Virginia: The Energy Guzzler Capital of the East Coast

WalletHub

by James A. Bacon

Virginia is the 43rd most energy efficient state in the country, which is another way of saying that it is the 6th most energy inefficient among the 48 states included in a national ranking by the number crunchers at WalletHub. The finding is based on the publication’s energy efficiency rankings in homes and automobiles, two of the largest categories of energy consumption. The methodology has lots of limitations but it does provide an interesting place to start thinking about measuring energy efficiency.

WalletHub calculates home-related energy efficiency by tabulating the total amount of energy consumed per capita by residential homes and adjusting for degree days. (Degree days are a measure of how much temperatures vary from a base of 65° Fahrenheit.) Houses in a state like Virginia, with a relatively mild climate, might require less energy for heating and cooling than, say, a state like Arizona, which is subject to scorching heat, but that doesn’t mean Virginia houses are more energy efficient. Adjusting for degree days gets closer to an apples-to-apples comparison. By this measure, Virginia ranked 35th among the 48 states.

The calculation for automobile energy efficiency measures what is essentially the average miles per gallon of the state’s automotive fleet — annual vehicle miles driven adjusted by the gallons of gasoline consumed. By this measure, Virginia also ranked 35th in the country.

The most obvious limitation to this data is that miles per gallon measures the energy efficiency of cars, not transportation systems. You could put every Virginia driver in a Toyota Prius (50 miles per gallon), but if every worker drove solo to their job and racked up 20,000 miles per year, you’d still have an energy-guzzling state. Human settlement patterns that enable people to walk, ride bicycles, carpool, take transit and drive shorter distances to their destinations are more energy efficient, all other things being equal, than human settlement patterns that put everyone in a car and requires driving long distances between destinations. Accordingly, gasoline consumption per capita might be a better measure. (And even that is a rough measure that does not take into account the use of electricity and natural gas as transportation fuels.)

WalletHub’s calculation for housing energy-efficiency is more defensible, although it does not tell us everything that would be useful to know. To what extent does energy consumption in Virginia’s residential housing sector simply reflect a stock of bigger houses? Maybe Virginia has more McMansions than other states! I’ll bet a lot of McMansions have state-of-the-art heat pumps, zone heating and Nest thermostats. But no matter how much insulation and no matter how many Energy Star appliances,  McMansion won’t be as energy efficient as a Manhattan apartment building, even adjusted for square footage, which limits reduces exposure to the fluctuating temperatures of the outdoors. And that gets us back to human settlement patterns. Some patterns are more energy-efficient than others. Virginia’s housing sector may be energy intensive not because of a failure to adopt Energy Star standards but because people are more likely to abide in single family dwellings, which are inherently less energy efficient.

Bacon’s bottom line: Measuring and ranking energy efficiency is a worthwhile exercise. WalletHub at least prompts people to start thinking about these issues. Its methodology is far too primitive to give us much useful information, much less to suggest meaningful public policy solutions. The experts consulted by WalletHub focused mainly on technology solutions — solar photo-voltaic electricity, LED lights and the like — and what kind of government incentives it might take to get people to adopt them. None of them touched upon the role of human settlement patterns. But that’s where the big savings will come from.

— JAB


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

43 responses to “Virginia: The Energy Guzzler Capital of the East Coast”

  1. Re: Lower auto MPG in Virginia…this is what I keep trying to say, with one of the highest car tax rates in the nation, especially in NoVA, there is reduced incentive for residents to go and get an average new car (costing $32,000). I am concerned the car tax hurts the economy and slows down our collective buying of better MPG cars. I know that our NoVA locality leaders feel a high car tax is the secret to good government, but I am not so sure.

    Full disclosure- We own a 2006 Prius

    1. That’s a really interesting point. I have to say, one reason I purchased a used car and have held onto it for some eight years from now is that I HATE paying personal property taxes! This is a classic case of taxes having unintended consequences. It would be great if we could eliminate the car tax (and the state car tax relief). Trouble is, we’d have to replace the revenue with a different tax, which would have pernicious effects of a different kind.

