Novel Concept: Kids Walking To School

Here's a practice that was once commonplace but now seems totally foreign—kids walking to school:

It's no surprise that fewer students are walking to school these days, especially considering the busy intersections near some schools and the ever-present parental concerns about "stranger danger" or child abductions.

But for the past year and a half, the pedestrian-advocacy organization Feet First has collaborated with Bailey Gatzert Elementary in Seattle to form a "Walking School Bus" program to get children exercise, promote alternative transportation and pedestrian safety, and better connect families — particularly immigrant families — with their schools.

On any given day, dozens of students will gather several blocks from Gatzert and walk to school with their parents and community volunteers, sometimes making stops along the way to pick up more students.

I used to walk to school all the time, even through high school. Of course as the article mentions, modern parents are so terrified that child abducters are lurking around every corner that they would hardly allow their children to walk next door without close supervision. Interestingly, the latest update from the carless family in Ballard addresses that very topic:

Well, to judge by others' reactions, the thought of preteens traveling to softball practice or drama on their own triggers the fear of "stranger danger"--the specter of losing a child to abduction by a pedophile, serial killer, or psychopath. Amy and I hear a lot of things like, "Bike all that way alone?" "Oh, I wouldn't be comfortable with them walking by themselves. I'll come get them." "The bus? Are you sure that's safe?"

In the age of Amber Alerts, JonBenet, Polly Klaas, sex offender housing (find it in your neighborhood here), and sensationalist TV news, most parents don't want their children ever to lack adult supervision. What's more, people we know don't even want our children to lack supervision.
...
Parents' perception of "stranger danger" is catastrophically inflated. And the lock-down security regime that's resulted may do more harm than good.
...
Of the 115 US children abducted in 1999, about 50 were murdered. That number is horrible. Even one case is too many. But the United States is a really big country. It's such a big country that even minuscule risks kill dozens of people. Tylenol, for example, kills about 150 Americans each year. Aspirin kills about 60. (Go here.)

So no, your kids do not face certain abduction if they go 10 minutes without your personal watchful eye upon them and yes, a little exercise and independence will do them good. Plus saving gas is always a bonus, too.

(Jessica Blanchard, Seattle P-I, 05.02.2006)
(Alan Durning, Sightline Institute, 04.28.2006)

'No-Build' Not Dead Yet

Sorry I'm a bit behind on this one, as it is last week's story. I wanted to post it, but I don't want this blog to be "all Viaduct, all the time." Anyway, a few weeks ago I talked about the option to tear down the Viaduct and just don't replace it. At the time the idea appeared to be dead in the water, but apparently Seattle's City Council is still interested in the thought:

Despite discouraging signals from the state, the City Council said Wednesday that it is going to take a longer look at tearing down the Alaskan Way Viaduct and funneling its travelers onto surface streets and public transit, without building a new elevated or below-ground roadway as a replacement.

"The surface/transit option is emotionally appealing," Councilman Richard Conlin said after the announcement.

But Conlin said he doesn't have enough information to know if that's a feasible alternative. He still favors replacing the 2.2-mile double-decked viaduct with a tunnel — the position that he, and a majority of the council, supported in a 2004 vote.

The council said it's commissioning a preliminary, $15,000 study that will review previous studies of viaduct replacement options and also consider the experience of other cities. Depending on what that examination comes up with in five or six weeks, the council will decide whether to pay for a deeper analysis of the so-called no-build option.

Keep in mind that Councilman Conlin is the only member of the council that actually practices what he preaches about personal trip reduction and alternate methods of commuting. That said, I am still confused about this whole thing, because spending $15,000 on a preliminary study sure doesn't sound like it is being treated like an emergency. Wasn't the imminent collapse of the Viaduct a major part of the emotionally-charged "No on 912" campaign? Oh yes, it was indeed.

It's so much of an emergency that we aren't even in a hurry to decide what we're going to do about it, much less actually start the work.

(Gregory Roberts, Seattle P-I, 04.27.2006)

Transportation Secretary Denied License

While our supposedly environmentally-active Mayor uses 5 gallons of gasoline per day , another prominent politician has been kicked out from behind the wheel:

[Doug MacDonald] , the state's energetic highway chief with the thick Boston accent is selling his wheels, though under unfortunate circumstances.

He was recently unable to renew his license after failing the required eye exam three times.
...
Still, "I expect spending more time on transit will give me lots of ideas about what transit is doing well and what it can do better," he said.

"My parents live in Seattle, and I'm very interested in how to get from Olympia to Seattle on public transportation. I'm seeing a program which isn't as good as it should be, but we already knew that."

But it's unmistakable that he misses the view behind the wheel. People are very tied to their cars and the lifestyle they provide, he said.

