Affordable Housing Modifications bill

via: Planetizen

Utah State Senator Jake Anderegg, R-Lehi proposed SB 34, an "Affordable Housing Modifications" bill for consideration by the State Legislature this year.

In addition to increasing funding for the state's largest affordable housing loan fund, SB 34 would allow mother-in-law apartments and encourage construction of high-density housing near transit in the hopes of promoting housing affordability (for more details on the proposed legislation, see news coverage by Tony Semerad from December 2018).

As noted by an article by Nolan Gray and Brandon Fuller, SB 34 would force local governments to plan for the state's worsening housing crisis. But unlike proposed laws in California and Oregon, SB 34 leaves much of the legal control of land use regulations in the hands of local governments. It will still be up to cities how they go about achieving their plans for growth.

"Municipalities facing a housing crunch would have to adopt at least three policies from a menu of popular housing reforms—policies that run the gamut from bread-and-butter housing policy to radical reforms. More conservative options, like starting a community land trust or purchasing and preserving existing affordable units, are still on the table. So, too, are permitting accessory dwelling units and lowering parking requirements," according to Gray and Fuller.

Want a streetcar? Skip the local MPO

A Marvelous Machine: Creative Approaches to Securing Funding and Building Public Support for Streetcar Projects in Four U.S. Cities

James P. Wood, Jeffrey R. Brown

First Published January 8, 2019 Research Article 

https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198118821317

Article information

The resurgence of streetcars in American cities has presented planners and civic leaders with a novel means of transportation and redevelopment for cities, many of which have a history of failed regional transit votes and suburban domination of regional planning bodies. To overcome these political and financial obstacles, supporters have engaged in a host of creative strategies to satisfy or bypass streetcar critics. Using a case study of four American cities with recently built streetcars (Atlanta, Cincinnati, Kansas City, and Tucson), this paper explores these strategies from the perspective of streetcar supporters. Results indicate streetcar projects in these cities were pursued in part because each city had faced at least one failed rail-transit vote in recent years (usually involving light rail). Supporters of streetcar plans anticipated vocal citizen opposition based on those past failures; however, in most cases this did not materialize to the expected degree. This suggests that narrowly focused and lower-cost streetcar projects can avoid the contentious opposition of pricey regional light-rail proposals by offering a different product and/or seeking fewer local dollars. Results also indicate widespread distrust for regional planning structures and a willingness of local boosters to bypass those entities and apply directly for federal funds. Although not all four cities ended up with the streetcar they envisioned, the findings nevertheless document an eagerness on the part of proponents to seek transit projects that transform public opinion, circumvent a burdensome regional planning process, and take advantage of a national funding environment willing to fund streetcars in urban areas

DEMOLISHED - The 'Millenials will move to the Suburbs, just like their parents' narrative

Millennial First-Time Homebuyers and Location Choice

Elora Lee Raymond, Jessica Dill, Yongsung Lee

First Published October 25, 2018 Research Article 

https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X18807751

We research whether Millennial first-time homebuyers are more likely to purchase homes near city centers than Generation X. We use a random sample of individual credit records data to examine first-time mortgaged homebuyers from 2000 to 2016 in the fifty largest US cities. In a logistic regression controlling for age and generation, we estimate separate age and period effects. We also control for car ownership, income, credit score, mortgage size, mortgage payment, and student debt levels. We find that the odds Millennials buy near city centers 21 percent higher than Generation X. This suggests that as Millennials purchase homes, they do not move to the suburbs at the same rate as Generation X.

Moving FrontRunner East a block

Trax, FrontRunner, Amtrak, moving them all and connecting them all in one place...

Probably a lot of money for not much benefit. Nice map, though.

HSR in Utah

Wasatch Choices 2050 had a high speed rail depot at the SLC International Airport.

But when I look at this map, I wonder if the place to put it isn't on the Red line Trax Meets the orange line on the map... Would be a long way from the CBD, though, with no direct connection.

Connected and Autonomous Transit Vehicles

More and more research suggesting that complete automation is a pipe dream, and CAV are going to need special guideway--this makes CAV a great match for transit, specifically for line-haul transit. Especially so for BRT, which already has 50%+exclusive guideway. I know UTA is getting in CAV, but only in the context of first/last mile functions, as 'driverless shuttles' running on educational/corporate/medical campuses. But I think it's worth considering an automated shuttle for line-haul service. I'd like to propose travel demand modeling (MAG-WFRC model) to determine how good a line-haul transit CAV might be. Do some scenarios with tripled headway and the like. I think it could be done pretty simply, by playing with model coefficients. A transit CAV could break the link between labor costs and headway that limits the frequency UTA can provide services, a potentially transformative outcome. Ideally, I could piggy-back on an existing EA, AA, or EIS, (such as the proposed Taylorsville or Bountiful BRTs), using already prepared model data, and adding another alternative. Alternately, the use of connected and automated transit vehicles (CATV) could be explored in a 'shuttle' function, such as connecting Sandy Civic Center Trax with the Ebay FrontRunner, (Project 32b in the RTP) or connecting said FrontRunner station with the Phase 3 Blue line Trax Extension at Highland and I-15, via the Prison site. (Project 34b).

Parking Requirement are Terrible for Downtowns

No, really. But they are ESPECIALLY terrible for historic main streets and down towns.

Sandpoint, Idaho removed minimum parking requirements a decade ago. The city's director of planning describes what happened since.