      1. is this a case of the government – picking winners and losers with one of the winners named CarMax?

        however, the tax on new cars – brings in MORE money than the tax on fuel does… true.

        motor fuel – 718.7 million
        new vehicle taxes – 909.6 million
        general sales tax – 936,6 million

        http://www.dmv.state.va.us/webdoc/pdf/tracking_aug14.pdf

        so ironically – the folks who buy new cars – as well as the people who pay general sales taxes – generate twice as much in revenues as the gas tax …
        which… has been .. demagogue over the years in Va in political campaigns to notable effect.. McDonnell beat Deeds in part over the assertion that Deeds would increase the gas tax.

  2. LifeOnTheFallLine Avatar
    LifeOnTheFallLine

    The guy who used a simple line graph and an elementary regression analysis to prove that the racial bias in school disciplinary punishments is calling someone else’s analysis primitive?

    1. OUCH! I have a feeling Bacon is going to continue to hear about this!

    2. “The guy who used a simple line graph and an elementary regression analysis to prove that the racial bias in school disciplinary punishments is calling someone else’s analysis primitive?”

      ” … to prove that the racial bias in school disciplinary punishments …”

      To prove that the racial bias is what?

      Proofreading is such an important step when writing something critical of someone else.

      1. LifeOnTheFallLine Avatar
        LifeOnTheFallLine

        Aww, you still sore from getting waxed?

        Drop your address here so I know where to ship the Johnson & Johnson.

        1. Johnson & Johnson? Wow. Witty. I always wondered what pseudonym David Letterman would use to post comments online.

  3. Virginia may well be the worst of the worst – if you include all measures.

    First – we depend on the Federal Govt for our jobs and economy.

    Then they usually commute to the exurbs SOLO every day because they want a bigger house than is available closer to work AND they do not want to live in neighborhoods closer to work where the demographics are adverse and the schools often suck.

    Every weekday down Hampton Roads way and on I-95 to NoVa the roads are clogged for 3 hours in the morning and 3 hours in the evening of solo driven cars that are often on trips that exceed 30-40 miles one way.

    It’s not that rare even in other urban areas – drive past 2-3 school systems to get to the one they want their kids to go to.

    would people drive less is there were good schools closer to where they work?

    honest question.

  4. Peter Galuszka Avatar
    Peter Galuszka

    And, genuflecting before big business. Virginia has no mandatory renewable portfolio standards to force conversion to wing, solar, etc. That is why Virginia gets only about 6 percent of its electricity from renewables.

    This is also a state that is so anti-tax they had to go through a convoluted sales tax increase just to avoid increasing taxes per gall on gasoline.

    The problem with the author of this post is that while understanding the problems, he is just too dogmatically conservative to embrace some fairly simple solutions — namely, have the government step in and change certain forms of behavior.

    1. Maybe the government should un-do its previous actions that screwed things up in the first place. Putting transportation funding on a user-pays basis would be a good first step. Then we could move on to rolling back zoning codes, transportation subsidies for sprawl, ridiculous VDOT road standards, government subsidies for single-family dwellings and on down the list.

      The problem with the author of this comment is that he never met a regulation he didn’t like.

      1. LifeOnTheFallLine Avatar
        LifeOnTheFallLine

        I disagree that flat user pays is a good step at all, but most of the rest of these are sound ideas. I’m curious which VDOT road standards you find ridiculous, though.

    2. I agree with Peter that VA has somewhat a convoluted tax structure, caused by our top two priorties: (1) tax NoVA harder than the rest of the state; and (2) maintain a facade that the VA is low tax state (which is certainly not true in NoVa anymore).

      I feel NoVA really got whacked in the Transportation Bill because NoVA got higher sales tax and higher gasoline prices, despite the lowered VA gasoline tax. The reason for the higher gasoline price in NoVA seems to be the fact that MD, PA, and DC are all raising gasoline taxes. As I understand it, the marketers try to keep gasoline prices status quo over state boundaries. Bottom line is, we could probably increase gasoline taxes in NoVA by 15-20 cents, and not expect to see too much higher price at the pumps.

      RE: household energy, I agree we could do more roof-top solar and on-shore wind, also I’d do more trash-to-stream as a renewable credit. But I don’t think we have to sign up for the Federal government mandatory RPS system, which I feel may not work when states like MD are forced to spend mega-buck$ to install renewables. The RPS system has worked “OK” in the early years, but that’s because there are so many low cost ways (“loopholes”) for utilities to claim renewable credits with no investment. Some states had great renewable resources (wind in TX for example). Lots of hot air down there apparently.

