 |
| Program for today's event; Picture is thanks to Juan's Nexus One. |
NOTE: This will be fully updated by Monday. For now, these are my notes. Enjoy!!!
8:58AM --Richard Katz is at the podium to kick off the day. He notes Art Leahy is late, and quips about Art's affiliation with USC (Art Leahy, the CEO of Metro, often talks up USC and plays the fight song).
9:01AM -- Richard says that he got a phone call from a realtor who said that he has gotten visits from homebuyers who are looking to buy in Cheviot Hills because of the proximity to Expo.
He also is talking about the proposed development at Pico & Sepulveda, which makes me think of the song
9:05AM -RK mentions that people may be opposing new projects because of fear of unknown; fear of planning mistakes in the past. And now, we are listening to Measure R shout-out number one. I'm seated next to Chris S., who helped BTR rally for Measure R in Fall 2008 as a freshman. We're happy.
Also RK is alluding to projects which benefit people not necessarily in their backyards, like closing the 710 gap -- suggests that this would improve the highway network throughout LA county, like the 4-level (because there would now be a way to circumvent downtown and 110), the 101-405 interchange, and some others
9:15AM - RK suggests that accelerating projects has Costco-like benefits (concrete in bulk!) and economic stimulus. He's made a shoutout to UCLA's Bruins for Traffic Relief, and quipped that USC students didn't do what we did (which was organize ourselves to convey our support for Measure R and our frustration with traveling around the city.)
Someone is refuting RK's support for the project at Pico and Sepulveda. Literally. She is commandeering the event under the guise of a planner. RK is on the spot. Lets' see how he responds.
9:16AM - RK defends Metro, educates the crowd that it is LA City and not Metro that makes specific land use decisions (Metro influences, but does not approve individual projects). Points out the economic stimulus effect from a project of the scope of Pico/Sepulveda.
Bob Toole asks about the 710. RK says that there may be a tunnel option, conveys importance of finishing something. Gotta look at the importance of building critical infrastructure. What do we need in order for the County to work better?
9:25AM -- RK says that transparency and expediency are things that Metro and legislators need to work on for Measure R projects. I think it's interesting that he mentions that he and Metro have been working on the Measure R website because it's as though RK really, really wants the audience to know that Metro is doing a LOT to help/educate the public on what it is doing with Measure R dollars. And yet, there will still be some demystifying to be done, like how cities are spending their allocations. The City of Los Angeles, for example, might be using Measure R money to make up for shortages in Prop A and C money. I don't know if you'd see that on a Metro Measure R website...
(OH and RK makes a shout-out for bikes. See, Dr. Cahn, nobody's heartless here.)
9:30AM - Dean Gilliam says that Brian Taylor and Art Leahy will be talking about solutions for traffic congestion; Randy Crane and Bob Cervero will be talking about how we get around (Bob and Randy; I love them); Donald Shoup (aka Shoup-Dogg) and Robert Poole will talk about using pricing for reducing congestion; and the Honorable Antonio Villaraigosa and the Honorable Michael Dukakis will provide the keynote remarks.
This is going to be a really long morning for live-blogging.
9:36 Brian Taylor (BT) is now giving us a lesson on congestion:
These are the points he made in his presentation:
- Traffic congestion is not as it seems
- Why is LA so congested
- Compact, transit-oriented development will increase congestion - that may not be a bad thing
- Only 3 ways to substantially reduce congestion (but may not be politically popular)
BT says most people hold contradictory views on the causes and consequences of traffic. BT makes quip: that people make their opinions known on traffic, since most think they are experts on the subject.
Notes that most transit rich cities also have the most congestion.
Now BT shows us a graph of Portland's congestion -- as transit miles increased is that traffic increased. BT suggests in places where cars don't work at well, transit becomes a more attractive option.
Another refrain: "We would have to double-deck freeways, or get rid of half cars in order to cut congestion"
Conundrum: Traffic is recognizable, but not intuitive:
That traffic flows and speeds could increase without adding capacity seems preposterous, but it is true (according to BT) -- hoses don't contract. Basically, with small actions, we could dramatically increase
Speed v traffic density -- Kara Kockleman (UT, 2003): As cars crowd closer and closer (density), speeds slow down greatly.
