Monday, April 7, 2008

Gas Tax Sanity

UPDATED: I got a lot of math wrong. I fixed it.

I missed this very smart call for a higher gas tax from the Globe Magazine a month ago. Writer Phil Primack hits all the high points:

  1. The $0.21 gas tax hasn't been raised since 1991, eroding it's value to $0.14 in 1991 dollars

  2. Those who reap the benefits of our transportation infrastructure should pay for its upkeep.

  3. Even a significant hike would not put us out-of-line with neighboring states, maybe not even making ours the highest.

Yup, yup, and yup.

I'd add another point. While the gas tax has failed to keep up with inflation, it's done an even more woeful job keeping up with the cost of gas. In 1991, the average price for a gallon of gas appears to have been about $1.10. (I can't find a more authoritative reference.) A 15-cent 21-cent per gallon levy translates to an effective 13.6% 28% state tax: .21 Mass. gas tax/($1.10 - .21 Mass. gas tax - .141 federal gas tax). In February, the price of a gallon of regular was $2.989. If the effective, proportional rate were the same as in 1991, we'd be paying 40 cents 73 cents a gallon in tax: .28 x (2.989 - .21 Mass gas tax - .184 federal gas tax).

The current gas tax pulls in $600 million per year. Raising it to 40 cents 73 cents would reap an additional $629 million $1.77 billion per year (at $34 million in revenue per cent of gas tax). Think that wouldn't help ease the difficulties we're having paying to maintain our transportation infrastructure?

This isn't just a mathematical game to bolster the argument for a higher gas tax. The cost of maintaining our transportation infrastructure is closely tied to the cost of gas. Revenue from the gas tax ought to rise proportionally with the price of gas.

Instead of a gas tax, we're likely to have a super-regressive cigarette tax.

Read More...

Monday, March 24, 2008

We can do better than this

This is what ought to be the prime pedestrian crossing along Needham Street.



Marshall Plaza and Fresh City Wraps to the left. Starbucks, two restaurants, and more stores to the left.

Not to repeat what your eyes already tell you, but the crosswalk has been completely rubbed off and the pedestrian crossing sign is down (for the second time in less then a year). Click for the larger picture. The empty signpost is just to the left of the fire hydrant.

I know that DPW is stretched with winter business, but why isn't this a priority?

Read More...

May 18, it's a date!


The event of the spring season is on May 18: Bike Newton, an afternoon of bike fun capped off by a 2.5 mile ride from Newton City Hall and back, all to encourage a grass-roots effort to make biking safer in Newton.

I'll have more later. In the meantime, Bike Newton's web site is chock-a-block full of information. Check out the list of supporters, which includes hizzoner.

Read More...

Obstacle Course

Friend of NS&S Molly alerts us to this sign that hangs over the striped shoulder on Beacon Street near Hammond Street waiting to decapitate a rider or, more likely, send her into traffic.

Here's Molly in her own words:

This sign sticks out into Beacon Street and is exactly at the head height of a bicyclist. Last week I was nearly decapitated/hit by a car (not sure which is worse) due to the this sign. Not only does it overhang the roadway, it is also at the point where Beacon Street narrows and the striped shoulder disappears forcing cyclists into the flow of traffic.

Yes, the little things matter.

Read More...

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Time to talk gas tax

The governor's angry response to casino opponents: okay, so what's your big idea?

Governor Patrick, listen up.

Roadway infrastructure in disrepair. (Parker Street bridge is falling down, falling down, falling down.) Massively debt-ridden Turnpike Authority. Even more massively debt-ridden MBTA.

Oh, yeah. There's also a little public policy imperative: global warming.

It's high time we raise the gas tax.

According to a two-year-old editorial by the president of the Conservation Law Foundation, every additional penny of a gas tax would raise $34 million. Fifteen cents would bring us $510 million at current demand. One hopes that the increase might decrease demand. Even so, we're talking hundreds of millions.

The total Massachusetts gas tax is now $.21. Add fifteen cents and it would be $.36, not out-of-line with our neighbors Rhode Island ($.31), New York ($.303), or Connecticut ($.297). For reference: Maine ($.23), New Hampshire ($.206), and Vermont ($.20). (Recycled this from a comment I made on the TAB blog.)