      1. what tells us that NoVa gets taxed “harder”?

        and yes.. both NoVa ad Hampton got ADDITIONAL taxes that they both wanted and they get the keep them and use them for their regions as opposed to higher gas taxes that go to Richmond and maybe don’t come back to where they originated.

        there does not seem to be any way to satisfy people on this issue.

        it’s damned if you do and damned if you don’t.

        NoVa and Hampton, by the way, are no entrepreneurial power-houses that RoVa feeds on. They’re both critters that suck on the National Teat – both funded by taxes on other people .. including those in RoVa.

        Virginia’s economy is basically based on Federal taxes collected from farmers in Nebraska and convenience store workers in Toledo and spent on Fed govt bureaucrats in NoVa. RoVa just wants their share!

        😉

  5. Road standards that over-engineer the roads, particularly subdivision streets. Adds to the cost, mandates more asphalt than necessary, makes streets less walkable…

    1. LifeOnTheFallLine Avatar
      LifeOnTheFallLine

      I’m inclined to agree with you that our stroads are over-engineered (or at least engineered to a level above the speed desired for those roadways), but I’ve seen little evidence of that in subdivisions to begin with, much less actually being adhered to by developers. Especially keeping in mind that VDOT is required to push snow through them, school buses need to navigate down them, and the general preference for larger vehicles (VDOT had to change their guardrail specs a few years ago because too many vehicles were going over the rails).

      The real loss was that links-to-nodes regulation that got rolled back.

      1. remember also – if you live in 46 other states – that subdivision road, it’s maintenance, it’s snow plowing, etc, belongs to you not the DOT.

        People who live in such subdivision – essentially pay little or no transportation taxes for the rest of the road system because most of what they pay in taxes – goes to maintain and plow their subdivision road and the folks that live in apartments and townhouses (whose parking is NOT maintained by VDOT) – their taxes pay for the external roads.

        by the way – the .5% general sales tax (that is incrementally increasing to a full 1% I believe) – that money is dedicated to road maintenance not new construction.

    2. “over-engineer” ??? when we have high maintenance costs for roads that break up ?

      I’d go with the standard that is most cost-effective and I’d have to see something more than an assertion to believe it.. VDOT scores pretty high on asset management… last time I checked.

      user-fee? how can you have a user-fee when the conservative hypocrites in the Gen Assembly has used that as a cudgel against the Dems ?

      The GOP spent all these years demonizing the gas tax – then the guys that claim to have the user-fee brand philosophy totally violate it by raising other fees instead?

      the BEST user fee was never the gas tax anyhow – it is a TOLL. People hate tolls but not as much as they hate gas taxes and many of the recent polls show two astounding sentiments among citizens. 1. we should increase funding for transportation .. and 2. we are opposed to higher taxes or tolls.

      this is the logic of the travelling public these days – egged on by the no-tax idiots.. who control the General Assembly.

      finally, restrictive zoning does not create exurban commuting – not when the exurbs and urban centers all have the same codes…

      what drives people to the suburbs is that they do not want to live in an apartment to start with – much less one were the neighborhood school is a failure and proves that it discriminates against the economically disadvantaged which in turn means good teachers will avoid those schools like the plague.

      The problem with Jim – is he keeps looking at ideological concepts rather than dealing with the realities… and the realities are simple. People will not willingly live in a neighborhood with a bad school – only those who have no options do that. That neighborhood then becomes one of residents in poverty and all the ills associated with poverty. The city could try to give that land away and people would not want it. If we want to truly talk about settlement patterns – and “restrictions”, this aspect has to be a part of any honest dialogue. Blaming the city for restrictive zoning is bogus.

      1. LifeOnTheFallLine Avatar
        LifeOnTheFallLine

        Over engineering basically means making roads wider than the intended purpose and speed would otherwise dictate. For example, you don’t need to design a local road to highway specs because the amount and speed of vehicles between the two is drastically different.

        1. I’d still like more specifics. For instance, heavy trucks , including moving vans, dump trucks, fire engines , etc use all roads.. and if those roads are not engineered for that weight – damage occurs.

          and if those roads cannot accommodate the SIZE of these larger vehicles – access to structures that need these services may be limited – and that would include school buses.

