Rubber Hits the Road

Overpopulation is the cause of all this. Why isn't this issue being addressed?

As usual trio Francisco, Self and Hotchkiss have a very narrow and short term view. That is pretty natural and it fits their constituency well.

It makes sense that Self would continue to lobby for her "family of 8 cars" that live up a 10th of a mile private drive, on the grounds of a historic home, complete with a seemingly permanent and gigantic quonset hut that was possibly purchased online from WalMart.

And Hotchkiss, pulling another Hotchkiss is slow to realize that most homes already have 2 to 3 cars; and that is the problem. So Hotchkiss should have stated that staff should be planning for the inevitability of the Hotchkiss reality of 3 to 5 cars per household along with a double-decker 12 lane Hwy 101.

Francisco always speaks with a believable but limited framework and within the short time-line of a televangelist minister. Simultaneously loving and frightening, convincing but narrow. I am in agreement though that the fellowship should have "buy-in" and right our wrongs. Let us restore the parking on Carrillio Street for the property owners, especially the businesses on the section of Carrillo Street as depicted in the 3rd picture above. I don't recall these people having "stakeholder buy-in." Or is it that Francisco only needs "buy-in" from the influential on our beloved downtown State Street.

Decriminalize skateboarding, the most energy efficient and environmentally friendly mode of transportation. If working class people could also get affordable housing closer to their jobs, congestion and pollution would also decrease.
FSH are only interested in enriching outside corporations.
2-5 cars is NOT the reality of the future.

To punctuate my first comment (as of yet, undressed) vehicles today are far more energy-efficient than those of a few decades ago yet the clamor to get them off the road increases. Why is this?

I find myself agreeing with billclaussen on this one. I live downtown, drive a hybrid, commute into LA fairly regularly for work on Metrolink, and try to walk everywhere locally I can. But giving up the car is not realistic. There's no high speed rail to get me to Ventura, and there isn't a sufficient economy here to generate jobs for people like me, who have to work alternatively out of LA / my home. My kid's school is bikeable, but not through the industrial / Haley district she'd have to travel, and bus service takes her all the way to Carillo first for a transfer. I waste less gas and time driving her to school. There are no markets close by, so getting in car is mandatory for groceries. I live in a high Latino populated neighborhood, and my neighbor has 5 vehicles - 3 personal for him and his family, and two work trucks. This is the reality of our area, and Plan Santa Barbara doesn't address that. It tries to force folks like me out of our cars, but doesn't confront the Latino population and their needs, which would be a difficult proposition. Until it does, the trio is correct to resist. Plan Santa Barbara just doesn't provide all the answers needed to various transportation issues...yet.

Interesting aspect sharonella. Despite the ostensibly pro-working class veneer of this plan, among the people it hurts is the working class. For what it's worth I drive a car that gets 25/33 MPG and I don't want people to think I'm dismissing the need to be environmentally concious.

All of this makes me wonder if the ultimate goal is to seal off downtown and render it inaccessable by car.

From what I see idealism trumps practicality when it comes to these ambitious plans.

If there should be no free parking in the downrown area, I will not go there. In addition to missing favorite stores and restarants I will have to find a different opthamologist to replace the one who has helped me for years.

lmeoriole perfectly illustrates the problem. If I can't have my car, I won't go there. Whaaaa, whaaaa.

Grow up. The car had its heyday but is now part of the problem, not part of the solution.

SezMe: Do you have any solutions?...or do you just insult people? Here is something you need to know: not everyone is able-bodied and can walk/ride long distances.

No, again CARS are not the problem. They weren't the problem decades ago even when they belched out much more in the way of toxic chemicals. Actually though, your post makes the point clearer: much of what is behind this thread is the angry luddite mentality.

So, do have anything constructive to say?

Wow, Helene Scheider quickly tallied up almost 600 MIL spent on support of the car culture in SB. How much do you think support of a Metrolink commuter train (or three during the peak hours) to/from Camarillo-Goleta would have cost? I know a LOT of commuters who would be happy to have been riding that train. Now, a Metrolink solution might not have addressed the parking/parking lot woes of local residents, but it would have gone a LONG way to easing freeway congestion through the fair city, maybe saved some $$, and likely prevented the graffitti blight we now get to look at along the spanky new wall on US 101.

thereasthefarmer: there are two issues that I am seeing and one is transportation within the Santa Barbara/Goleta area, and then as you mention, that between local cities.