Wait, you say, how can I propose raising the price of gas when prices are at an all-time high? Because they really aren't. Inflation-adjusted, prices are not out-of-line with the early 80s. And, cars are more efficient, so we're actually spending less on gas.

One way or the other, we're going to have to foot the bill to keep our roadways in decent condition. Let's charge the users.

Read More...

Wednesday, February 6, 2008

Sheldon Brown

As reported in the TAB this week, Sheldon Brown died this week.

Sheldon lived and worked in Newton. But, his cycling web site and his participation on cycling forums made him influential far beyond our city's borders. Here's a post that captures Sheldon nicely.

An excerpt:

There's little danger that cyclists will forget Sheldon Brown. I doubt that there's any cyclist who hasn't consulted his site, or who doesn't still. And as the architect of the cycling canon he's done more for cycling than any pro cyclist, or critical mass, or white bike, or orange bike ever has. No matter what you ride, how you ride, how long you ride, or how long you've been riding, you're a fan of Sheldon Brown.



The cycling community has lost a vital figure.

Read More...

Tuesday, February 5, 2008

What's up at the Mall?

Neighbor Adam makes a great observation about the Mall at Chestnut Hill: in the recent renovations, they took out the staircase. (The children of NS&S lament the related loss of the "penny fountain.")

It's not a good sign that there's no way to self-propel oneself from one floor to the next (unless you go outside). Escalators. Elevators. But, no stairs.

Speaking of the MaCH, on a recent visit, I noticed a bunch of empty store fronts. I only hope that means a change of tenants and not a shortage of tenants. I'm not a big fan of the MaCH, but a healthy mall is better for the city.

But, I'm not sanguine. The economy's going downhill and new stores are opening at the Natick Collection. I'm not sure that a super-regional mall in Newton is going to survive, even if anchored by the apparently wildly successful Bloomingdales store.

What does that mean? Expect that Simon (the MaCH owners) to propose a Planned Multi-Use Development (like what New England Development is proposing right across the street). They wouldn't have to tear down the mall, they could build the housing around it.

It also makes me wonder about the viability of Chestnut Hill Square. Make no mistake, with the right kind of changes, Chestnut Hill Square is a lot better than most of the alternatives. But, will it make sense to build a new mall across from a struggling mall in a recession?

Read More...

Thursday, January 31, 2008

Public Hearing on Snow Clearing Ordinance

There will be a public hearing on Wednesday, February 6, in the Aldermanic Chambers to hear testimony on a proposed ordinance that would restore residents' obligation to clear snow from sidewalks abutting their properties. (No agenda online, yet.) I assume the meeting will begin at 7:45 PM.

It won't be a complete cure to the problems on our sidewalks, but it will help. The Board of Alderman need to pass this ordinance.

Here's the language to be added to Section 26-8 as a new section (D):

(D) In order to allow for safe pedestrian and wheelchair passage, every owner or occupant of a building or lot of land abutting upon a sidewalk or any person having charge of such property shall cause snow to be removed from the sidewalk and ice on the sidewalk to be removed, sanded or salted to allow for a passageway of at least thirty-six (36) inches in width, provided that where the sidewalk as defined herein is less than thirty-six (36) inches in width, the passageway shall encompass the entire width of such sidewalk. Snow shall be removed and ice shall be removed, sanded or salted within twenty-four (24) hours after such snow has ceased to fall or such ice has come to be formed, provided that when such property is owned or occupied by a low income elderly or low income handicapped person as defined in the foregoing paragraph (B), the time for compliance shall be forty-eight (48) hours. The Commissioner of Public Works, or his/her designee may grant a waiver from the terms of this paragraph (D) to persons defined in paragraph (B) for good cause shown. This paragraph shall apply to snow and ice which falls from buildings, other structures, trees or bushes, as well as to that which falls from clouds. This paragraph shall not apply to owners or occupants of a building or lot covered by Section 26-8.