          I’d like to see smaller-footprint access roads but the reality is that our current vehicles are sized for the larger footprints … not that we cannot change… but you’re going to have t convince the makers of fire trucks, school buses, garbage trucks, etc… to change.

          it’s the size and weight of those trucks that drive standards – whether they are VDOT standards – or HOA standards.

          if you build an HOA subdivision road to lower standards – it’s going to be damaged or will not accommodate existing vehicles sizes.

          right? wrong? what say you?

          1. LifeOnTheFallLine Avatar
            LifeOnTheFallLine

            Last I checked VDOT design standards for pavement depth were dependent on the soil profile of the subgrade, the expected amount of traffic and lastly the presence of heavy vehicles, which are only a consideration if they represent over five percent of the ADT.

            The maintenance issues with subdivision roads getting accepted into VDOT’s network that I’ve been privy to are all because the builder cut corners with doing the base or subgrade propely.

          2. subdivision roads have to be “accepted” by VDOT who has to verify the road bed.

            we are ALSO talking about 600 series secondary roads – that carry things like school buses, concrete trucks and all manner of large heavy vehicles.

            don’t know where you live but secondary roads where I live carry tractor trailer traffic – including logging trucks, fire engines, moving vans, etc.

            if you build a subdivision and you want school bus service or fire service, it has to be built to VDOT specs..

            the question here is are the VDOT specs “over-engineered” not if the developer cuts corners, right?

            I just don’t buy the “over-engineered” idea in the current vehicle environment. If someone wants to say we need to change the standards and ban bigger/heavier vehicles – that’s a debate – but it aint the way things are right now. Right now – a pan·o·ply of vehicles do exist and do expect to travel to homes.. for services and VDOT is responsible for maintaining a road bed that supports such uses.

            again – then can be debate – but the reality is the here and now.

          3. LifeOnTheFallLine Avatar
            LifeOnTheFallLine

            It seems our wires are getting crossed so let me try again…

            Whether they’re over-engineered from a pavement depth perspective is different from whether they’re over-engineered from a pavement width perspective, my impression from Jim’s language is that he was arguing the latter.

            That said, whether the depth of pavement standard is adequate is possibly debatable, but I’m relatively certain it’s derived from AASHTO guidelines, which are pretty robust. Heavy vehicles are factored in, but only if they make up more than 5% of the daily traffic volume. Is that an appropriate threshold? Maybe, maybe not.

            I said what I said about the failure do to cutting corners to say that evidence of failure is not evidence that the standards are failing. Yes, VDOT is supposed to inspect the road bed and everything, but the reality is the agency is not allowed to have more than 7,500 employees and that means sometimes developers will do an asphalt lay and leave only a desirable patch of road bed visible before an inspector can get there. It means they’ll lay the road and if they’re well connected enough complain about how onerous ripping it up would be to someone higher up the ladder and get it swept in regardleas. It means those roads have traffic profiles that have changed 30 years since being built.

          4. Width of travel lanes is also a hard standard. Vehicles and trailers are manufactured with regard width standards and if have ever met an oncoming tractor trailer on a secondary road – you instantly know this.

            Having said that, there ARE some state roads that do not have those widths but they are far fewer in number than the vast majority of roads.

            again – are we discussing the actual standards that are required or VDOT’s inability to monitor and verify? Jim is talking about required standards – in his usual vague way.

            the question is – are these standards – which you point out – probably national in scope – AASHTO – “over engineered” for Virginia or even nationally.

            Call me a skeptic but then Jim drop kicks these issues with scant evidence..

            I’m not pro road or anti-road or pro dense-settlement pattern or not – I tend to think in pragmatic terms as to what is – not what we’d like but if we are going talk about changing existing, then I do require more substantial evidence than advocacy…

            the reality is that millions of vehicles are manufactured with size and weights that are guided in large part by engineering standard – adhered to by most DOTs .. and to say that they are “over-engineered” needs some specificity and evidence… because we’re not going to change those standards because someone wants to build denser settlement patterns..

            right now – today – standard sized vehicles are built according to highway specs…

      2. LarryG:

        I am not sure why you find it astounding that people want more transportation funding but don’t want to pay higher taxes and tolls. As I recall, the total percentage of the Virginia budget allocated to transportation is 11%. 89% of the money taken in is spent on something else. Are the tax dollars being allocated in accordance with the priorities of the citizenry? That seems like a fair question to ask.