The 2009 approval of a 60,000 square foot, 3-story bank headquarters in the heart of downtown ended up requiring 218 parking spaces. Because only 110 were provided (which was plenty), the bank was subjected to in-lieu parking fees totaling over $700,000. Well, being bankers, they soon realized the cheaper alternative was to buy up adjacent properties and demolish the buildings for surface lots. Consequently, small businesses were evicted and the much-beloved downtown historic development pattern was diminished.

Designing “Drive Slower, Travel Faster” LEAN Networks

Check out some new stuff by Metro Analytics*

With new styling and better batteries, the nerdy golf-cart has been reinvented! The market
for eBikes, scooters, and all kinds of low-speed electric vehicles is exploding! Such vehicles
are designed for short trips on 25-30-mph neighborhood roads and multi-modal paths. These slow vehicles travel faster than expensive, heavy, fast vehicles.

Low-Emission Alternative Networks (LEAN networks for Lean Vehicles!) The high-speed, heavy vehicle network often isn’t fast at all. After accounting for stop-lights and congestion, you might average just 10-20 mph quite often. So the growing popularity and low cost of low-speed human-scale vehicles makes it worth asking if it’s worth creating super-safe LEAN networks for short trips (the vast majority of trips).

Peachtree, Georgia shows the value of such networks – where bike paths double as “golf-cart
networks.” By installing just one low-cost overpass or underpass, thousands of people can suddenly connect to your commercial areas more quickly than they could get there in a regular car.

When such networks exist, many buy Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEV) to replace one or more of their regular cars. The elderly who can’t or shouldn’t drive heavy vehicles can still get around safely into their 90’s – if there are safe paths not required to contend with the “Drive Faster, Travel Slower” network. Such vehicles are low-cost and require far less parking. For a mere $10-million, less than one modest-sized heavy vehicle bridge, Peachtree created 25-miles of LEAN network, which included several tunnels and light-weight overpasses. That’s orders of magnitude cheaper than arterial street widening. Their commercial parking lots are full of Neighborhood Electric Vehicles.
NEVs, LEAN networks, and “Automated NEV Shuttles,” when combined, can expand transit’s reach from 1⁄4 mile around a stop, to 2-3 miles! If your area is quickly developing greenfield land, or if you need first/last-mile solutions for transit, please call us for advice on how to create a LEAN network that can fill transit, fill stores, and foster walkable development!

*I work for them. But I still think this is a good idea.

LEAN Networks

LEAN sounds like a good idea (Although any alternative to using on-highway vehicles for all mobility is probably a good thing). The car is our hammer, and when all you have is hammer, everything starts looking like a nail. So what we really need is a toolbox of mobility solutions. The sustainability purist in me wants to exclaim that all we need is walking and biking. But biking runs into the exact same limitations--a lack of network. A cyclist must either use the pedestrian (sidewalk) or automobile (road) network, neither of which is really suitable (sidewalks are terrifying on a bike at >15 mph--far too rutted, too many jags and jumps). But to circle back, I think it's certainly worth further exploring micro-mobility alternatives in vehicular transportation. If nothing else, the e-scooters have been transformational in a way that neither bike-sharing nor e-bikes have been. (I got my Mom to ride one). In the vehicular niche, four-wheelers seem to fulfill a niche in rural areas--I've seen well-beaten paths alongside highways, occupied by four-wheelers. In a suburban environment, the golf cart seems to fulfill the same niche. In both cases, driven by both the young (14?) and the elderly. In both cases, the availability of network/ROW seems to be the clincher. Yet few places are going to develop whole new networks to provide for these new vehicular modes, unless the modes are already present (for other purposes) in critical mass. (People already have ATV's on a farm, golf-carts are the norm on golf-course communities). Four wheels seems to be key--stability while in use and when being boarded. 

I'm pretty skeptical on vehicles as first-last mile connection to transit stations. Vehicular access to transit stations has a fundamental issue: Park and ride. Stations require a place to stash vehicles, regardless of type (consider the zoo that is bike parking in Amsterdam). 'Docked' systems (similar to e-bikes) require both a sending and receiving dock. Vehicles check out at the station for last-mile journeys cannot return to the station on their own (imaginary autonomous solutions disregarded), so the number of such journeys that can be made is finite, and limited by the number of docking stations. Dockless systems like e-scooters rely on 'chargers' --people who round up the scattered vehicles, charge them at home, and drop them off at sites designated by the apps. I saw guys with a pick-up and trailer doing it. Seems unlikely such would be feasible for larger vehicles.  

Twitter, IFTTT, Google+

So I'm not using IFTTT ("IF This Then That" to post all the things I write here to my twitter account (now that Google+ is shutting down).

Perils of Sustainability Madness

Sometimes, the sustainability purist in me just wants to limit all travel to bikes and walking. I recognize it the impulse for what it is (pure madness).  For a large segment of the urban environment (and the population) walking and biking simply aren't real options, even for short distances. But it does mean I have a bit of blindspot when it comes to vehicular solutions. I like the lifestyle vehicular travel affords--makes it possible for me to get places. And it's certainly lovely to be alone in the car, with the stereo blaring. 

I don't want anyone to live in a gulag. I certainly don't believe there is a one-size all solution for all places, or that top-down management is the appropriate way to fix things. 

I would like to see the gas tax high enough to actually fund the Highway Trust fund, rather than relying on transfers from the General Fund. I'm alarmed at the build-up of future liabilities that massive investment in urban highways create. 

If you live in a rural setting, cars are the way to go, no questions asked. But at a hundred units per acre, everyone can't have cars (where would you park them all?). But there are a lot of benefits to living at such densities, and a lot of people who enjoy that lifestyle. So I think it should be an option, even if not something you would choose for yourself.