As I discussed previously, I had been concerned about adding another requirement when the city isn't enforcing an existing prohibition against putting snow on sidewalks, Section 26-9. But, the new ordinance will regulate conditions not conduct making it more easily enforced. Ironically, it may even create greater compliance with Section 26-9. So, now I'm an enthusiastic supporter.

There are a few issues with the ordinance language:

  • It's unclear whether a citizen is responsible for snow that ends up on the sidewalk as a result of city street plowing. Here's the applicability sentence: "This paragraph shall apply to snow and ice which falls from buildings, other structures, trees or bushes, as well as to that which falls from clouds." Is this meant to apply to snow that comes over the grass berm onto my sidewalk? It should.
  • It's also unclear whether this covers the apron from the sidewalk to the street at corners. Again, it should, though that would impose an extra burden on corner-lot owners given the high mounds the city leaves.
  • It really should cover the apron at the end of most people's walks, where homeowners are supposed to leave garbage cans and recycling. This might reduce the cans-on-top-of-snow-banks problem.
  • The ordinance should include a provision that allows the Commissioner of Public Works extend the period for snow clearing in exceptional circumstances. It needn't be in the ordinance, but the Commissioner of Public Works could communicate the extension on the city web page, reverse 911, and any other communications mechanisms that the city uses in the future.

Try to make the hearing. Or, communicate your support for the new ordinance by e-mailing members of the Public Safety and Transportation and Public Facilities committees. E-mail the clerks:

  • Shawna Sullivan ssullivan@newtonma.gov (PS&T)
  • Christine Owen cowen@newtonma.gov (Pub Fac)
  • Rosalie Myers rmyers@newtonma.gov (Pub Fac)

Ask the clerks to forward your message to the committee members.

Read More...

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Chicane cartoon

Want to understand how a chicane calms traffic?



From Streetsfilms.

Read More...

Pushing people to the street

Last week's death of a Watertown man who was walking in the street in West Newton brings unfortunate urgency to the question of sidewalk clearing. While it may turn out that the man was walking in the street for reasons other than the sidewalks being impassible, it seems unlikely.

There are four reasons why a sidewalk might be impassible, and the city is currently responsible for three (arguably all four). It's important to note that, in any given block, any single one of these factors will send pedestrians into the street, even if a sidewalk is otherwise clear. It may not be the brightest decision, but people generally don't go into the street to avoid an impasse, then get back on the sidewalk. Once they are in the street, they stay in the street.

Here are the four reasons:

  • There are high mounds at the crosswalks/corners from city or city contractor snow plowing. This is not illegal, but section 26-8C does say that the city "shall endeavor to minimize the blocking of sidewalks and intersections with plowed snow."
  • There are high mounds besides driveways because residents or businesses violate ordinance 26-9, which prohibits placing snow on city roads or sidewalks.
  • A sidewalk in a business district is not cleared, in violation of ordinance 26-8, which requires that owners and residents within a business district clear snow from sidewalks.
  • A sidewalk not in a business district is not cleared. The city only clears 60 miles or so of sidewalks. And, there is no ordinance which currently requires sidewalk clearing, though such an ordinance is currently working its way through Public Safety & Transportation and Public Facilities.

We know that the city does not minimize the blocking of sidewalks with plowed snow. But, high mounds at corners are standard operating procedure, not the exception. Former DPW Commissioner Rooney once explained that it is much more costly to avoid putting snow on the corners. If that's so, the ordinance should be struck. Or, DPW should be funded to adhere to the ordinance. The city does remove some of the mounds on the routes handled by the city's sidewalk clearing machine.

Sidewalk clearing in business districts is, from my own observation, mixed at best. I do not know — and will inquire — how many citations the city issues, but I would bet it's none or very few.

Businesses and residents put snow on sidewalks all over the city. Last year, the city issued no citations for violations of Section 26-9. The stated reason for issuing no citations: the police can't issue a ticket unless they see a plow actually pushing snow onto the sidewalk. It seems obvious that if a driveway has been plowed and plow detritus is on the sidewalk, the detritus is the direct consequence of the plowing and a citation might properly issue. But, even if you accept the lame rationale, there's a very simple solution. Note a street that seems to have a high incidence of plowing and have an officer monitor the street during the next storm. As a plow operator leaves a job, give him a ticket if he's left snow on the sidewalk. Or at least a warning.