        The other question involves taxes that are not being taken in. In Virginia the General Assembly sees fit to grant company-specific and industry-specific tax breaks for many reasons. One of the main reasons is that the favored companies and industries give the General Assembly members campaign donation, gifts and jobs. Two years ago Chap Petersen (one of the rare honest and competent General assembly members) proposed legislation that would require these company-specific and industry-specific tax breaks to expire after 5 years. The General Assembly could extend the tax break but would have to specifically vote to do so. Sensing a potential reduction in donations, gifts and jobs (for themselves) the Imperial Clown Show in Richmond quickly quashed Petersen’s common sense legislation. One wonders how much additional money would have been freed up for transportation if that bill would have passed.

        The only thing astounding is that we expect the politicians for life being elected from gerrymandered districts in our General Assembly to give a rat’s ass about their constituents.

        Virginia is not a low tax state. There is no reason that we can’t have adequate transportation given our existing taxes. Unfortunately, Virginia’s state government is a low competence, low ethics operation. That’s the real problem.

        1. ” I am not sure why you find it astounding that people wanter more transportation funding but don’t want to pay higher taxes and tolls. As I recall, the total percentage of the Virginia budget allocated to transportation is 11%. 89% of the money taken in is spent on something else. Are the tax dollars being allocated in accordance with the priorities of the citizenry? That seems like a fair question to ask.”

          well if you were really serious about it instead of just wanting more services and not pay more.. right? I don’t find it astounding.. I find it not surprising and amusing.

          I mean heck .. I’d like to have NO gas tax and twice as many roads.. wish for what you want ..right?

          “The other question involves taxes that are not being taken in. In Virginia the General Assembly sees fit to grant company-specific and industry-specific tax breaks for many reasons. One of the main reasons is that the favored companies and industries give the General Assembly members campaign donation, gifts and jobs.”

          geeze Don.. you seem so very reasonable at times and then go completely off the rail at other times. taxes pay for services.. no matter what companies and lobbyists do.. or not.

          “Two years ago Chap Petersen (one of the rare honest and competent General assembly members) proposed legislation that would require these company-specific and industry-specific tax breaks to expire after 5 years.”

          I would agree but these incentives is terms of proportions are spit in the spittoon.. they won’t increase state revenues in any significant way.

          ” The General Assembly could extend the tax break but would have to specifically vote to do so. Sensing a potential reduction in donations, gifts and jobs (for themselves) the Imperial Clown Show in Richmond quickly quashed Petersen’s common sense legislation. One wonders how much additional money would have been freed up for transportation of that bill would have passed.”

          one of the biggest tax breaks that Va provides is the one of not taxing health insurance as compensatory income.

          “The only thing astounding is that we expect the politicians for life being elected from gerrymandered districts in our General Assembly to give a rat’s ass about their constituents.”

          well.. you’re down in the dumps on govt – and actually so am I but it is what it is.. and it’s way ahead of what they have in 3rd world countries.

          “Virginia is not a low tax state. There is no reason that we can’t have adequate transportation given our existing taxes. Unfortunately, Virginia’s state government is a low competence, low ethics operation. That’s the real problem.”

          in terms of transportation taxes – is Va a low tax state or not? where do we rank?

  6. re: ” … Heavy vehicles are factored in, but only if they make up more than 5% of the daily traffic volume. Is that an appropriate threshold? Maybe, maybe not.”

    you have to define with more specificity what “heavy” means.

    so the standard is not 5% of any weight – but 5% that do not exceed a specified weight – .. it’s not that big a deal unless someone makes a wholly arbitrary statement that roads are “over engineered”.

    at that point – if they want to provide some evidence that we build roads too wide and too deep and they last longer than they should because we have truly made them wider and stronger than they needed to be… etc..

    but the reality is that Europe tends to over-engineer and we tend to under-engineer and it requires more frequent maintenance tempos and more rehabilitation … the secondary roads with truck traffic – break up – especially in winter and even the interstates start to see damage on the edges and on the interfaces between the panels…

    In the internet age and the just-in-time logistics chain – age – we are seeing more and more trucks not less.. Even in a uber-dense settlement pattern – virtually ever single item in that residence – go there by truck.