"If I had a chance to get back my driving privileges or a restricted license of some kind, I'd jump right on it."

Mr. MacDonald is not as notorious for pushing the anti-car agenda as some in our local governments, but it will be interesting to see how future policy is shaped by his new perspective in being forced to use alternative transportation methods. Of course, he could just follow Mayor Nickels' lead and hire a driver to cart him around in a 17-mpg Cadillac with heated seats with built-in massage and Premium Enhanced Audio with Satellite Radio...

(Jeff Switzer, Everett Herald, 05.01.2006)
(Stefan Sharkansky, Sound Politics, 04.27.2006)

Reduced Parking Not Popular — Duh

The Seattle P-I takes a look at some street-level, real world reactions to the city's plan to reduce the amount of parking downtown.

To owner Steve Shulman — who relies on seven angled spots in front of his small market — a city proposal to reduce or eliminate minimum parking requirements in neighborhood business hubs around the city seems insane.

"It blows me away that they want to cut more parking because it's so precious right now," he said. "It's a huge disconnect — just talk to the people, ask what their shopping habits are, where do they go and why."

The changes would make commercial areas more pedestrian friendly. But some say the city's tough-love approach to parking is likely to create huge frustrations without better transit alternatives.

Bingo. Of course, where "better transit alternatives" would go is the multi-billion dollar question, isn't it. Still though, if they want to ban cars from downtown, why don't they just do it. You know that's what they're trying to work toward.

(Jennifer Langston, Seattle P-I, 04.29.2006)

Reaction To Ron's Bus Plan

Here's an interesting pair of editorials about Ron Sims' buses for everyone plan. On one side of the fence you have a Seattle Times unsigned editorial gushing over the thought:

At a time when the public clamors for leaders willing to stick their necks out and plan for the future, Sims does that. It may make him seem like he loves to raise taxes, but it costs money to operate a truly convenient bus system. Buses have higher operating costs and lower up-front costs compared to fixed-rail transit.

To hear the Times' tell it, all of Seattle's traffic problems can simply be solved by throwing more buses on a few select routes. It's the "bus it, and they will come" strategy. Not everyone is a fan of buses, though. On the other side of the argument, you have Dan Savage of The Stranger working himself into a frenzy of rage against all things bus.

Buses—the public-transportation option favored by people who do not take public transportation. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that no one on the Seattle Times op-ed board commutes to work by bus. And Ron Sims? Like most pols, he only boards a bus for photo-ops. Fact is, people don't like riding buses, which are notoriously slow, noisy, dirty, and unreliable. Putting more slow, crowded, stinky buses on the streets isn't going to do anything to address Seattle's transportation problem or provide a transportation option attractive enough to get people out of their cars.

And that's about the tamest excerpt I could take from Dan's diatribe. He really doesn't like buses. Personally, I find myself in between the anonymous Times editorial author and Mr. Savage. I think buses are a decent transit solution, but I am not impressed with Ron Sims' plan to add more buses to places that are already fairly well served. How about throwing eastside commuters a bone here, Ron? I guess if we want useful bus service on the eastside we're going to have to pay even more. Yippie.

(unsigned editorial, Seattle Times, 04.24.2006)
(Dan Savage, The Stranger, 04.27.2006)

Mountlake Terrace Parking Crack Down

Mountlake Terrace is on a mission to fight blight.

Drive through the older neighborhoods north of Mountlake Terrace City Hall, and they're everywhere.

Boats, modest vacation trailers, huge recreational vehicles, junkers — some on blocks, others sagging on flat tires — plus an assortment of family cars and pickups, presumably in running condition.

Many are parked on grass or patches of loose gravel, making them illegal as of March 15. The city is offering free driveway-construction permits, which cost up to $200, through Sept. 8.

Mayor Jerry Smith estimates that about 10 percent of the city's 6,000 households are in violation of the new parking rules. But he said residents generally support the rules, approved March 6 by the City Council.

I certainly understand the desire to promote tidy and inviting neighborhoods, but how are rules like this not a violation of private property rights? I'm as averse as anyone to living next door to a house with six broken-down cars parked in the front yard, but how does that make it okay to create laws against it? I also don't like living next door to people that smoke out on their porch... can we make that illegal, too?  Where does it stop?

(Diane Brooks, Seattle Times, 04.26.2006)

Council & Mayor Love Their Cars

Stefan Sharkansky over at Sound Politics has been doing some digging into Seattle city officials to find out whether they practice what they preach with regards to commuting and "trip reduction." Unfortunately, the answer for most of them is a resounding no.

