No net pavement: a modest proposal

I have long been thinking about a policy for construction of roads and highways, that would result in no more pavement. A post by Charles Marohn on Strong Towns blog titled “What is the federal role?” reminded me that I’d not posted on my idea. An excerpt from his post:

So if you forced me to have a federal transportation bill, then I would want it to do two things. First, I would want it to place a moratorium on the expansion, extension or construction of any new auto-oriented facilities. No new road miles anywhere. There is no need for this country to ever build another mile, another lane, another overpass or anything — we have far more than we can take care of now, most of it very unproductive. I would make this exception, however: any state that wants a new mile of highway has to remove two miles of existing. This would allow flexibility for states that wanted a strategic contraction, allowing them to allocate scarce resources to areas that would have the greatest benefit. In short, I would ensure the bill funded maintenance (which would make it politically irrelevant in the current context, but that is beside the point).”

I worked for several years in the Lake Tahoe basin, doing watershed education. The policy for hard coverage such as buildings and pavement, which produces runoff to the lake and a decline in water quality, is that there be no net increase in coverage over time. If a developer or homeowner wants to increase their coverage by expanding the areal extent of a building or parking lots, they must retire other buildings or pavement. The policy has been quite effective, and is primarily responsible the reversal in the steep decline of lake clarity. I realized that the policy would be a good one to apply everywhere. Pavement everywhere has the same effect, causing rain and snow to run off, carrying sediment and debris into waterways. Less pavement equals cleaner water. But there are so many more benefits of less pavement to the environment and to livability in towns and cities, that it makes no sense to continue paving, anywhere, anytime.Read More »

SACOG transportation plan

An interesting SacBee editorial, SACOG sets high bar on transportation plan. SACOG is the Sacramento Area Council of Governments, responsible for overall planning and much of the distribution of transportation funds for the region. The plan funds transit, state highways and local roadways, and pedestrian/bicycle facilities. I’ve reviewed the Metropolitan Transportation Plan 2035 (MTP), and […]

Climate Change

20120318-102104.jpgThe Sacramento News & Review this week included an insert from the City of Sacramento entitled Climate Change in Your Hands. If you haven’t seen it, I recommend it. I’m not sure if it was also in the Sacramento Bee, since I don’t read the Bee regularly. The insert is remarkably strong in its support of climate change, without any of the tea party denialism that shows up in so much of the printed and broadcast media.

The graph at right shows the transportation element of greenhouse gas emissions for Sacramento, and it is the largest, at 48%. The city’s Climate Action Plan (at http://sacgp.org/cap.html) has a goal of reducing vehicles miles traveled (VMT) by 7% by 2012 and 16% by 2025. Both seem to me rather weak goals, but are nevertheless imperative as at least a starting point.

“Cruising the green lane” on John “Bucky” Perez talks about his shift to biking rather than driving the five miles to work. He talks about the money savings, the health benefits, and that biking gets him energized in the morning and unwound at the end of the day.

The “What can I do” sidebar list seven individual actions, including checking your Walk Score (which I posted about yesterday). The others are: 1) support sustainable land use initiatives; 2) think about moving; 4) try finding a job closer to home; 5) telecommute; 6) shift daily trips to walking, and 7) drive more efficiently. Each of these is worth exploring in more detail.

These may seem like pretty big changes, particularly where you work and live, but think about that fact that most people these days change jobs a number of times and residences several times. Each of these changes is an opportunity to make a decision for sustainability.

Getting started

As I ride my bike and use transit, and even to some degree as I walk, I think about our transportation system. In part this is my job, as a Safe Routes to School Coordinator, to observe, document, and reflect on the patterns of traffic and human behavior. But is is also just part of how I relate to the world. I believe that the two most important activities we do in our lives, for their impact on the earth, are eating and getting around. Eating is something I very much enjoy, but don’t spend a lot of time thinking about. Getting around is.

I’ve been living in Sacramento since April 2011, but there was a long period of transition as I left Carson City. There was also a long period of transition in becoming car-free. I’ll have more to say about being car-free in the future, but it has already faded into the background for me. I spend much more time thinking about how I get around than on the fact that I have no car and rarely drive.

This blog will collect my thoughts about how our transportation system works in Sacramento, both for me and for other people. Just so you know, I don’t think the system works very well. A system designed to give priority to the personal motor vehicle doesn’t work. It doesn’t work for us personally, it doesn’t work for us as a society, and it most certainly does not work for our relationship with the earth. We are killing the earth for our own convenience, and I feel strongly that we must stop.

I have a personal blog (link at right) on which I’ve posted a bit about transportation issues, and I’ll link back to those posts here and sometimes cross-post, but most of what will show up here is transportation ideas I’ve had rattling around for some time, and reactions to the day-to-day joy and challenge of getting around.