem Auto-Dependency or Suburbia?

Posted on by John Jensen
Atlanta. Photo by Flickr user Nrbelex.
Atlanta. Photo by Flickr user Nrbelex.

Where someone lives is often a deeply personal choice. Sometimes it’s not so much personal as circumstantial (drive-til-you-quality) or temporal (no traffic! [not yet, anyway]). So questioning where someone lives is destined to create contention — we all know that.

If I criticize a portion of Bellevue’s cul-de-sac development, a commenter is just as likely to deride my urban elitism as seriously analyze the serious consequences of that development. And true, Seattle itself is hardly the best example of perfect development. We can’t get density on major rail corridors without seeing “threatening” images of Hong Kong.

Read on after the jump…

Continue reading “Is the Problem Auto-Dependency or Suburbia?”

I-90 Move Just the Latest

Posted on by Andrew Smith
Capitol Lake
State Capitol Building, Olympia

So State House Speaker Frank Chopp may want to take a billion or two from Sound Transit. What’s new? The legislature has been going after Sound Transit money for years now, and this is just the latest attempt in a long line of attempts. I’ve been writing about the state’s transportation funding troubles for two years now, and much of this story will be familiar to long-time readers. Whole history (as I see it) below the fold.

Continue reading “I-90 Move Just the Latest”

Goldy: Chopp Behind R8A Shenanigans

Posted on by Martin H. Duke
Frank Chopp
Frank Chopp

Update: Andrew points out that Ben made a fairly similar point two weeks ago.

As we’ve reported on the R8A saga, we’ve focused on the agency of Mercer Island Representative Judy Clibborn, based on her sponsorship of various legislative items, past statements skeptical of Link on I-90, position as chair of the House Transportation Committee, and service to a constituency that has a vocal minority opposed to light rail.

Today, however, Goldy at Horsesass reports that the ultimate culprit may be House Speaker Frank Chopp (D-43rd), in an attempt to raid Sound Transit funds to build his preferred (expensive) SR 520 bridge option.

I can’t say anything intelligent about Goldy’s sources in Olympia, but I can add that the political economy of this makes a lot of sense, in spite of the North Korea-style margins by which Prop 1 won in Chopp’s District.  After all, you have a fairly large number of voters and interest groups clustered around (or with a view of) the Montlake interchange, and 100% of them care very strongly about what that interchange looks like while having little regard for costs incurred by the state.  Moreover, a larger constituency just wants to get the SR520 bridge done, and the more money that’s thrown at the project the quicker that’s going to happen.

Against that, you have a relatively diffuse group in the district that’s excited to take light rail to the Eastside.  If this kind of thing had flown under the radar, a delay to East Link may very well have been framed as Sound Transit incompetence, while important 43rd district interests would have gotten their goodies.  All in all, it’s a win-win for Chopp and a loss for regional voters and taxpayers who want a comprehensive transit system.

Goldy’s right, however, that any shakedown of ST by WSDOT is a straight transfer of dedicated transit funds to roadbuilding, and should be viewed as such.