As for the graffiti problem you mention, I don't get your point about how having less vehicles driving the 101 would prevent that from happening since graffiti is everywhere.

Santa Barbara is too small of a city to have priced parking. It works better in larger cities where they have alternatives and where everyone knows that it is needed.

I am missing something....in 20 years from now, wouldn't the added vehicle congestion be a natural deterrent for using vehicle transportation? (thus relieving the need to add a deterrent now by taking away the free parking)

SezMe: Do you have any solutions?...or do you just insult people? Here is something you need to know: not everyone is able-bodied and can walk/ride long distances.
-- billclausen

People who whine about the lack of free parking deserve every insult that comes their way.

Let's be clear on one point, Bill. The number of people who are limited in some way is so small that they are not part of the problem. Every single one can have a car and it won't affect any long term solution to the problem. Strawman incinerated.

So, do [you] have anything constructive to say?
-- billclausen

Sure. Plan for small electric cars. Jitney services. Bike stations located all over the place where one just pays, say, 25 cents via their cell phone which unlocks a bike. They can then go anywhere there is another bike station and leave it there. The tourists would love it. All that and I'm not a transportation futurist.

Finally, I've seen absolutely no constructive solutions out of you. Got milk?

I think addressing the issue of overcrowding is constructive. How long do you think we can try adding 10, 20, 30 pounds into a bag that only can take 5 pounds?

At some point the unpleasant reality of too many people will have to be addressed. Funny how the Zero Population Growth concept has gone from one that I heard much discussed in decades past to just being an elephant in the living room.

By the way, I like the "got milk" comment. It's very cute and original.

Pedestrians are a source of gridlock, wasted time, and pollution. Just sit at any downtown intersection and watch all the cars waiting, motors running, for peds to clear the intersections so they (the cars) can proceed. Why not do as D.C. did 50 years ago and reprogram the traffic lights so that all peds walk at once, across and diagonal, then cars go when peds don't. Whaddya bet our "progessive" traffic planning department is completely incapable of such a basic traffic management skill as reprogramming the lights. Hey, but they get a big salary and better benefits than the private sector, along with virtual no accountability. Thanks once again to our union-loving Council members (you know who you are).

"JohnLocke" you are truly a force of nature:

Not satisfied with simply unearthing a "progressive" unified conspiracy within Public Works, you also share your definitive traffic flow analysis -- encompassing and coordinating the disciplines of physics, statistics, and engineering -- for FREE!

Interesting list here:
http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/10/cong...

Jack up the price of gas. That is the solution. If you are worried about the burden falling on the poor, then offer gas stamps to the needy. The rest will take care of itself. Streets will turn into bike ways and walk ways and public transportation will prevail. Those dependent on the car industry will have to adjust. Local business will thrive once again!

Slow Down and Move On Santa Barbara!

Or maybe, JohnLocke, they looked at your suggestion and decided that it was not the panacea that you portray it to be. But never mind, it gave you another opportunity to make one more in an endless stream of whines about our hapless bureaucrats. Thumbs up!

What about ethanol?

Let's start with the city and county workers paying for parking. There is a very large number of city and county workers downtown. Let's find out how many cars per day they generate and then start charging them $20/day for parking and then keep upping the cost until no more than 20% of the population drive cars to work.
Given the large population of these workers it would make a noticible impact and would allow us to see the price elasticity

SezMe, I don't believe for an instant that the traffic department looked at the D.C. solution; they are too busy dreaming up driver-enraging and bicyclist endangering 'solutions'.

'Hapless bureaucrats'. Riiiight....I'm not whining; I am expressing, repeatedly, publicly, and loudly, outrage at the 100%-over-market these people are being paid. It's not the salaries, though those are high by comparison, it's the pensions and the four day workweeks. Do the math. Read something besides the Indy and get another view. And BTW, a 'furlough' without pay is not a pay cut - a pay cut means the same work for less pay.

@JohnLocke - Yeah, I too am shocked that the traffic department didn't waste their time researching traffic solutions from the country's most congested city. Sweet Mary, are you a walking plethora of bad ideas.