The highlights: Nearly all of the Councilmembers drive to work. When they travel around the city on official business they usually take cars, although some occasionally travel by bus or bicycle or walk to nearby appointments. To his credit, Councilmember Richard Conlin practices what he preaches and reports the lowest overall auto usage among his colleagues and that he usually takes the bus, walks or bikes to work. Some of the other members to their credit, at least don't charge the city taxpayers for their automobile use. And the most prolific automobilist on the Council? It appears to be Peter "trip reduction" Steinbrueck himself.

Mayor Nickels seems to quite like his cars, too:

I've been curious about Mayor Nickels own automobile usage, so I recently submitted a records request for all of his city-paid auto expenses for 2005-2006. The city responded late yesterday: Nickels has been driving enough in the last 16 months to fill 168 pages of expense records.

In Seattle, what's good for the goose is apparently quite beneath the gander.

(Stefan Sharkansky, Sound Politics , 04.24.2006)
(Stefan Sharkansky, Sound Politics, 04.25.2006)

Upcoming Seattle Road Improvements

While improvements to Mercer Street may only be in the "planning" phase, real constructions is moving forward this summer to improve the embarrassing condition of some of the city's worst streets.

The plans include nearly 80 miles of road repaving, installing or upgrading a dozen traffic signals, and improving 60 street crossings.

The biggest project is the $22.8 million repair of the Fremont Bridge.

Nickels said the city faces a $500 million backlog in transportation projects.

He said he plans to release a funding package soon to put on the November ballot to pay for more road repairs.

Of course, it would be too much to expect real progress to be made with existing funds. But hey, at least we get this nifty map of all the projects. I wonder which of those dots won't get done without increased taxes.

(KIRO, 04.19.2006)

Seattle & Expensive Gasoline

Let's talk about gas prices. A few weeks ago a study was released that placed Seattle as the 8th "most prepared" for a sustained oil crisis among large cities in the US.

With gas prices on the rise and $3 or $4 a gallon gas on the horizon, SustainLane.com took a close look at the 50 largest U.S. cities to see which are most prepared and which are most vulnerable to an extended gas price shock in the $3 to $8 dollar a gallon range. Those cities that can reduce or stabilize their spending on gasoline will keep substantially more money in their state's economy, rather than siphoning it overseas.

Huzzah for us, I guess. Although I think Seattle would still be in a pretty tight spot if gas started costing $8 a gallon. There aren't that many people that carpool or take the bus. But if $3 per gallon is a "crisis," then yeah, Seattle's not likely to hurt much. According to the Seattle Times, rising prices isn't really likely to affect Seattle much at all:

From the federal Energy Department to your neighborhood cashier, experts think the price will continue to rise as summer approaches — and they say we'll take it in stride.

"I hate to say people are comfortable, because that would seem a stretch, but they're resigned. We see the demand staying relatively consistent," said Janet Ray, communications director for AAA Washington.

Jason Toews, co-founder of the national GasBuddy.com Web site, which tracks gas prices nationally, said he expects Seattle prices to hit $3, "possibly as high as $3.25."

Well I speak for one family whose demand is going down, thanks to my new wheels. And I'm anything but "resigned" to paying out my ears for gasoline. I've been dreaming of ditching the ol' internal combustion engine for years. I don't like being completely dependent on a substance whose cost could double overnight. It just doesn't sit well with me. Personally I think electric will be the wave of the future, especially if gas prices do reach $8 per gallon for any extended period of time.

(SustainLane, 03.24.2006)
(Mike Lindblom, Seattle Times, 04.15.2006)

City Plans Mercer Improvements

During my time in college at SPU, there were two convenient ways to get to the freeway. To go north on I-5, you would wind around along the canal through Fremont to the 45th Street onramp. To head south, it was Westlake to Mercer Street, which was always fun since that last stretch of Mercer before the onramp feels like it's been the victim of a sustained air campaign. Every time I drove that stretch, I wasn't thinking "man, this traffic is horrible," but rather "why don't they fix this road?" Now, almost ten years later, they're finally drawing up plans to do just that.

The plan for fixing the Mercer Mess continues to chug along, even though more analysis by the city of Seattle is showing it won't do much to get people around faster.

The city's latest analysis of travel times under Mayor Greg Nickels' $100 million plan to widen Mercer Street and turn it into a two-way road will be unveiled at a community meeting this afternoon. That analysis, completed this week, shows that commuters could save a few minutes heading west on Mercer from Interstate 5, but they actually could spend more time in traffic going east toward the interstate.

Seriously, I wouldn't mind spending a few more minutes in traffic through there if the road was at least pretending to be smooth and non-bombed. My main beef is that they didn't do this a decade ago.

(Kery Murakami, Seattle P-I, 04.20.2006)