    I think sometimes we forget that…. trucks are what makes our little worlds go around…

  7. dense settlement patterns look like this:

    http://youtu.be/SCbzEhk3E4o

  8. Fall Line is right… my concern is mainly with road widths. I’m all in favor of building quality roads that don’t require a lot of maintenance. The problem is the width of the roads. Wide roads are just another element that pushes houses and buildings further apart and reduces walkability. VDOT rules really give the New Urbanists fits. They like narrower roads that are easier for pedestrians to cross; narrower roads also reduce traffic speeds, which pedestrians also find reassuring.

    1. Jim – I hear you!

      now tell me this is “walkability”:

      [youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCbzEhk3E4o&w=500&h=312%5D

      1. Looks like a truck to me. Not sure how “walkability” enters the picture.

        1. Jim – are you looking at the “walkability” of the city streets?

          can you explain how this obviously dense settlement pattern leads to more narrow streets and more opportunities for people to walk and cross streets, etc?

          I think the world you seek – is not the one that exists right now in many – well established, long standing urban areas.

          trucks and big vehicles, buses, etc. rule the streets of New York..

          1. I’m confused. What does this have to do with the dialogue we’ve had in this thread? I don’t know how to answer the question.

          2. ” Maybe the government should un-do its previous actions that screwed things up in the first place. Putting transportation funding on a user-pays basis would be a good first step. Then we could move on to rolling back zoning codes, transportation subsidies for sprawl, ridiculous VDOT road standards, government subsidies for single-family dwellings and on down the list.”

            then:

            ” Fall Line is right… my concern is mainly with road widths. I’m all in favor of building quality roads that don’t require a lot of maintenance. The problem is the width of the roads. Wide roads are just another element that pushes houses and buildings further apart and reduces walkability. VDOT rules really give the New Urbanists fits. They like narrower roads that are easier for pedestrians to cross; narrower roads also reduce traffic speeds, which pedestrians also find reassuring.

            and then I posted a video of an obviously dense settlement pattern – the roads that serve it .. and the “fitness” of those roads to serve walkability.

            this is part of a continuing theme that blames VDOT / DOT for forcing road standards that are not dense-settlement-pattern-friendly.

            what the video shows – is a pretty normal and routine urban transportation corridor – that is anything but pedestrian-friendly.

            My bigger point here is that density means more people and more people means more groceries and more services which in turn require trucks and buses… and other large vehicles.

            it’s a bit of a conundrum because even though density is more energy efficient – it’s also more intensive use of infrastructure – and everything a person gets – is brought by truck.

            VDOT did not cause the truck traffic – people did – but VDOT has to provide the access infrastructure – which has to be more than “narrow” – walkable roads..

            Is what you seek – in settlement patterns – realistic given people’s dependence on trucks to supply their needs?

    2. LifeOnTheFallLine Avatar
      LifeOnTheFallLine

      So for the lowest volume road for a subdivision road the minimum curb-to-curb distance is 28′ and it assumes that there will be cars parked on either side, so assuming 5′ car width on each side it cuts down each travel lane 9′, which is fine as far as that goes, but then you have to look at your turning radii and whether service vehicles will be able to adequately navigate and turn around.

      If you want to drop the road widths – which is arguably fine – there have to be other design restrictions to make sure these subdivisions are accessible. If you want to cut down the street width but make some streets one way to compensate, that would be fine. If you want to cut down the street width but make the basic design standard something closer to the Fan or Highland Park to allow for straight line navigation, fine. If you want to narrow the roads and ban on street parking, fine. But relaxing the width standards without applying other design criteria is going to result in these Byzantine subdivisions with narrow roads that are going to be almost impossible to push all necessary traffic through.

    3. Ahhh. The wizards at VDOT (under rumored urging from John Foust) recently narrowed Walker Road just south of Georgetown Pike in Great Falls. The project took months and was rumored to be materially over budget. When it was done nobody seemed able to understand why it was done. Foust eventually mumbled something about walkability at a meeting I am told. Unfortunately for the man who would like to be the next Congressman from the 10th District the old road determined where the buildings were built. Narrowing the road did not bring the buildings closer together. From all appearances it also did not make the area more walkable. What would have possibly made the area more walkable would have been sidewalks. Sidewalks going up and down Walker Road and sidewalks going up and down Georgetown Pike.

