Automotive Transportation

Green Metropolis – A Book Review

Green Metropolis - By: David Owen

Last Thursday, I purchased the book Green Metropolis, written by David Owen. This book was an incredibly well thought out, well researched book. Contrary to the popular held opinion that ‘being green’ involves CFLs and recycling, Owen argues that the greenest city in America is not in Maine or Oregon, but rather New York. In fact, he argues that New York City is the greenest city in America. I was confused too, at first, because the image that I (and most people) have of NYC is a dirty, concrete jungle full of traffic jams and smog. According to Owen’s research, despite the dirty nature of NYC, the city uses less energy per person than any other city in the USA. He uses gasoline as an example and compares NYC to Vermont. Most would agree that wehn you think ‘green,’ you are thinking about something that looks like Vermont: trees, clean air, clean water, etc. According to Owen’s statistics, Vermont residents, on average use 545 gallons of gasoline per person per year, whereas Manhattan residents use only 90 gallons of gasoline per person per year.

It is an interesting theory that the more compact a city is, the more energy efficient it is. There are many examples in this book that I think are important lessons for area, especially since the light rail will be opening next year and we want to expand it and we want it to succeed. Owen talks about light rail. He references it in multiple places. First, in order to be successful, he reinforces the fact that the area served by light rail (or any transit system) needs to be dense.  He references a specific density of seven people per acre. This gives us something to think about if we want to have a regional mass transit system. Hampton Road’s overall density is .625 people per acre. Of course that includes rural counties such as Surry and Isle of Wight. Norfolk’s density is 6.82; much closer to the 7/acre number referenced by Owen as essential for successful transit.  When you consider that there are many places in Norfolk that are not ever going to be ‘dense’ (such as the 1300 acre Norfolk International Airport), we really do have a good start. Virginia Beach has a little bit to go. Their density is only 2.67 people per acre. Granted, half of the city is rural, we will give them the benefit of the doubt and give them 5.4 people per acre. That takes into consideration that most of their people live above the self-imposed ‘green-line.’ In the past few years, they have made great strides increasing density. Town Center is a good example. The recently proposed redevelopment of the Newtown Road ‘Strategic Growth Area’ is another good start (also an attempt to capitalize off of light rail without officially supporting it). We must continue to make the corridors around the light rail lines and proposed light rail lines more dense. I specifically emphasize proposed because if we can make these corridors dense now, it will be easier to get funding and ridership once they are built.

Another thing that Owen’s emphasizes in his book is that, in order to make density and transit more effective, we have to stop catering to cars. If we keep building new roads and highways, we are only reinforcing the automobile’s ease of use. If it is cheaper and easier to drive to work than use transit, why would you bother? Instead, we should use a combination of tolls, gas taxes, congestion pricing, etc. to make driving more costly and less inviting. The proceeds from these revenue streams could be used to expand the transit system. We have to remember, though, that while we want to make driving more uninviting, we do not want to make transporting goods more costly, which would only raise prices of everything and hurt the economy. Truck traffic could face free tolls, lower diesel taxes, or designated lanes (these lanes would be removed from regular lanes, increasing congestion and making car travel even more uninviting). I am not saying to do this overnight, but it is certainly worth it. With a denser area that focused on efficient transit rather than wasteful suburbanism, Hampton Roads would be more likely to compete with other areas.

These are just some of the ideas that would be useful in creating a more efficient, more environmentally friendly metropolitan area. I strongly suggest that everyone reads this book. Especially those who identify themselves as environmentalists. Current ‘environmentalism’ is destroying the planet. Hybrid cars are terrible ideas and only firm up and strengthen our dependence on oil. Read this book. No matter who you are, you will gain something. No matter who you are, your opinions on environmentalism will change.

…in the long run, a car’s fuel gauge is far less significant, environmentally speaking, than its odometer. In the same way that life in Manhattan is inherently energy-efficient, whether or not residents consciously try to conserve, life in the suburbs and beyond is inherently wasteful, no matter what kind of cars the residents park in their garage, or how assidously they swap incandescent lightbulbs for compact fluorescents. It’s miles traveled, not miles per gallon, that make the difference. A sprawling suburb is a fuel-burning, carbon-belching, waste-producing, water-guzzling, pollution-spewing, toxic-leaking machine, and, unlike a Hummer, it can’t be easily abandoned for something smaller and less destructive. We’ve spent a century erecting our way of life. Now we must reconfigure it.

