November 2, 2006
RTP Exercise - What's Working - Free Market Scenario
Adron has compiled his list of outcomes in a less government-interventionist scenario, so we'll run this set of outcomes through the same three questions, starting with what's working?
- Organizational Leadership is increased for business and related transit oriented development.
- Overall subsidization of the transit systems (including roadways) decreases by at least 50% at the state levels and users provide more representative costs.
- Companies locate downtown in greater number.
- Sprawl is minimalized and density is increased around transit oriented developments.
- Transportation costs begin to reflect true usage that create a decrease in vehicular person trips (auto & transit oriented) in the region.
- More liberty and individual rights are considered in transportation planning with minimal usage of Emminent Domain, preferrably Emminent Domain is NOT used at all while existing right of ways are utilized better and highway mileage is mixed with light rail (ala I-205 expansion).
- DMV & Operational Licensing of Motor Vehicles increases efficiency, providing better market statistics and relevancy, quicker consumer response to demand, decreased complaints and eliminating all associated tax burdens while focusing costs on users.
- Primary thoroughfares are allowed collection of electronic tolls, shadow tolls, and other funding sources to alleviate taxpayers of cost without use.
- A quicker response time and standardized approaches to accident removal/clearing from primary thoroughfares and light rail.
- Public/Mass Transit provides real services based on increasing transportation speed via express sevices on light rail, valid commuter rail options, and other faster commute options.
- Increase available rail options that provide more comfortable and commuter related services.
- Increased reliability during cold weather seasons and increase reliability in general to a significantly higher level than what automobile users receive.
Again, the question for this phase: What is working well to achieve the outcomes?
November 3, 2006 8:15 AM
hmmm. So I suppose nothing is working currently as a free-market, individual liberty oriented basis with the items above.
:( how sad. (or did everyone just not read the blog for a day?)
November 3, 2006 8:25 AM
Chris Smith Says:
It may just be fatigue with the whole exercise :-)
Sprawl is minimalized and density is increased around transit oriented developments.
I think we're actually starting to see TOD development work on a market basis with less government subsidy, particularly in the urban core (it still seems to take some subsidy further out). You can see this reflect in the recent Portland City Council to raise the bar on requirements to get a TOD tax abatement.
November 3, 2006 1:47 PM
Lenny Anderson Says:
Social policy has always set parameters for the market as Adam Smith noted. The UBG has been very successful in directing private investment back into central areas of Portland, raising property values and reducing travel distances.
Regulated monopolies, public or private, have also been around forever due to the relationship of investment costs (infrastructure) to return, i.e. risk. Buying down risk is nothing new. De-regulation, which is at the heart of your approach, comes with its own set of costs, some visible and others not.
I'm reminded of the winter I spent in Lima, Peru; we rode the bus frequently from the center to the beach. We could choose from all kinds of jitneys, collectivos, etc. or ride the regular bus...modern Manns from Germany. Things were pretty chaotic with vehicles competing for lane space, riders, at stops, etc. Could any public or private entity in Lima afford to upgrade to a BRT system...more capacity, more comfort, more reliability, more speed, more riders?...without restricting this competition and guaranteeing some level of ridership? It would be a tough sell to the bankers.
November 3, 2006 3:54 PM
Chris - I do agree with that in large part. One reason I stick around in PDX. Otherwise I'd throw my hands up and go live in the stix and avoid taxes and other people suggesting we all live a certain way. But that would be boring to me. I do have hope that the situation can be balanced somehow. I'm a mixed mode believer of Keynes (more Portland model related economics) but more hoping of Adam Smith's preferences. The later dictating more inidividual liberty.
Lenny - per Adam Smith, and many other economists, you don't have to limit the competition to put in place a dominant competitor with better services. You just keep competing.