Sidewalks outside the business district will be residents' responsibility if a proposed ordinance is adopted. I've been reluctant to get too excited about a resident snow-clearing obligation because the city refuses to enforce existing ordinances, namely Section 26-9. But, it recently occurred to me that Section 26-9 and the resident snow-clearing obligation are different enough to reduce my concern.

Section 26-9 prohibits a conduct: putting snow on the sidewalk. The proposed ordinance will obligate people to cure a condition: the presence of snow on an abutting sidewalk. While lame, the we-didn't-see-it rationale for not enforcing Section 26-9 won't apply to the new ordinance. If there's snow on your sidewalk, you are in violation. In fact, the proposed ordinance would enhance Section 26-9 as a snow plow operator that puts snow from the driveway on the sidewalk increases the homeowner's burden.

It's time for the new ordinance, but it's only part of the solution. In response to the problem of the high cost of salt, the TAB quoted the mayor as saying "public safety comes first." I hope that means a look at the whole problem of sidewalk clearing: crosswalk mounds, enforcement of existing ordinances, expanding city clearing, and lobbying for a resident snow-clearing ordinance.

Read More...

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Snow capped cars

If you're going to buy and drive a tall vehicle — SUV or mini-van — can you also invest in a small step stool and a shop broom?

Then, clean the snow off the top of the tall thingy before you start out in the morning.

Riding down my street this morning, a minivan in the other lane hit a bump and a sheet of snow from the roof slid down and covered the windshield — with the minivan pointed right at me. The driver stopped short, sending the rest of the snow from the roof right into my path.

There's no law in Massachusetts requiring owners to clear their vehicles, but do we really need a law to use their cars and trucks in a thoughtful manner?

Read More...

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Thaw surprise

Somebody seems to have taken advantage of the spring-like conditions to freshen up Newton Centre.

I counted over 35 new trees up and down both sides of Centre Street just north of Langley Street. This picture is looking north, with Centre Street to the right.

As best I can tell, they were planted in the last week or so. Some of the trees had little signs saying that they were donated by Newton Andover Theological School.

Read More...

Tuesday, January 8, 2008

Meet the new boss

I think that it's good news that Alderman Stephen Linsky is going to be the chairman of the Public Safety and Transportation committee and, by extension, a member of Traffic Council. I would characterize him as one of the more pro-pedestrian and pro-bicycle aldermen we have, but not among the most vocally so.

He got a B from NS&S on his answer to the League of Women Voter's pedestrian and bicycle question — How would you encourage safe walking and bicycling in the city, especially during the winter? — mostly because his answer lacked the specifics that other alderman gave. Here's his answer in full:

PTOs at some elementary schools are now sponsoring initiatives to encourage safe walking to our schools, reversing the trend toward increased reliance on individual transportation. Not only does this help promote overall safety, but it also helps combat the rise of childhood obesity and reduce carbon emissions. Through participation with the Bicycle and Pedestrian Task Force, I hope to encourage safer biking and walking opportunities throughout the city, including and especially bike paths.

He strikes me as among the more thoughtful aldermen and not a big defender of the status quo. And, he's appeared at Bike and Pedestrian Task Force meetings!

Among Christine Samuelson's virtues as PS&T chairman and Traffic Council member were her strong technical grounding in traffic issues, her apparently good working relationship with the city Traffic Engineer and Transportation Planner, and her willingness to listen to community insight about the particulars of neighborhood traffic issues, although she could be a bit brusque to residents in meetings. (My read on her concern for the neighbors is not universally held.) I hope that Chairman Linsky follows former Alderman Sameulson's example in these regards, save for the brusqueness.

Read More...

Ahhh

The northeast is a great place to ride year-round, provided you have the right gear for cold and wet. It was it's own kind of fun to ride when Neena's time and temperature sign showed 4 degrees last week.

But, it sure is nice to ride when it's warm enough for shorts.

Read More...

Tuesday, January 1, 2008

Happy New Year, indeed

There's a proposal to make five miles of Storrow Drive car-free on Sundays.

A nice treat for 2008.

Read More...