      A real step forward for walkability would be for VDOT to stop maintaining roads in populous areas which don’t have sidewalks. If the people living along those roads feel they have the right to thwart increased walkability by objecting to sidewalks then they can pay for the road maintenance as pat of the price for holding a veto on progress.

      1. ” A real step forward for walkability would be for VDOT to stop maintaining roads in populous areas which don’t have sidewalks. If the people living along those roads feel they have the right to thwart increased walkability by objecting to sidewalks then they can pay for the road maintenance as pat of the price for holding a veto on progress.”

        I don’t know about Fairfax and NoVa rules for subdivisions but down our way, sidewalks are not required.. and so we have many, many subdivisions without sidewalks where people walk and kids play in the street….

        some of the upscale subdivisions have asphalt “trails” but they vehemently opposed the public using them OR them being connected to adjacent subdivision walking trails. I visited a friend over the weekend who cited the trail as a security vulnerability to his subdivision because it went to the boundaries next to other developments.

  9. charlie Avatar

    What about the energy consuming, glare producing continuous highway lighting that VDOT insist on in most onf NOVAs highways. They should take a note from Maryland and only illuminate the junctions. Cars have lights for a reason and today’s lights are much better than in the past.

    1. I found this site to be interesting:

      Urban or rural: Which is more energy-efficient?

      http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/translating-uncle-sam/stories/urban-or-rural-which-is-more-energy-efficient

      but here’s the quandary that I have. Personal energy consumption vs public infrastructure/services consumption.

      cities provide things like 24/7 buses that often run not at full capacity.. most of the time… whereas a car in the suburbs sits in the garage until people show up needing a ride.

      cities have lighting on virtually everywhere at night …

      most buildings have to have 24/7 HVAC operating..

      has anyone REALLY done an apple-to-apple comparison of energy consumption that INCLUDES both personal and city infrastructure ?

  10. LifeOnTheFallLine Avatar
    LifeOnTheFallLine

    Larry,

    It’s unfair to conflate NYC’s North-South corridor with urban density with urban walkability. When people talk about walkable urbanism they’re not referring strictly to downtown Manhattan (although if you look at the side streets running East-West are considerably more narrow and thus way more walkable), they’re talking more about parts of Brooklyn like Bay Ridge or the Fan in Richmond. But even in Manhattan you see other things that make an area walkable – clearly defined crosswalks, slight bulb outs so the sidewalks meet the crossing pedestrians, the availability of midblock shopping.

    And I have more thoughts, but The Flash is on and is way more important than this.

    1. LOFL – I don’t know about “fair” but each of us takes food, medicine, clothes, etc and in todays world – very little of it is produced “locally” within walking distance and is delivered on vehicles… and on the video – there CLEARLY is MORE than 5% heavy vehicle traffic!

      in the good old days – it came in on wagon then later on rail and then from the rail by wagon.

      In fact to diverge a tiny bit – rail is how “sprawl” got it’s start when folks realized the rail also left town to return!

      I think cities have “enclaves” of walkable cleaved by major arterial thoroughfares like spokes on a wheel instead of being monolithic dense, walkable cities … In Richmond, you have the Fan, you also have I-95, downtown expressway, Broad, Staples Mill, Cary, 9th, 12th, etc, etc.

      most all of these roads pre-date VDOT and AASHTO standards, right?

      I think these roads exist not out of misguided transport policies about roads and their purpose and use but necessity – from the beginning… to supply the food and other needs of the city.

      and it’s not like there are not cities in the world that DO have narrow roads – many in Europe and Asia and the 3rd world do – but none of them have become the best-practice model … for the US.

      I would posit that the more dense the city -the more you’re going to see these major arterials fulls of trucks and buses..

      a guy that thought about this was named Robert Moses… who wanted to have two levels in cities – one for vehicles and one for people.. because he felt (in my view – correctly) that the city required heavy vehicles to operate.

      there just is something about the Smart Growth movement that does not feel 100% legitimate with respect to recognizing the necessary movement of goods and services.. you could make all the streets more narrow and then use nothing but smaller vehicles – but you’d still need the vehicles whether you were moving apples or pianos or kitchen countertops… and the denser the area – the more people – the more apples and countertops you’d need which means the smaller the vehicles – the more intense the delivery tempos.

      even then – you need fire equipment, refuse trucks, utility trucks, heavy equipment to tear up streets when you need to get at failed sewer, etc.

