Purpose

To consolidate, disseminate, and gather information concerning the 710 expansion into our San Rafael neighborhood and into our surrounding neighborhoods. If you have an item that you would like posted on this blog, please e-mail the item to Peggy Drouet at pdrouet@earthlink.net

Saturday, March 16, 2013

  An Invitation from Anthony Portantino
March 16, 2013
 
 
Please go to my new fan page and "Like" it. Thank you!!!
Father of two wonderful daughters, Sofia and Bella. Sofia just graduated from UCSB and Bella attends 5th grade in a public school. Married to Ellen a terrific executive at Warner Brothers.
Page: 483 like this
 
 
Out and about with Congressman Adam Schiff, Senator Carol Liu and La Canada City Councilmember Elect John Curtis. — with Carol J. Liu and Adam Schiff.
 
 
Local B-cycle Memberships Will Be Good in 15 Cities

 http://dc.streetsblog.org/2013/03/15/local-b-cycle-memberships-will-be-good-in-15-cities/

By Angie Schmitt, March 15, 2013

 
B-cycle memberships are about to get a lot more portable.

Beginning next week, annual memberships from this bike-sharing company will be honored in 15 cities where B-Cycle operates, from Nashville, Tennessee, to Kailua, Hawaii. The program is called B-connected.

Bob Burns, president of B-cycle, said in a press release that the program will “empower annual members to experience visiting cities by bike versus car.”
B-connected will be available in the following B-cycle cities:
  • Denver, CO
  • Boulder, CO
  • Madison, WI
  • San Antonio, TX
  • Houston, TX
  • Spartanburg, SC
  • Charlotte, NC
  • Des Moines, IA
  • Kansas City, MO
  • Omaha, NE
  • Nashville, TN
  • Kailua, HI
  • Broward County, FL.
  • Fort Worth, TX (launching Spring)
  • Salt Lake City, UT (launching Spring)
The company has been exploring the “B-connected” model since last March, using Denver, Boulder, and Madison as pilot cities. If a B-cycle member incurs additional fees while in another B-cycle city (by taking a bike out longer than the allotted time limit, for instance), they will be charged by the system where the trip took place.

This is the first time a bike-share company has allowed members to use other cities’ systems when they travel without having to pay extra. Will Alta Bicycle Share follow suit? Alta already runs systems in Boston and D.C., with new ones set to come online soon in New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and Portland. A similar move could create quite a network.
As Youth Driver Licensing Dips Again, A Focus on the Millennials

 http://dc.streetsblog.org/2013/03/15/as-youth-driver-licensing-dips-again-a-focus-on-the-millennials/

By Tony Dutzik, March 15, 2013


In 2011, the percentage of 16-to-24 year olds with driver’s licenses dipped to another new low. Just over two-thirds of these young Americans (67 percent) were licensed to drive in 2011, based on the latest licensing data from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and population estimates from the Census Bureau. That’s the lowest percentage since at least 1963.
Source: Licensing statistics from the FHWA’s Highway Statistics series of reports and population estimates from the Census Bureau.

There has been lots of speculation about why fewer young people are getting driver’s licenses (and why even those who do have them seem to be driving less). Is it the economy, which has been particularly brutal for young people lately? Is it the rising cost of gas? Is it the tougher driver’s licensing laws that make it more expensive and difficult to get a license? Is it because young people are too busy cuddling with their iPhones and iPads to get behind the wheel?

There are arguments to be made for any and all of these explanations. But less often is the question asked: Why does it matter that young people just aren’t that into cars anymore?

One important reason it matters is because today’s young people are tomorrow’s main users of our transportation systems. If the useful life of the transportation infrastructure we build today — the highways, light rail lines, bike lanes and sidewalks — is roughly 40 years, that neatly envelops the peak earning and daily travel years of people currently in their late teens and early twenties. If fewer Millennials are driving, that should influence our choices about how we invest in transportation.