Speed and flow --When we're stuck in traffic, not a lot of vehicles are getting through. We could be
moving all those cars through at 60mph plus -- if we regulated flow, we can get more cars through.
If we used pricing or some other means to regulate cars, everyone, BT says, would be better off. He suggests that small changes in travel demand can have huge effects on travel time and flow.
2. Why is LA so congested?
We're densely populated (6,237/square mile--highest in the country, higher than New York), and have fewer lane miles per capita.
Angelenos drive less than average, and ppl on relatively few lanes = congestion
3. BT explains why density is not so bad. OOOH snap to that woman who attacked RK for his support of the development at Pico & Sepulveda.
He shows slides of smart growth.
Most densely developed city tend to be most congested.
He insinuates that traffic congestion decreases attractiveness of automobile travel - makes transit travel more attractive...
As population density increases... there is an inverse relationship - people travel way fewer miles per person, and their travel density is highest (SF is 1,000vmt miles/acre) -- so people are traveling a lot less, but because they're all traveling together, there's just more congestion.
He says that smart growth does not make people worse off because it provides residents more options for traveling through congested spaces.
Brian humors me: Good Congestion, bad Congestion
9:50AM: Brian shows map called "localized congestion in Metropolitan LA", and Averate Trip Distance by Neighborhood in Metro LA.
Trends: People who live in densly populated areas make a LOT of trips. People who live in low income areas make fewer trips. Areas with densely populated areas (all factors held equal) make more shorter trips, like at UCLA, Santa Monica, NoHo, Burbank, Torrance - and these are areas that are notorious for being very congested. WeHo, for instance, has a lot of trip making and congestion -- but there's also close uses, and density, and destinations.
Southeast of downtown has moderate density, less compatible uses, etc -- but fewer nearby destinations accessible by foot, bike, or bus.
BT shows some kick-awesome maps. Can't wait to get my hands on them!
4. Ways to reduce congestion.
a) Increase supply and add lots more roads
b) Reduce demand (FLint model, driving prohibitions, traffic calming)
c) Bring supply and demand in line with prices. (Right now, congestion delays increase time "price" of travel until equilibrium is reached; this is grossly inefficiently. This is a deadweight loss because nobody is collecting the revenue)
Must write less. Think more.
10AM: Art Leahy has made it and is speaking!
2. Why is LA so congested?
We're densely populated (6,237/square mile--highest in the country, higher than New York), and have fewer lane miles per capita.
Angelenos drive less than average, and ppl on relatively few lanes = congestion
3. BT explains why density is not so bad. OOOH snap to that woman who attacked RK for his support of the development at Pico & Sepulveda.
He shows slides of smart growth.
Most densely developed city tend to be most congested.
He insinuates that traffic congestion decreases attractiveness of automobile travel - makes transit travel more attractive...
As population density increases... there is an inverse relationship - people travel way fewer miles per person, and their travel density is highest (SF is 1,000vmt miles/acre) -- so people are traveling a lot less, but because they're all traveling together, there's just more congestion.
He says that smart growth does not make people worse off because it provides residents more options for traveling through congested spaces.
Brian humors me: Good Congestion, bad Congestion
9:50AM: Brian shows map called "localized congestion in Metropolitan LA", and Averate Trip Distance by Neighborhood in Metro LA.
Trends: People who live in densly populated areas make a LOT of trips. People who live in low income areas make fewer trips. Areas with densely populated areas (all factors held equal) make more shorter trips, like at UCLA, Santa Monica, NoHo, Burbank, Torrance - and these are areas that are notorious for being very congested. WeHo, for instance, has a lot of trip making and congestion -- but there's also close uses, and density, and destinations.
Southeast of downtown has moderate density, less compatible uses, etc -- but fewer nearby destinations accessible by foot, bike, or bus.
BT shows some kick-awesome maps. Can't wait to get my hands on them!
