RIPTA Riders Oppose KP Overhaul

The RIPTA Riders Association has passed along information about a press conference it will be having to oppose the current design of Kennedy Plaza.


~~~~



SAVE KENNEDY PLAZA NOW!

VOICE YOUR OPINION BEFORE KENNEDY PLAZA IS RUINED for BUS RIDERS!!!

5 PM, Tuesday, August 5th, the Ripta Riders Alliance is holding a press conference on the plaza between the RIPTA terminal building and City Hall.

The event will call attention to the problems the Kennedy Plaza redesign and construction is causing bus riders and other Plaza users.

Despite the hype from officials and private developers, RIPTA's $2.4 million redesign will make conditions worse for passengers! Permanent bus stops will be moved to less convenient locations, half of the bus lanes at Kennedy Plaza will be permanently relocated, congestion for buses and cars will increase, and the heated system that automatically melts snow in the Plaza's bus stops will be eliminated.

Officials ignored the rights of the public to have real input in the redesign of Kennedy Plaza.  After this year's construction, there will be worse changes later if we don't speak up now.  Please join us at this press conference so the voices and opinions of RIPTA patrons will be heard!!

Join us - at 5 PM, Tuesday, August 5th on Kennedy Plaza across from City Hall!!



~~~~



(Me again)

I personally have mixed feelings about the KP Design. The initial plans to enliven the space looked like a mixed bag to me. I did like the sidewalk extensions, the idea of people sitting in a public square, the addition of trees, moveable chairs and tables, etc. The architecture critic at the Projo wrote a good piece talking about how this initial design by Union Studios was dropped (full disclosure, Union Studios helps work with us on Park(ing) Day, but my only in to the Union Studios drop was having read the Projo. I haven't heard anything directly.) 

I don't necessarily think it's the end of the world to put some buses on Exchange Terrace, although I do think the current set up during construction, where the buses are all over downtown, is onerous. 

However, I think in order for it to make sense to have the buses around the whole square, Washington Street at KP has to go car-free. Otherwise bus riders trying to cross are going to have to make a choice between being safe crossing traffic and being able to make their bus. We also, more than anything, need to consolidate a lot of our routes into simpler ones that are more frequent, so that transferring becomes a convenience to help us connect to all points, instead of being the chore that it is today.

I also worry that having so much money put into capital improvements for KP without thought into maintenance is a problem. We have basic things that are not taken care of at Kennedy Plaza that wouldn't cost much to fix, but which are not handled because of the fact that funding boosts tend to be structured towards capital needs rather than operational ones. For instance, the building closes early everyday. The bathroom is closed for at least two hours at lunch time for cleaning, but when you go to it post-cleaning, it's not clean. There are no soap dispensers in the men's room (can't speak for them women's room, but I imagine the same). The bubbler finally got cleaned after I asked and asked and tweeted embarrassing photos to RIPTA staff, but the mouthpiece is still stained, giving an uninviting image to those who want water. It's these little things that make using RIPTA either nice, or unpleasant. I don't see how we're going to fix these things this way.

Anyway, I would say I'm probably more supportive than not supportive of the RIPTA Riders' views, but I'd like to offer those caveats.



~~~~


West Side Map for Park(ing) Day

It's super exciting to see the West Side map for Park(ing) Day up! It's nice to see that protected bike lane. . .


You can sign up for a parklet at the webpage.

~~~~

Waterfire Should Get Bus Lanes


Bus lanes, Chicago.
Regular readers may remember that I asked Waterfire director Barnaby Evans last year if he'd ever consider cordoning off some parts of South Main and Memorial for temporary bike lanes, an idea that came to me when I realized that the traffic congestion of Waterfire made biking very safe but very unpleasant. Waterfire actually supports such an idea, or at least they did the last time I spoke to them. The reason it hasn't happened yet is that the city's emergency services have claimed that this would cause severe traffic jams, and that not moving cars through the area would be dangerous in the case of an emergency.

My response was to point out that wide bike lanes are perfect places for emergency vehicles, since no cars are in their way. And I'm backed up by experiences from the Netherlands, where biking expert David Hembrow has seen the gap between American and Dutch emergency responses. Still, it seems like this hasn't been on its way to happening, public safety be damned.