The transportation behaviors of the Millennials are doubly important because there are so many of them. That youth driving should be on the decline now is remarkable since there are now more teenagers and young adults in America than there have been in years. Since 1992, America has gained more than 7.3 million 16-to-24 year olds — an increase of 22 percent — but has added only 1.2 million 16-to-24 year old drivers.

Source: Licensing statistics from the FHWA’s Highway Statistics series of reports and population estimates from the Census Bureau.

The key question for anyone thinking about the future of the transportation system is whether today’s 
young people will continue to drive less as they get older and move on to new stages of life. The answer to that question doesn’t just depend on external factors such as the economy or even the preferences of the Millennials themselves. It also depends on public policy — specifically, the degree to which we are able to transform our transportation policy infrastructure from an effective machine for the building of lots of new roads into an efficient provider of the mix of flexible transportation options that Americans of all generations, but especially young Americans, now crave.

Regardless of the reasons for the recent drop in youth driving, the fact that young people are driving less provides a golden opportunity to rethink our transportation and development policies. It’s time for decision-makers at all levels to take advantage of that opportunity.
Sen. Patty Murray Increases Transportation Investment in 2014 Budget

 http://dc.streetsblog.org/2013/03/15/sen-patty-murray-increases-transportation-investment-in-2014-budget/

By Tanya Snyder, March 15, 2013

 

So, right now you’re thinking, “God save me, not another post about the budget!”
Sen. Patty Murray proposes $100 billion for transportation in her FY 2014 budget. 


And you’re to be forgiven. There are two versions of the FY 2013 budget out there right now (House and Senate), for a year that’s half over. There are the budget cuts from the sequester that everyone’s still waiting to feel the full impact of. Rep. Paul Ryan, chair of the Budget Committee, put out his FY 2014 blueprint Tuesday. And Wednesday, Senate Budget Committee Chair Patty Murray (D-WA) rolled out her budget proposal. Considering how dysfunctional every single one of these budget processes is, it’s no wonder we plug our ears at more budget news.

But there is a silver lining: Murray’s budget, which her committee approved yesterday, contains a $100 billion “targeted jobs and infrastructure package” that would focus on transportation.
It includes $50 billion to create jobs repairing “our nation’s highest priority deteriorating
transportation infrastructure” — fixing roads, bridges, and airports, and also “updating”
mass transit systems, which could mean more than just state of good repair. She notes that a 21st century transportation system includes “road projects that make room for bicyclists and pedestrians, bridge projects that include transit as well as cars and trucks, and regional plans that require multiple jurisdictions to work together.” She also mentions that transit is essential, as “building more roads alone will not solve the nation’s congestion challenge.”

Murray’s proposal also creates an infrastructure bank to leverage private sector investment, seeded at $10 billion, as Sens. Frank Lautenberg and Jay Rockefeller recently proposed, and as former Sens. John Kerry and Kay Bailey Hutchison had also proposed.

There’s also $10 billion in the budget to repair dams and dredge ports, $20 billion for technology infrastructure, and $10 billion for worker training.

It’s a little more ambitious than the “fix-it-first” policy President Obama laid out in the State of the Union last month, which included $40 billion for transportation maintenance. He didn’t mention an infrastructure bank that time, but he’s called for one many times before, only to be met with stonewalling from Republicans.

A lot has to happen before a package like this comes into reality. Though this spending, if it’s to come out of general revenues, isn’t necessarily dependent on finding a solution to the Highway Trust Fund’s insolvency, any new spending is dependent on Washington getting to a better and more sustainable place. Somehow this budget would need to be reconciled with Ryan’s budget, another grenade of a conservative policy document that doesn’t include anything like the spending Murray proposes. Then the appropriations committees would need to agree to actually make the money available.

Without a proposed revenue source, Murray’s budget isn’t a game-changer. It’s mostly just a re-stating of well-known Democratic objectives, with some wishful-thinking numbers attached. But it’s nice to see that the Democrats are still keeping transportation improvements on the agenda, and still with a maintenance-before-expansion ethic.