4. Ways to reduce congestion.
a) Increase supply and add lots more roads
b) Reduce demand (FLint model, driving prohibitions, traffic calming)
c) Bring supply and demand in line with prices. (Right now, congestion delays increase time "price" of travel until equilibrium is reached; this is grossly inefficiently. This is a deadweight loss because nobody is collecting the revenue)
Must write less. Think more.
10AM: Art Leahy has made it and is speaking!
AL says that MTA is facing severe service cuts because the state is defunding transit operations.
Notes from AL's presentation:
Notes from AL's presentation:
- AL explains relevance of north county connector - says that there would be huge benefits to the main basin's air quality if we build that project because then trucks can traverse LA up there. Because so much of the vehicular traffic through the 210 is just trucks and goods movement, there would be enormous benefits to the LA region - but also residents near the 210, and the 710 (up in Pasadena and La Canada Flintridge). And then, maybe, the residents near the proposed 710 tunnel would be more amenable to this project (since it would be only moving local residents and not goods movement).
- AL is talking about congestion pricing (when you spread out the peak, travel speeds increase, and people volumes -- not car volumes -- go up. Yay!)
- Emphasizes that low income travelers on 110 and 10 Express Lanes will receive discounts.
- Shows map of LRTP Public Transportation Recommended Plan. LOTS of projects. Will have to post here soon.
- AL says that soon, you can take the train from Westwood to the Rose Bowl to see UCLA lose to USC. Brian has smiled, good-naturedly put his hand on his head, and shaken his head.
10:25AM: Ryan Snyder (who rocks, btw - bike/ped planner) asks isn't it time for us to stop expanding freeways to add HOV lanes, and painting HOV lanes in existing infrastructure and implementing TDM? Art says that there could be a change in the mind set.
Chris S just asked me what a HOT lane is.
HOT stands for High Occupancy Toll Lane. The idea is that if you're traveling alone (or with a two-person carpool -- some HOT lanes have such high demand that they require you to have THREE people in your car in order to drive through for free), you can PAY to drive in a carpool lane. The price for driving in a carpool lane will vary based on the existing traffic level. So if it is a Friday at the PM peak hour, it'll cost a LOT. (Right now, driving on the 91 Express Lanes for a single carpooler is like $16 -- although I need to verify that number. In contrast, driving at non-peak hours... well, it's cheap.
10:25 Someone says she is opposed to the 710 completion; but wants to learn more about the high desert corridor. AL says that from a contextual basis, the projects can make sense. He emphasizes his understanding of the questioner's situation; says we need to do a better job of defining the problem because is it that there is too much traffic on the 210 as a result of the connectivity to the I-15? Or is the problem is that there's no way to connect to the I-15 without going through LA County's urbanized areas? I think this person is reasonable. She says that the I-15 completion has added more cars to the 210. Fair enough.
Chris S just asked me what a HOT lane is.
HOT stands for High Occupancy Toll Lane. The idea is that if you're traveling alone (or with a two-person carpool -- some HOT lanes have such high demand that they require you to have THREE people in your car in order to drive through for free), you can PAY to drive in a carpool lane. The price for driving in a carpool lane will vary based on the existing traffic level. So if it is a Friday at the PM peak hour, it'll cost a LOT. (Right now, driving on the 91 Express Lanes for a single carpooler is like $16 -- although I need to verify that number. In contrast, driving at non-peak hours... well, it's cheap.
10:25 Someone says she is opposed to the 710 completion; but wants to learn more about the high desert corridor. AL says that from a contextual basis, the projects can make sense. He emphasizes his understanding of the questioner's situation; says we need to do a better job of defining the problem because is it that there is too much traffic on the 210 as a result of the connectivity to the I-15? Or is the problem is that there's no way to connect to the I-15 without going through LA County's urbanized areas? I think this person is reasonable. She says that the I-15 completion has added more cars to the 210. Fair enough.
