Can I Get a Ride?
According to a recent NPR report, "Growth and Transportation," the Triangle population will increase by 120,000-150,000 people within the next ten years, as "one of the fastest growing metro areas" in the country. The specific area of concern is Raleigh, where the current transportation system is predicted to collapse if burdened with the aforementioned population growth. What are Triangle planners saying about this potential fiasco?
Mitchell Silver, Raleigh's Director of Planning, hopes to ease some of this burden by linking Raleigh to Chapel Hill by transit by 2020. Although one can travel between these two places now using the TTA system, it is far from being an express ride.
Another suggestion is to follow the example of Charlotte, whose citizens actually agreed to a tax increase in order to support a rail system. More than one planner seems to agree that Charlotte is home to some serious promising practices relative to transit solutions.
Suggestions vary from placing streetcars in downtown Raleigh and absorbing the population growth, to a downright refusal of allowing this growth to occur. The latter group seems to argue, "If you build it, they will come...so stop building."
I'm interested to know the thoughts of you Fellows who know much more than I about Urban Planning and Transportation. Do you foresee an addition of more than 100,000 people to the Triangle as having the potential to bring about a transportation collapse?
Last, if water shortage continues at this rate or worsens, I'm not sure that the transit system will even be our top priority in 2020.
Mitchell Silver, Raleigh's Director of Planning, hopes to ease some of this burden by linking Raleigh to Chapel Hill by transit by 2020. Although one can travel between these two places now using the TTA system, it is far from being an express ride.
Another suggestion is to follow the example of Charlotte, whose citizens actually agreed to a tax increase in order to support a rail system. More than one planner seems to agree that Charlotte is home to some serious promising practices relative to transit solutions.
Suggestions vary from placing streetcars in downtown Raleigh and absorbing the population growth, to a downright refusal of allowing this growth to occur. The latter group seems to argue, "If you build it, they will come...so stop building."
I'm interested to know the thoughts of you Fellows who know much more than I about Urban Planning and Transportation. Do you foresee an addition of more than 100,000 people to the Triangle as having the potential to bring about a transportation collapse?
Last, if water shortage continues at this rate or worsens, I'm not sure that the transit system will even be our top priority in 2020.
posted by Erin at
9:10 AM
4 Comments:
Great questions Erin.
I recently attended a talk called, "Blueprint for the American metropolis" by Bruce Katz, a researcher at the Brookings Institute. His point was that the US is increasingly becoming a nation (in a world) of Cities.
The speaker was adamant that creating good public transit connections, probably rail, that operate on a regional scale would be a key aspect of keeping our cities competitive in the international economy, and that, in fact, the FEDERAL government should play a key role in making sure cities are effectively connected by cutting edge transit systems.
I think the Triangle area would be remiss not to implement a regional-scale, high-speed transit system, especially in light of anticipated growth. The good news is, with increasing population comes increasing viability for transit! (More potential customers, for one thing.)
I disagree with the perspective that we simply "shouldn't build" to prevent the population from growing. I think the key is, to build the right way. In this case, that means, among other things, building more DENSELY. Density is what can really facilitate great public transit. (As a simple example, consider the differences between NYC and LA - compact Manhattan versus the sprawling OC - and which has America's greatest subway system!? Hint: Not LA).
Supporting an intercity rail system will require more from Raleigh than just putting in new transit infrastructure; but orienting development around the lines (in planning we call this "TOD - Transit Oriented Development"). If people can easily access the transit system from their home or destination, they are much more likely to use it!
I know Raleigh is currently updating their comprehensive plan, but this issue of intercity transit really drives home the need for not just city-by-city, but coordinated regional planning in the Triangle.
Interesting stuff. Since I'm a hit-or-miss NPR kind of gal, I missed this great-sounding story, but I did happen to hear about this on one of the Triangle news stations the other night. The image that they showed was a pretty impressive span of both extended bus service as well as a light rail system linking the the cities and RTP together. It's a great idea - one that could make transit in this area much easier to handle (and much easier on the environment, hopefully) - but it could also make this city more marketable.
My hope is that along with the current planning that would need to happen in order to actualize these plans for transit, that there is a long-term plan for what (and how) to do/deal with the folks who might be more attracted to this area than before. We learned last Monday about the issues dealing with growth and no plan in terms of disaster management, and I hope that there is a long-term plan for growth and development that supplements this transit system development to ensure that the Triangle can grow *smarter*.
As many of you know, this is a topic near and dear to my heart. You can see an overview of TTA's regional plan, along with its status at their website What new to the area don't know is that an attempt to bring rail to the triangle failed in 2005/2006 for a variety of reasons.
One of the main reasons was that they could not project sufficient ridership to make the numbers work for the federal government. This gets into a chicken and egg problem -- how do you increase density without transit stations and how do you increase ridership without density. As a possible solution to this, TTA may enter into an agreement with Cherokee Investment Partners to build dense nodes, as though the train was already coming. That way, when TTA resubmits to the federal government, they will be able to project more riders.
Transportation is just one symptom of the unplanned growth problem in the triangle. Wake County public schools, once some of the best in the country, and a significant reason people moved to the area, are now hugely overcrowded. This is due to a lack of coordination between planners and the school board. Perhaps our MPA fellow could speak a little to the poor organization of this setup?
Haha no pressure...
A disconnect often occurs between planning and implementation at the local level for a few reasons. As mentioned last week, local governments are often focused on the day-to-day. Because of the annual nature of the budget process, it can be difficult to plan strategically without guaranteed funding.
A second issue is the low level of sophistication with forecasting techniques. Human beings are unfortunately less predictable than say, a simple organism. When school systems, for example, are trying to plan for the next year, they are caught in the balance between overplanning, which can cost "unnecessary" money and underplanning, which can lead to problems with service provision. Back to the budget process, we tend to be fiscally conservative when allocating money for projections, for political and practical reasons. When we shoot too low, however, it is difficult to get those extra funds.
However, I do agree that a little coordination can go a long way. My prescription? A little more coordination, a little more applied logic to predictive models and a telephone line between planning and the LEAs.
Post a Comment
<< Home