-Excerpt: Green Metropolis – By: David Owen

Money for Highways

Everyone agrees that most of Hampton Roads’ most congested roadways are part of the Interstate System. These include Interstate 64′s HRBT and Interstate 264′s Downtown Tunnel. This also includes the need for the Third Crossing, which, for the most part, would take the name of Interstate 564. This also includes the Berkley Bridge and the High Rise Bridge. (On a side note, Virginia has more Interstate Highway Drawbridges than any other state. Hampton Roads alone has 25% of all Interstate Highway Drawbridge)

Most would also agree that the region’s highways are also important to the local military facilities including Camp Peary, Yorktown Weapons Station, Fort Eustis, Langley AFB, Norfolk NAS, Little Creek Amphib Base, Fort Story, Oceana NAS, and Dam Neck. I’m sure I missed something, but regardless, everyone has seen how much traffic is lessened by a holiday where the Navy does not have to report. Completely ignoring the toll that military traffic takes on our highways, my point is that if something happened to some aspect of our system, the Navy would be crippled. I’m not talking about an attack or something like that, I’m talking about a severe traffic accident. Or perhaps a hurricane. I know that during a hurricane evacuation all lanes of traffic are directed away from the area. How are the military supposed to get to the base to take the ships out of harbor?

Do you see my point? I think that the continuing neglect of our highways has even greater national security complications than any other threat you can think of. What good is a top-notch Defense Department if they can’t get to their bases? The “National Interstate and Defense Highways Act (1956)” renamed the highway system to the “National System of Interstate and Defense Highways.” Eisenhower even announced it as the “National Defense Highway System.” In fact the “National Interstate and Defense Highways Act (1956)” specifically states that the System’s “primary importance [is] to the national defense.” With all this in mind, I think that it is fair to say that, with such a National Security importance, Hampton Roads has been cheated out of the funds necessary to maintain the acceptable level of service that is required to maintain a quality Highway.

The Navy was opposed to a bridge being used as part of an expanded HRBT because they were afraid it might be destroyed in an act of terrorism and would leave all the ships stuck in the harbor. What good is a clear exit if the personnel required to operate the ships are stuck in traffic? Not only as Hampton Roads or Virginia residents, but as United States citizens, we should require Congress to bring our National Security up to par by fixing our highways. China, which is technically a ‘developing country,’ is using American highway and traffic engineers to design a world-class highway system. Meanwhile, America is utilizing Chinese … cheap crap, drywall, and substandard steel to effectively undo our position as a world power.

NOTE TO CONGRESS: FIX IT

"Parkway's Prospects Dim"

That was the headline in Sunday’s ‘Hampton Roads’ section of the Virginian-Pilot. It is also a headline that I have hoped to see for a long time. I think that even the leaders of Virginia Beach are starting to admit that the project is not exactly a viable option now or in the future. The road would destroy hundreds of acres of wetlands in multiple fragile watersheds so that area residents have the possibility of shaving 7 minutes off of their commute. That’s $385 million per minute saved. Is it really worth it? If the residents are that concerned about the need for a highway, they would have purchased a home closer to an existing highway. There was a resident quoted in the article as saying, “I don’t think it will ever get built.” Thank you EPA. Thank you for sparing the taxpayers the cost of this incredibly overpriced parking lot.

More Money for a New HRTA

I think it is agreed by everyone that 86 years is too long to wait to finish our roads. The first attempt at the HRTA was to utilize the following taxes/fees:

  • $10 automobile inspection fee
  • 5 percent tax on automobile repairs
  • Grantor’s tax of 40 cents for every $100 of assessed value when selling a home
  • Motor vehicle rental tax of 2 percent
  • One-time vehicle registration fee of 1 percent
  • Annual vehicle registration fee of $10
  • 2 percent gas tax

