Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

CONNECTING THE DOTS

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

No “Shape of the Future” column this week but here is an exercise in connecting-the-dots on the path to understanding the shape of the future.

Yesterday and today WaPo devoted much of the front page to a two part series of great significance.

“Coming of Age: Graying of ‘Suburbs’.”

The stories, maps, graphs, pictures and captions (“Frank Brown, 66, has worked at Hollin Hall Automotive Service Station since 1992. Every morning, he helps Ruth Ann Harvey, 84, up the hill to work. Harvey, whose family has owned the shop since 1960, is behind the register six days a week. The full-service station is a favorite among elderly drivers, who don’t have to get out of their cars to pump gas.” “Rita Turner of Falls Church, seated, whose neighbors call her the Queen Mum, sold her car because she thought she was too old to drive. Now she must depend on others, such as driver Shobha Sahgal, to get her errands done.”) tell a compelling story.

Also see “Shape of the Future” column of 30 July “The End of Family as We Knew It” concerning the demographics of Dooryards and use of the word Household.

(Warning: For anyone who is aware of the importance of understanding of scale of components of human settlement patterns, the use of “community,” “village” and “neighborhood” in these WaPo stories is confusing in the extreme.)

In today’s WaPo Business Section (that is the “how to make and manage money” section) devoted most of the front page to two stories:

“Rejuvenating Loudoun: To Attract Young Workers, County Looks for Ways To Shed the Perception That It’s a Bit Middle Aged” and “Perks Give Area Firms a Silicon Valley Feel: Whether Posh of Quirky, Extras Help Lure Talent To the High-Tech Sector.”

Those who understand what they read at Bacons Rebellion should have no problem connecting the dots to grasp the necessity of Balanced Communities in sustainable New Urban Regions (aka, functional human settlement patterns.)

PS:

A regular reader e-mailed us last week and asked that we outline a simple way those who claim “I do not understand” to grasp the metrics of functional vs dysfunctional human settlement patterns. If this is a case where “you get WaPo but you don’t get it” then Civilization as we know it may be lost because these stories provide a wonderful primer. Here are some thoughts that will be expanded upon in TRILO-G:

Mobility and Access Crisis:

The level of Mobility and Access for those too young, too old or otherwise unable to use an Autonomobile.

(NB: “otherwise unable” includes economic as well as physical limitations. This is important since the percentage of Households that can afford and safely use one – much less more – Large, Private vehicles will decline dramatically as energy costs and vehicle complexity continue to escalate.

Just as alarming is the complexity and cost of the Large, Private vehicle support system as it grows to meet Business-As-Usual demands.)

Affordable and Accessible Housing Crisis:

Percentage who can live in the Community where they are employed. (NB: “Community” as defined in GLOSSARY.)

Helter Skelter Crisis:

Absence of unreasonable subsidies to achieve Balanced Communities. (NB: “unreasonable subsidies” can be defined by democratic processes once all of the location variable costs are fairly allocated.

In addition to the Loudoun stories noted above, See Jim Bacon’s “Bug in the Ointment” posted earlier today.)

EMR

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

10 responses to “CONNECTING THE DOTS”

  1. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Connect these dots: hang proffers on job creation in these congested communities–instead of on houses built–and the dysfunctional human settlement patterns would self-correct overnight. Make Volkswagen pay $36,000 for every new job they bring–instead of giving them the store–to compensate the local governments for the service demands these jobs create congestion would vanish, the cost of living would go down and rural communities starved for development would benefit from the spillage of companies that say ‘no’ to the proffers and look elsewhere. Happiness would reign! Don’t you see, we’re proffering the wrong thing! BKD

  2. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    … and then… shortly after citizen riots in NoVa.. completely blocking the major commuting roads and burning down the new VW headquarters – the GA voted without debate…to replace “Virginia is for Lovers” to “Virginia is NOT open for business – GO AWAY”.

    Shortly after that vote.. in a contentious debate… the NoVa legislators and allies succeeded in passing a law outlawing the transfer of any tax money from Fairfax to other localities…

    Next.. a delegation of local elected leaders requested a meeting with Prez Bush to discuss having the Fed Gov agencies moved to Roanoke…but Sen Byrd of Wva objected strenuously .. arguing for Charleston, WVa….

  3. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Ahh…Larry…my friend! Precisely! The lesson is this, and it is forever: you cannot have it both ways! You cannot have this fabulous economic engine that is NOVA without the considerable downside trade-offs that come with such engines! BKD

  4. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Yes, but how do you measure the level of mobility and access? I think they are two differnt things with two different measures, but never mind. If I want to look up the mobility index for Falls Church, where would I go?

    How can I determine the number of people who can afford to live in the area they work? At what percentage of their income? What if thye can afford it and choose not to? Where do I look up the housing crisis index for Potomac?