But how about bus lanes? It occurred to me coming back this weekend on the 60 from Newport that bus service is severed by Waterfire in a number of places, and that the remaining streets are so clogged with cars as to make taking the bus feel like a joke. Considering that the mission of Waterfire is supposed to be communing with the river and its natural beauty, this seems like a problem. Using Waterfire to demonstrate the usefulness of right-of-way transit in a temporary way could be a really great way for the city to advance an idea that is generally misunderstood by the public.

I'd like to propose three things:

1. We need some kind of congestion pricing for Waterfire. It doesn't have to be a huge charge, or even be calculated strictly on what the market cost of driving it. It could be $1 flat fee for the night. If you want to drive in the downtown of Providence, you have to pay $1, in addition to whatever parking fees.

2. We should take one of the two lanes on S. Main, one from S. Water, and one lane in each direction from Memorial to make temporary bus lanes. Of course, I'd like to see some kind of bus lanes emerge in parts of the city in general, particularly on N. Main. But Waterfire is a special situation of unusually high traffic congestion, and in order to make the bus system function, and to help relieve that congestion, we should have bus lanes.

3. The money from the congestion pricing should go to RIPTA to extend some of the statewide bus service. It might not make sense to extend every line, but we should be able to pick a few lines that have the potential to carry more passengers. I think the 60 is a good target, because it really carries quite a lot of people anyway (almost always standing room only). What not double the frequency of the 60 on Waterfire nights, but charge a fee for drivers entering the city? Other candidates for extended bus service could be the 54 from Woonsocket, or the 66 from Narragansett/Kingston (during the school year). For some of these routes, money would be better use to extend the span of service later into the night than to increase frequency, but for the 60, service is already pretty late.

I haven't thought of an exact detailed mechanism for charging people. One idea I have is to just put the fee into parking. We do still have a lot of free parking around downtown, and we could charge at least $1 for people to park in those spots. More likely we should charge much more. This would act as a congestion charge without needing to have tolls set up at all the various entrances to downtown. But if someone has a better idea for how to levy this charge, I'd like to hear it.

Alternatively, if people find that using the fee to extend transit is too much of a stretch, we could just extend the money to Waterfire in reduced charges for set up, ultimately to be passed along to customers in either more Waterfires or cheaper food, etc. I prefer the RIPTA funding route, and think it makes more direct sense (you use a road charge to pay for transportation-related expenditures). But I could go either way.

~~~~

How to Tax Parking (And How Not To)

I want to thank Brent Runyon of the Providence Preservation Society for bringing this study by VTPI to my attention. I've been thinking a lot on my own about how to tax parking in Providence, and this study gives a lot of insight into what to do--and what not to do.

The long and short of it is that it's politically easiest to tax parking on dedicated lots, rather than to do a "per space" tax on all parking, but this way of taxing parking has problems. We might be tempted, for instance, to tax the lots in downtown Providence but not tax the lot attached to, say, the Whole Foods, because our instinctive thought would be that though we don't like a surface lot next to a grocery store, it's much better than a bare lot serving nothing but parking alone. 

The problem comes with the fact that the lot parking attached to businesses is free to customers and employees. Of course, it's not actually free. It costs money which is passed into lost wages or higher prices. But to the worker or consumer, it appears free. When the price of commercial parking, i.e., the lots downtown that charge per hour, becomes more expensive without putting an equal burden on these other parking lots, it gives a stronger incentive for businesses to include free parking into their design as a benefit to customers or workers. This is not what we want.

What's more, this problem already rears its head in other ways already. As I pointed out in a piece in Eco RI News and The Urbanophile, Providence's smallest (by area) businesses produce the most revenue for the city per acre, while those that appear to be the anchor businesses often produce much lower revenue per acre. Fertile Underground, whose building (with apartments above it) is valued at $750,000 is worth much more per acre than the Waterman Whole Foods, valued over $2 Million, because FUG only takes up  0.2 acres, while the Waterman Whole Foods is much larger (Note: We couldn't even get reliable data from the city on the taxable value of the N. Main Whole Foods, which has even more parking, but my guess is that in absolute terms the building is worth more, and that in per acre terms it's probably worth a great deal less). Even the African Market we chose off of Cranston Street, which was in a dodgy neighborhood and perhaps wouldn't even appear on the radar of city officials, was worth more per acre than the Whole Foods (I'm not trying to pick on Whole Foods here as a "corporate" or "non-local" business, either. This is about building design--the Chipotle on Thayer Street is worth about the same as the Fertile Underground building, but takes up half as much space, making it worth over $7 Million per acre. The Fertile Underground, actually, only has about four parking spots in the back of it for apartment dwellers, but it often occurs to me as I'm taking out the trash there that a whole other building of the same size could fit in that space.)

So, when we set a parking tax, it should be per parking spot. This is a fair tax, because businesses are free to choose whether the cost of parking is worth it to them in a market, or if they'd like to trade some of that cost away for greater infill development. As this study shows, it's hard to make this argument politically, because on the face of things most people assume that they've already paid their fair share for parking, and that a tax on it is some kind of special arm-twisting by a big government conspiracy. But in reality, what's happening is that large frontage businesses with lots of parking are taking up a great deal more in resources from the public--everything from extensions of plumbing, road wear and infrastructure, lost tax revenue from potential development, and so on. In the extreme cases, mostly outside of Providence, we have instances of bus lines like the 54 or 66 being required to go off-route to take people into parking lots and to the door at a Walmart or Stop-and-Shop, and this also is a public drain, taking valuable fuel, vehicle wear, and paid driver time away from running a more efficient route.

Providence has very high property taxes, and is fourth in the country for commercial taxes. It also has a considerable gap between rental property taxes and homeowner taxes, making apartments less affordable. So taxing parking to produce a dividend to lower property taxes is one of the smartest things we can do. A parking tax is fair in a market sense because it puts a value on things that are actually consumed by drivers. It's fair in a lefty-socialist sense because it allows funds that are currently being used to prop up car ownership to be repurposed--either through an expanded market for housing, lower prices on rents; or even in expanded services, such as better spending on schools. It makes sense in an environmental sense because it helps us to achieve green goals. And at its center is the notion that we should build more cool stuff in our city to make it a more attractive place to live.

Let's make sure it's a per-space tax, though. This study shows the importance of that.