10:39 -- Randy Crane is up to give his presentation 'Global Transportation problems and research challenges'. But first, a joke: He is the vice-chair of UCLA Department of Urban Planning, and Associate Director of the Institute of Transportation Studies. Brian is department chair and ITS director. Therefore, Brian always goes first; Randy always goes second. Ha, ha, ha. Randy's humor is self-deprecating, which is why I found him so amusing and paid close attention to him and his lectures in class. (I took two classes with him, which many find surprising.)
10:50 --Randy showed us a video twice because he thought it was cool. Emphasizes that there are ramifications for urbanization, including escalating demand for motorization (which in turn means exponential increases in greenhouse gas emissions...+ TRAFFIC).
Also, China wants 30 year plans it can build in three years. "That's not a 30 year plan then," Randy quips. "I tell them they want a 3-year plan. They don't get it."
Tough policy lessons: Every move forward is a trade off; all easy answers are off. Travel behavior can be harder to manage than land use, and managing land use is harder than transport investment.
Randy says that the Chinese are dead serious apparently about understanding all three facets noted above. (Randy has been doing a lot of research there.)
10:58AM - Randy's on the hook to introduce Bob Cervero, but he tells us to read Bob's bio in the brochure and instead tells us that Randy's an ultra-thoner (runs in 100-mile races.).
I mean this sincerely: Randy is FUNNY.
11AM - Bob's presentation is entitled "Resourceful Mobility: A Global Tour". He plans to focus on three things: Getting the prices right; a more market-oriented & plural transport sector; and mobility, livability, and prosperity.
1) Singapore's Three-Tier Model --
Bob points out the urban density in LA is dysfunctional - it does not work very well for transit; the density in Curtitiba is different because of the alignment of their density (it is concentrated), where as Sao Paolo is concentrations of density. Bob says that this took a vision to plan for this. My question is, really? How is Curitiba so different from the SFV? I think I might need to get Bob to clarify. however, Bob points out that the Valley urban design induces frequent, high vmt trips.
He also explains dense, mixed-use corridors, and how they can be well-served by transit.
11:15AM -- Bogota's urban regeneration/transit == driven by economic development. Saw incentive for less congestion, more safety = economic.
Yes, there was a lot of infrastructure constructed for the middle class, but Bob points out that Bogota also did a lot of bike/ped infrastructure, which also helped the poor.
TDM!!!
11:20AM --Showed urban regeneration and BRT in Seoul, Korea - visionary leader - reclamation of inter cities. Tearing down 6-mile freeway in five years. Tourist attraction now. This project shows 2 to 5% reduction in air temperature, compared to a street two blocks away. I think this is amazing.
To account for the redistribution of trips from these kinds of projects, Seoul built mad crazy amounts of BRT capacity.
Marriage of TOD & Green Urbanism --Bob is now studying what this wouljd look like. He talked about visiting Madgar, and how they required him to record his VMT from his taxi ride so they could figure out how to off-set it.
11:24 -- How do we pay for all of this?
Hong Kong - extracts value added to nearby real estate by transit by capturing this in property development, shopping, retail, concessions.
Tsing Yi Station -- this is a real estate / economic development strategy that Juan will explain better here later.
Visions need Visionaries -- Bob shows photographs for these great leaders. We will eventually be these leaders too!!
Randy's joke: Bob is a prolific scholar. He has an article for every slide, a book for every seven of those slides (you just saw).
11:36AM -- Randy says something legit: Reminds us that constituency building is very important, that occurred in Curitiba, and we cannot exaggerate how hard it was to do all of this.
Panel 3: Using Prices to Reduce Congestion
Donald Shoup is speaking now, providing an introduction to Robert Toole. But first, he has managed to a) make a quip on parking and b) tell us that perhaps some of us were conceived in a parked car. ZING!
Bob's presentation: HOT Lanes 2010: A US Overview
10:50 --Randy showed us a video twice because he thought it was cool. Emphasizes that there are ramifications for urbanization, including escalating demand for motorization (which in turn means exponential increases in greenhouse gas emissions...+ TRAFFIC).
Also, China wants 30 year plans it can build in three years. "That's not a 30 year plan then," Randy quips. "I tell them they want a 3-year plan. They don't get it."