The hardest thing to think about is what you can charge for without making people feel put out or overwhelmed. I think that any fee/tax needs to benefit those who drive cars that wear lightly on the roads and cost those with heavier vehicles more. Virginia should raise overall registration fees for vehicles. Right now, there is only an $11 dollar difference in fee cost for registering a small car ($38.75) versus a a heavy truck (7,500 GVW – $49.75). Compare this to someplace like D.C., where the same comparison shows that a small car costs $72 and a similarly sized truck costs $300. Don’t get me wrong, if VA raised our rates that high I think a revolution would be necessary, but we should go higher. These rates would be applied statewide. Hampton Roads and Northern Virginia’s collected fees would go to our respective Authorities. The rest of the state’s collections would go right into the capital budget of VDOT. While we are re-evaluating fees, we should consider a discount for fuel economy. I was thinking 30 mpg would be a good start. This would encourage people to buy more fuel efficient cars which are usually lighter and wear less on the roads.

The next source of revenue is one which makes most people cringe. I am talking about the gas tax. Nobody wants to pay more for gas. Interestingly, those that oppose it the most are usually the same people that either drive gas-guzzlers or drive hours each way for their daily commute. I know that it will be tough. For me, for you, for everyone. We need to raise the money. I think an additional 5 cents would be a good start. It would put VA right around the national average (we are below it now) and well below the national maximum. If we had raised the rate when the prices started going down, the effect would have been near unnoticed.

The next touchy subject that nobody wants to talk about but most kind of know in the back of their minds that they would be beneficial in the long run: tolls. Hampton Roads has a number of proposed Public/Private Partnerships brewing right now. Each of them has something in common. Tolls. If our area could fund more road projects like the Chesapeake Expressway, we might get further. For those of you that may not know, the CE was funded by a loan from VDOT and by bonds, both of which are repayed through tolls. These tolls don’t need to be high. They can be simple 5 or 10 cent tolls on heavily traveled thoroughfares. A toll as low as 5 cents would only cost the average commuter $1 per month. As low as this seems, a 5-cent toll on, hypothetically, the I-64/264 interchange, could generate $6 million per year. Or a 20-cent toll on the Midtown Tunnel, which would generate $5 million/year. A 5-cent toll on the HRBT, the Midtown, the Downtown, the High-Rise, and the MMBT could generate a combined $7 million per year. All of these are hypothetical of course, but if we looked at small tolls that wouldn’t hurt anybody but would collectively raise enough money to matter, we might be able to get somewhere. After our projects are built and paid for, we could keep the tolls low (around $.05) and perhaps only toll in one direction, so that we can continue to pay for maintenance. All of these tolls would be collected completely electronically and could be billed monthly or paid online.

All of these proposals are hypothetical. They are just a sample of what we should do. We can no longer rely on state or federal money to pay for our roads. While I find that deplorable on multiple other levels, we have to keep thinking about our future. Remember: No Transportation = No Economy = No Jobs. Our roads are as important as water and electricity.

A New Hampton Roads Transportation Authority

The HRTA was created as an effort by the General Assembly to give Hampton Roads what it so desperately needs: a dedicated funding source for major highway construction. However woefully inadequate this funding was, it was a start. Using the latest cost estimates (and including the HRBT), there are an estimated $14.6 billion worth of “high priority” road projects in Hampton Roads. The HRTA would have raised an estimated $170 million per year. It stand to reason then, that without outside help, the total amounts would not be covered until the year 2095. By then, of course, we will have reverted back to farms and bartering because of a lack of connectivity.So we have tow problems. First, how can it collect money and second, how can it collect more money.

The reason the initiative failed was due to the lack of research by the GA. They should have known that a non-elected body could not tax. There are two possible solutions to breath life back into the HRTA. The first is that the GA could impose the fees and taxes and then earmark them to be devoted to the HRTA. The GA, however, being made up mostly of those that lack the testicular fortitude of a flea, refuse to take leadership of anything above cashing their paychecks. The second and slightly more plausible solution would be to create an HRTA board that we actually got to elect. If each city’s residents got to elect the representative to serve on the board, then theoretically, it would be constitutionally acceptable for it to levy taxes. The problem with this, however, is that the board might deteriorate into a bunch of whiny kids wanting to get the most for their city. I think a practical solution would involve making sure that the mission plan of the board is written clearly enough to make it impossible for them force one issue over another. They would also need both an end strategy and a process to get other projects added to the end of the list.

The second issue is how would they collect more money. I will save that for the next post.