~~~~

Become a Sponsor of Park(ing) Day

Donate, or these gentlemen will come. . . pay you a visit. . .


Park(ing) Day is upping the ante this year, bringing not just parklets, but the first-ever protected bike lane in the state, from Dean Street to Tobey on Broadway. As some of you may remember, we've been advocating for Broadway to lose one side of its parking to provide for a 14' two-way protected bike lane, which would still provide 4' of space for new trees on the street, pedestrian islands for RIPTA riders, and other improvements. The temporary protected bike lane will be just unidirectional in order to be logistically easier to set up. Next to the temporary bike lane will be parklets.

As you may imagine, there's a huge cost to this. We have leftover grant money from the Narragansett Bay Wheelmen that we're putting towards some of the design work, but we'd also appreciate your support! In addition, we have to pay for permitting and advertisement related to the event, which is taking place throughout Downcity and the West Side.

$500 Sponsorship - The PARK(ing) Boot
 Logo on all publications for event
 Logo on rhodeislandasla/parkingday website
 Logo on sign at PARK(ing) Day reception
 Logo on parklet signs
 Mentions on all media blasts
 PARK(ing) Day t-shirt

$250 Sponsorship - PARK(ing) Authority
 Logo on all publications for event
 Logo on rhodeislandasla/parkingday website
 Logo on sign at PARK(ing) Day reception
 Logo on parklet signs
 PARK(ing) Day t-shirt

$100 Sponsorship - PARK(ing) Enforcer
 Logo on rhodeislandasla/parkingday website
 Logo on sign at PARK(ing) Day reception
 Logo on parklet signs
 PARK(ing) Day t-shirt

$50 Sponsorship - PARK(ing) Officer + Logo on sign at PARK(ing) Day receptionName on parklet signs
PARK(ing) Day t-shirt

$25 Sponsorship - PARK(ing) Meter Maid
Name on sign at PARK(ing) Day reception
Name on parklet signs

$12.50 Sponsorship - PARK(ing) Meter Feeder + Name on sign at PARK(ing) Day reception Name on parklet sign of your choice

Transportation Alternatives Committee Meeting

Barry Schiller would like you all to attend the upcoming Transportation Alternatives Meeting. I'm going to make it my personal mission to bug and cajole as many people as I can to show up--so beware! I'm coming for you!

Barry says: 

The Transportation Alternatives Committee meeting at 6:30pm on Thursday, July 24 at the DOA building. 
Though Sue and I are on the TAC to speak about this, they are used to us, so I urge others from the bike community to come and show support for Transportation Alternatives and bike programs, both on-road (part of complete streets, signage, lanes, sweeping, traffic safety enforcement...)  and off-road (e.g.  to get paths to the core cities & Narragansett Beach, make connections, Aquidneck...)   Remember, public comment is allowed at the start of the meeting and on any transportation topic at the end.
Please come to the meeting! 