Tough policy lessons: Every move forward is a trade off; all easy answers are off. Travel behavior can be harder to manage than land use, and managing land use is harder than transport investment.
Randy says that the Chinese are dead serious apparently about understanding all three facets noted above. (Randy has been doing a lot of research there.)
10:58AM - Randy's on the hook to introduce Bob Cervero, but he tells us to read Bob's bio in the brochure and instead tells us that Randy's an ultra-thoner (runs in 100-mile races.).
I mean this sincerely: Randy is FUNNY.
11AM - Bob's presentation is entitled "Resourceful Mobility: A Global Tour". He plans to focus on three things: Getting the prices right; a more market-oriented & plural transport sector; and mobility, livability, and prosperity.
1) Singapore's Three-Tier Model --
- Fixed fees (vehicle taxes & surcharges) -- fees in order to manage pollution, congestion, and VMT. For instance, there's an island entry/exit fee, and a fuel topping fee (so that ppl can't leave for Jakarta just to fill up their gas tanks; they have to come back with less fuel than they left with.)
Bob introduces us to different alternative transportation options
Carsharing
We don't do a good job of matching vehicles to trip demand needs (i.e.1 person trips with 4-seat cars... matching vehicle with trip purpose). Touts the Zurich case for carsharing, quality of life, and world-class transit.
Bikesharing (Juan asks, where's UCLA's picture -- answer -- soon! We won TGIF funding to pay for our first bike library).
Taxi-like paratransit
Bus-like paratransit in Rio
Philippines: Jeepneys, Jitneys (lower price, lower quality); Toyota Vans (AC, Higher Quality, Higher Price)
Bob points out the urban density in LA is dysfunctional - it does not work very well for transit; the density in Curtitiba is different because of the alignment of their density (it is concentrated), where as Sao Paolo is concentrations of density. Bob says that this took a vision to plan for this. My question is, really? How is Curitiba so different from the SFV? I think I might need to get Bob to clarify. however, Bob points out that the Valley urban design induces frequent, high vmt trips.
He also explains dense, mixed-use corridors, and how they can be well-served by transit.
11:15AM -- Bogota's urban regeneration/transit == driven by economic development. Saw incentive for less congestion, more safety = economic.
Yes, there was a lot of infrastructure constructed for the middle class, but Bob points out that Bogota also did a lot of bike/ped infrastructure, which also helped the poor.
TDM!!!
11:20AM --Showed urban regeneration and BRT in Seoul, Korea - visionary leader - reclamation of inter cities. Tearing down 6-mile freeway in five years. Tourist attraction now. This project shows 2 to 5% reduction in air temperature, compared to a street two blocks away. I think this is amazing.
To account for the redistribution of trips from these kinds of projects, Seoul built mad crazy amounts of BRT capacity.
Marriage of TOD & Green Urbanism --Bob is now studying what this wouljd look like. He talked about visiting Madgar, and how they required him to record his VMT from his taxi ride so they could figure out how to off-set it.
11:24 -- How do we pay for all of this?
Hong Kong - extracts value added to nearby real estate by transit by capturing this in property development, shopping, retail, concessions.
Tsing Yi Station -- this is a real estate / economic development strategy that Juan will explain better here later.
Visions need Visionaries -- Bob shows photographs for these great leaders. We will eventually be these leaders too!!
Randy's joke: Bob is a prolific scholar. He has an article for every slide, a book for every seven of those slides (you just saw).
11:36AM -- Randy says something legit: Reminds us that constituency building is very important, that occurred in Curitiba, and we cannot exaggerate how hard it was to do all of this.
Panel 3: Using Prices to Reduce Congestion
Donald Shoup is speaking now, providing an introduction to Robert Toole. But first, he has managed to a) make a quip on parking and b) tell us that perhaps some of us were conceived in a parked car. ZING!
Bob's presentation: HOT Lanes 2010: A US Overview
- Hot lanes in operation: Seattle, LA, Salt Lake, Denver, Houston, tampa, Minneapolis.