      I just think that at least some Smart Growth sounds as if you don’t need the streets – that they are misguided … and I don’t see how any dense settlement pattern “works” without large vehicles and streets big enough to accommodate them.

      we have an interesting dilemma in Fredericksburg. We have two major roads that intersect on the outskirts of the city – and a new trail that crossing near the intersection. there is a LOT of angst because the trail will have a countdown signal – on roads that already “fail” at rush hour – i.e. “fail” means you have to sit through more than one light change – in other words, green does no flush the stacked que… and NOW we will get MORE delay with some saying that people will have to wait through more than one light… etc.. many said the trail should have used a bridge over or a tunnel under the road but no one said the road should become more narrow…as a solution.

  11. The anatomy of an ill-informed debate …

    LarryG contends that increasing spending on transportation can ONLY come from tax increases. He simply ignores the idea of reallocating what is already collected in taxes.

    However, unable to resist adding to his illogic, LarryG ventures into ill-informed statements of pseudo-fact:

    “I would agree but these incentives is terms of proportions are spit in the spittoon.. they won’t increase state revenues in any significant way.”

    The Virginian-Pilot begs to differ:

    “A recent government report found nearly 200 tax breaks that together cost Virginia $12.5 billion a year – almost as much as the state collects in taxes.”

    http://hamptonroads.com/2013/01/virginians-shoulder-billions-each-year-tax-breaks

    You could pave the roads in Virginia with gold for the amount that Imperial Clown Show in Richmond gives away to its benefactors.

    There is no need to raise taxes to get better transportation, education, etc. There is only the need to dismantle the existing unethical and dishonest state government.

    1. ” The anatomy of an ill-informed debate …

      LarryG contends that increasing spending on transportation can ONLY come from tax increases. He simply ignores the idea of reallocating what is already collected in taxes.”

      because we have explicitly bifurcated taxes to earmark them for transportation and not have transportation competing for the same discretionary funds for other things like education. We’ve proceeded to this point – that taxes for transportation come from people who use transportation.

      However, unable to resist adding to his illogic, LarryG ventures into ill-informed statements of pseudo-fact:

      “I would agree but these incentives is terms of proportions are spit in the spittoon.. they won’t increase state revenues in any significant way.”

      The Virginian-Pilot begs to differ:

      “A recent government report found nearly 200 tax breaks that together cost Virginia $12.5 billion a year – almost as much as the state collects in taxes.”

      http://hamptonroads.com/2013/01/virginians-shoulder-billions-each-year-tax-breaks

      good article – thanks for the link (broke but you can find the article)

      HOWEVER – how about we list out the TOP 10 tax breaks and their cost to Virginians? I think if you do that you will see that they are not like the Federal tax expenditures :

      http://www.businessinsider.com/the-top-20-tax-expenditures-2012-11

      these Federal tax expenditures cost the Feds almost a trillion dollars a year – when we have a deficit of about 500 million. If we got rid of these, we could not only get rid of the deficit but start to pay down the debt.

      so how about you provide a list for the state ?

      “You could pave the roads in Virginia with gold for the amount that Imperial Clown Show in Richmond gives away to its benefactors.”

      until you provide real numbers to show this – your words are blather.

      “There is no need to raise taxes to get better transportation, education, etc. There is only the need to dismantle the existing unethical and dishonest state government.”

      the number given by the article is 350 million.

      VDOT’s budget is 2 billion. the gas tax alone – which is the smallest of the taxes in terms of revenue – brings in about 700 million. The general sales tax brings in more than that and the sales tax on new cars more also.

      The state budget is what 47 billion? we’re talking about what 1% of the state budget.

      I’m not opposed to getting rid of the tax breaks – both at the Federal and State clown-show levels but it’s just not going to happen.

      but even if it did – do you think we’d put ALL of it on one purpose? more than likely it would be shared proportionately …

      NoVa just received a tax increase for transportation – which it gets to keep all of it. It amounts to 300-350 million a year by increasing the general sales tax .7% …

      so instead of sending that money to Richmond -you get to keep it ..

      and you’re still not happy? 😉

Leave a Reply