Great Island Perfect Example of What's Wrong with RI Transportation.

Point Judith is currently a parking crater because of poor 
transportation and land use planning.
I'm interrupting the regularly scheduled reminiscences on my hometown to come back to the subject of Rhode Island, and talk about the lack of debate going on about the highway trust fund. We basically have two sides: the rightwing says "let it burn", and the "left" (if you can call it that) says "keep things the same". Both sides are being fiscally irresponsible, and both sides are being inequitable, so neither is really supporting the core ideals of right or left. The Rhode Island congressional delegation belongs to the "keep it the same" camp, and is pushing an effort to fund the highway trust fund so that we can continue to road build in much the same silly way that we always have. 

I give you Great Island Road, Narragansett.

Great Island Road is a local bridge to low density housing near Point Judith. The Rhode Island congressional delegation has been celebrating the work being done to fix the Great Island Road Bridge using federal highway trust fund money. To me, Great Island Road is emblematic of what's wrong with the trust fund.

First, this is a local road. It's as local as it gets. It serves a residential-only area, carrying no through traffic at all. There's no reason for federal funding to be supporting this. In general I would say some kind of tolling makes more sense for roads. On this one, I might even go as far as to say that property taxes are the best way to recover the cost of the bridge, because the users of the bridge are generally the same exact people as the owners and renters in the homes. But in any case, the cost of the bridge should be localized. Having used federal funds to fix this bridge, we should now find a way to recover that money through some kind of local charges, and pass that funding into better transit for the area.

Other roads and bridges around this area carry more traffic, but supporting them through the trust fund doesn't make sense either. Point Judith is now a huge parking crater due to the number of cars that come to it during the summer months, but in the fall and winter, and even into early spring, the Point is desolate. Route 66 of RIPTA runs to meet the ferry, but is very infrequent. Having a localized Route 66 along with tolling on the bridges would make sense as a way to pay the costs of the road infrastructure, reduce car use, and help to support more frequent transit. 

By a "localized" 66 I mean focused on South County. The 66 currently runs roughshod all over the state to get between Point Judith and Providence, but doesn't serve any particular point efficiently because it tries to serve everywhere--including many rural and exurban locations poorly suited for transit. It's long route also makes it impossible to run frequent service between denser points of interest. URI students have a notorious problem of getting into DUI related incidents, and I know from having worked on the Block Island Ferry as a bartender that a good number of the people getting off the boat are not in their best condition to drive. It makes more sense to have a ten minute frequency bus hitting only a few points--Peacedale, Wakefield, URI, and the train station--from Point Judith, rather than having a bus that snakes through parking lots, trying to carry service into West Greenwich and Warwick before going to Kennedy Plaza. Service to Providence would be better organized through the MBTA station at Kington, which should be the last stop for a viable 66. With frequency, this transfer won't be a problem.

Another important change should be putting better bike access onto Route 108. As a dauntless biker, I commuted each day along 108 to work, but many would not. The route is far too wide for its low usage during most of the year, and is only full of cars and congested in the summer due to poor transportation and land use planning. In the winter the existing Kingston Bike Path should be plowed and salted. 108 could certainly get protected bike lanes to help to remove many drivers from the road. The current excuse for not salting and plowing the Kingston Bike Path is that it would harm marshes, but this has the same ring to it that not putting bike racks at the Statehouse in order to protect the "historic character" of the sidewalks has. We plow and salt the large stroads we've built through this community, and the salt ends up in the wetlands through runoff. We should do what we can to make year-round biking comfortable.

I understand that the Tea Party's "let it burn" attitude toward the country is destructive, but the Democratic "stay the course" route on the highway trust fund isn't good enough. And Great Island Road should be an example of why. Rhode Island's delegation in Congress generally has the right positions on environmental concerns when they're specifically targeted, but somehow they continued to not understand the interactions of other things (like road spending) with these policies. There's an irony to Sen. Whitehouse's celebration in particular. Just as I pointed out in a previous post, the senator tells us each week to 'wake up' about climate change, and then is constantly rushing the door to support whatever road project he can. 

The appetite for cognitive dissonance is amazing.

~~~~