Programming note: I’ll join the rest of the universe and be posting on Measure M election results, etc. beginning at 8 p.m. tonight after the polls close. It will be the first post at the top of the the blog roll.
So, too, is Yonah Freemark, who will be looking at many of the transpo ballot initiatives across the U.S.
3 hours until the first polls close for Indianapolis’ transit referendum. Track results as they come in: https://t.co/pz8LKQBLzB
— Yonah Freemark (@yfreemark) November 8, 2016
My ballot measure cheat sheet is like a shopping list for the End Times. pic.twitter.com/Ht41p48fHg
— Abi Jones (@jonesabi) November 6, 2016
Fun fact I learned from @ronlin: If it's necessary, LA County ballot measures that need 2/3 are calculated to the fourth (!) decimal point.
— Laura J. Nelson 🦅 (@laura_nelson) November 8, 2016
Meaning that Measure M needs 66.6666 percent of the votes to pass! Measure M would raise the countywide sales tax by a half cent and extend the Measure R half-cent sales tax beyond its 2039 end date to pay for a number of transit, road, pedestrian and bicycle projects. Click here to learn more. And click here and scroll down to see a timeline of the projects and programs with funding amounts.
ICYMI 1: A note from the boss on the election.
ICYMI 2: The concrete wall between The Bloc in DTLA and 7th/Metro is no more.
Art of Transit:
Last night’s sunset from Source World HQ…
Photo by Steve Hymon/Metro.
How “innovation” chatter limits urban mobility: election edition (Human Transit)
One key sentence from transit planner Jarrett Walker for our friends in the cheap taxi industry:
These companies know that they rely on an urban, educated political base — people who can figure out for themselves that shifting lots of people from big vehicles into small ones is not the way to improve congestion, emissions, or pretty much anything that matters.
There’s more, including some points about self-driving vehicles. Here’s my post from yesterday about my questions for those who say self-driving cars are going to solve all our traffic problems. Most of the folks who have provided answers suggest that I’m wrong and self-driving vehicles will be awesome because, well, someone says so.
Will Pasadena be bike-friendly when bike sharing arrive next summer? (KPCC)
Megan McCarty asks a good question with Metro expanding its bike share program to Pasadena, the Port of Los Angeles and Venice in summer 2017. The answer from one Complete Streets advocate: the city is a still a long ways from having a connected network of viable bike routes. Understatement of the day, IMHO.
As Megan notes, Pasadena should be a good place to bike with some nice tree-lined streets. My three cents: yes, Pas is a great place to bike as long as you don’t hope to travel too far east-west or north-south! The residential streets only go so far and most of the major streets are extremely bad options for biking.
Bike share is for shorter trips and I can see it working. But hopefully it spurs some thinking at City Hall.
America’s most beautiful 11 streets (Curbed)
…most beautiful streets in big cities, actually. But a street in L.A. makes the list.
28 pictures that will help you get over your intense election anxiety (Buzzfeed)
Didn’t work. Sorry.
And some Election Day music…
Categories: Transportation Headlines
JK, have you experienced a computer crashing? That’s a big problem at the MTA and other transit systems when buses break down. Now imagine traveling at just 25 mph in a driverless vehicle and the computer crashes. Do you think you can gain control before the vehicle hits something or are locking up the brakes the alternative hopefully if it works.
I’m not sure why you’re arguing against self driving cars just because it’s not solving ALL the world’s problems. Even in dense metros with developed transit systems like Paris and Tokyo, there’s still need for automobiles.
I thought the goal was to lower car ownership? Lower traffic accidents? Shift vehicle control from stupid humans to smart computers? I assure you that self driving cars will not be beating any Blue grade crossings or driving down the Expo ROW. And people will not be buying cars if it’s just easier and cheaper to hail a self driving Uber to get them to transit stations.
When people perceive on demand services like Uber and Lyft to be transit replacements, that’s their problem – it was never meant to be like that, unless they want to spend hundreds of dollars on their daily commute. And if they do perceive it that way, maybe there’s a reason why. Just twice this week, I had to Uber to a Metro station because the bus was late. A quick look at Metro’s Twitter feed shows that I’m not alone in doing this.
Imagine a world where CAHSR is already done. Instead of paying thousands a month for the associated costs of car ownership or waiting 30 minutes for the next bus that takes 20 minutes to get anywhere, imagine just calling a $5, 10 minute Uber to the Gold Line, a 30 minute ride to Union Station, and just hop on a CAHSR train. That’s the vision for LA that self driving vehicles and on demand ridesharing can make a reality.
I’m not arguing against them. I am saying it would be great to have some real questions answered before plowing ahead with them — and I am expressing some skepticism about some of the claims that the self-driving car industry has made.
Steve Hymon
Editor, The Source