- Summarizes issues, starting with Lexus Lane issues (win-win, common-sense comparisons--giving people choices everywhere but in highway transportation; that luxury cars are only 5% of the users, which hopefully debunks myth that HOT lanes are rich people).
- HOV Eligibility
- Debunks claims "We've already paid for these lanes"
- Most HOV lanes don't work very well over time. Most either have too few vehicles, or too many, and the flow breaks down. This is sooooo true. Just go out to your local HOV lane to try this out today.
- (I wonder how our NIMBYs are doing. It must be like going to a place of worship that is not the one you belong to, because I know these conferences can be a lot like going to church for transportation geeks.)
- Advocates for two lanes - higher thru-puts, convert shoulders, squeeze in lanes by elevating, tunneling,lane narrowing -- which is kind of scary for me, as a driver, personally.
- Rate-setting: Bob notes that elected officials have a hard time understanding variable pricing hard to understand. Prices are set either by an algorithm, or via a published rate schedule.
- Safety (glad that Bob is mentioning this):
- Lane separation (paint, pylons, concrete barriors)
- Accidents at access points (mixed data from HOV lanes, may imply greater use of direct access ramps or flyover connections)
- GHG - Bob says this should not be a problem because free-flow traffic produces fewer GHG than cars stuck in congestion (and we know that the biggest producer of pollution are cold-starts).
- Hot 1.0--Convert carpool lanes, sell excess capacity to non-carpools
- Hot 2.0 -- Expres toll lane selling congestion relief, while providing HOV preference. Question: Which one will ExpressLanes (Metro's demo project here in LA) be providing?
- Bob says that these are profoundly different. Hot 2.0--Average 36x the revenue.
- Advocate for building HOT 2.0 modelneed to add significant new capacity, and pay for it
- Need to 'manage' nearly all traffic
- Enforcement considerations
- Reduced considerably if most of your cars are not paying (if they all have transponders)
- "Synergy" of Hot Lanes and brt -- suggest that value priced lane is equivalent of exclusive fixed guideway, and high speeds are guaranteed because of pricing.
- Emphasizes need for automated enforcemen
- Recommendations:
- HOV3 or higher (Super HOT)
- Integration with regional BRT
- Registered carpools only* (so this would be accommodating to regular commute trips, but not necessarily slugging, aka informal carpool...)
- Charge per mile, per segment
- Flyover connections at principal flow interchanges
- Two lanes/direction where feasible
- Nothing new right now; however, Don is making the case that cruising for parking - compounded by many, many drivers - is a major contributor of congestion within business districts.
- 12:20 -- Showed pricing for SFMTA, and showed illustration for impact of SFpark -- how after SF Park, there would be one open spot in a CBD, and two spots nearby (pricing caused better distribution of parking, like it prices just one more car out of parking in the CBD to a nearby area, thereby debunking the perception that there is no parking, as well as making it possible that people who are willing to pay to park to actually pay...)
- 12:23 -- " Would you rather have free parking and dirty sidewalks or clean sidewalks and paid parking?"
- 12:28 -- Shoup shows a pretty cool slideshow of pictures taken every four minutes with a camera facing parking spaces that are dynamically priced by the Law School. We see mad-crazy turnover in cars, since parking there is $4 an hour.
- Oh oh, Randy has a question. He fully introduces himself, never mind he spoke an hour earlier.
- Shoup says that Pasadena's poor people have benefited from the influx of jobs from new businesses which have opened up since the implementation of its parking policy. These businesses have included restaurants, shops, and....tattoo parlors.
- 12:40 -- John Gahbauer has a question. He refutes Bob's ideas about restricting carpool access into HOT lanes to just registered carpools, asking what about areas where informal carpool are prevalent? Bob says that there are trade-offs; says that if you are going to get a system with high system throughput, that's going to be a favorable trade-off. "You have to weigh one from another."
2 comments:
So awesome that you liveblogged this! It was like we were all there sitting next to you and Juan!
Great resource here. Thanks for doing this Sirinya!!
Post a Comment