    And the real stickler is how do I measure the absense of unreasonable subsidies? Especially if I have to wait until all the locational costs are fairly allocated?

    RH (I Still Don’t Understand)

  5. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re…”absense of unreasonable subsidies”

    huh?

    tell me again which subsidies and why you deserve them..

    re: mobility & access

    we don’t have a mobility & access “problem” for those that ride in Van pools or other multi-passenger vehicles and I especially want to point out that in both urban AND .. RURAL areas that Agencies on Aging… transport the elderly … on a daily basis to medical care, shopping, etc.. via Van Pools.

    Our mobility and access “crisis” is specifically those folks who want to drive the same trip from home to work, every day, in a large SUV – SOLO…

    I would submit that there would be no mobility & access crisis at all if most folks spent most of their trips on most days in a multi-passenger vehicle.

    No all people on all trips on all days… just .. the sweet spot.

    Solution: Provide Prime mobility for those who want to contribute to less congestion by riding multi-passenger vehicles – for free

    .. and charge those that want to do their everyday, rush-hour trips in a solo SUV – their fair share of the cost – that is required to provide the infrastructure capacity that they need – to do that trip.

    This does not mean that everyone is forever consigned to not use their car anymore… as many will imply.

    If the aged folks (and kids) can ride in Vans… and effectively manage the “access & mobility” … crisis (sic) for themselves.. tell me again.. why others cannot also do so?

    so a question to EMR: What IF – there was indeed an epiphany for many folks (shortly after congestion pricing tolls come online) .. and many folks actually start riding.. multi-passenger vehicles.. would your ideas about settlement patterns, access, and mobility be any different?

    .. “absense of unreasonable subsidies” ??? i’m having a brain fart here….

  6. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Absence of unreasonable subsidies wasn’t my phrase: I don’t understand it any more than you do. I really don’t understand how you measure the absence of something: it’s like a negative proof. And of course by EMR’s rule, I can’t even begin until after all the locational costs are fairly allocated, which apperently means never.

    —————————–

    All I asked was how you measure mobility how you measure access, and where to look it up. Seems like a pretty simple question.

    To say in response that we have no mobility crisis if everybody car pools doesn’t answer the question. Since everybody doesn’t car pool the point is moot, anyway.

    And not everyone commutes in a large SUV.

    Again, all I asked was how to measure it and how to look it up.

    But, suppose we define mobility and access as the probability that you can reach your destination in 45 minutes times the number of destinations within that reach. Using a car pool is going to cut at least ten minutes off of that equation. Now tell me how car poolling increases mobility and access.

    I recently contacted four people who live near me and work in my company to consider carpooling, or at least coordinate for emergency purposes. No one was interested in carpooling because of the extra time and inconvenience involved.

    If everone car pooled is a nice if. Now try a realistic goal, like 10% and see what that buys you. (I think the current usage is around 5%.) Figure out what incentive you would have to offer to get that next five percent. Now figure out the rate of return to see if it is worth it. Repeat that process for each five percent increment up to 100%.

    You will find out that the incentives for each five percent will be more and more expensive. The last five percent will probably cost as much as a new highway, because such curves are usually asymptotic to infinity.

    And, Larry, the reason the aged can get by with vans is that they don’t go to work every day.

    Anyway, the car pool lanes are often already jammed, so we can’t see any improved mobility there. According to today’s Post we need 218 lane miles or 78 million new transit riders every year, just to stay even, not to improve mobility.

    Care to guess what the probability of either of those options are?
    But we don’t have to go very far to find 218 lane miles that are barely used. It is only that there are no jobs there.

    All we need is a few new places.

    RH

  7. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    To me it is not about measuring access and mobility but rather it is a personal decision about how you will handle it – and the availability of options to you.

    I do not believe that folks who choose to NOT commute SOLO at rush hour in an SUV should pay for the folks who choose to do so.

    I DO believe that the folks who choose to do so – do have that option – AND that they be prepared to pay their fair share for that higher level of service.

    In other words – let folks choose but let them also bear the consequences of their choices.

    When we have everyone paying the same price – and allow everyone to choose more than their fair share – that’s when we get more demand than what can be supplied.

    We need to let the market determine the supply and demand of access and mobility – like we do with bread, milk and movie theater tickets, etc, et al.

    You don’t need to “measure” access and mobility … the market will do it for you.

  8. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    OK, tell me how many HOT lanes we will have if only the people that choose to use them pay one hundred percent of the cost.

  9. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Anonymous 9:38, We’ll have quite a few HOT lanes. Just look at the plans for the Washington Beltway and I-95. (See our previous posts for details.)

  10. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Yes, but the users will not be paying 100% of the costs of them and the investors will not be taking 100% of the risk.

    RH

Leave a Reply

Read More