For a lot of people, especially those who are on salary and not on hourly, a furlough is a pay cut. And even those who are hourly - while the hours might be reduced, the responsibilities are not. It's the same amount of work in a shorter period of time - (your wonderful myth about four-day work weeks notwithstanding).

This problem was caused decades ago by short sighted politico’s in the pockets of development, to grease the wheels and ride the bubble. Out of town dollars / tourist economy = shaft for locals.
I think a more significant benchmark of the traffic engineers was that they couldn’t even measure the width of Anacapa Street at the Granada Garage location, leading to a shift of the traffic flow and elimination of on street parking on that block. Who got fired for that one?
The freeway mess and intersecting streets is due to the workforce coming from out of town. Could over development have caused the overpriced real estate boom and the divided class? Can the Mayor say that she (the city) is paying for the freeway widening? Or are they just taking credit for it? Could they do more by implementing a staggered work schedule for local businesses?
The traffic czar Dayton needs to get off his high horse. They need to give business owners parking passes for their employees in the parking garages if nothing else. The Granada garage is empty.
Locals want the 90 minute reinstated or we go away. Is that what they want? I think they don’t care!
They just want to preserve their fat pensions, and create more stuff to do.
This council aught to get together before their meeting and figure out away to at least come off like they’re not wasting our time and resources. This is embarrassing!

Got ethanol?

Get rid of all the traffic lights and replace them with STOP signs. Much more efficient than leaving cars idling with no cross traffic.

1. DC would be even more congested without the allway ped crossings.
2. DC is not the most congested city; NYC is.
3. Hourly people, unlike salaried folks, work by the hour, not by the job. That's why they are called hourly. Fewer hours; less work. Your assertion that 'the same amount of work must be done' may be true, but the work is just delayed, not done in the same time period. To do the same work in fewer hours would be an improvement in productivity, something that unions hate and governments never heard of.
4. The local govunionemployee 4 day work week is no myth and has been reported in several of the local media - one article actually made a very good mathematical case for it being a 3 1/2 day week. Take vacation, sick leave, alternate Friday closings, and furlough days, add them up, subtract from 260 (the actual number of weekdays in a year), divide by 52 weeks and the work week is definitely not greater than 4 days, and arguable less.
5. At least I have ideas. Some folks seem to have nothing constructive to say and post only to protect and defend our evergrowing, far too intrusive and expensive government and their union supporters. SezMe and EatTheRich are perfect examples. Hmmmm. Maybe they are fatcat govunionemployees on furlough defending their own well-feathered nests!

1) So it would still be the most congested city. Terrific point.

2) Not according to the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI), a research division of Texas A&M University as published in Forbes Magazine (that bastion of liberal politics) in the link provided above by binky. Of course, it completely challenges your world view, so hence, you dismiss it without even a glance. Congratulations.

3) That's not even remotely accurate. Hourly people are paid by the hours they work. Most have responsibilities just like any other employed person. The fact that *some* things take longer is only one product of a furlough - not all responsibilities can be privileged in that manner. People who work for a living know this, by the way.

4) So you seem to believe that accruing one to two vacation days a months (depending on length of employment), one to two sick days a month (depending on length of employment and whether employees use them), alternate Friday and furlough days (which are unpaid), and you somehow get some cushy, four day a week job. Even if it does work out to four days a week - most of those days are taken out of the workers' pockets, so... yeah that's some creative math. How about you cite it?

5) "Ideas" are all you have, John - and they tend to be baseless and bad. As far as my "fatcat govunionemployees" status goes, once again, you are predictably and laughably wrong.

So, EatTheRich, besides not understanding the concept of hourly pay, and completely failing to understand the basic math of the four day week (vacation days are paid days, alternative Fridays off are paid days, and sick days are 'bankable' only in the always generous world of the union/government fleece-the-taxpayer conspiracy), do you have any actual ideas? Or just gratuitous insults?

And I am curious. Since I'm 'laughably' (in your worldview, at least) wrong about your being a furloughed govunionemployee, even though your attitudes seem to mesh perfectly with that group, I do have a question: Do you/did you earn your living in private employ or in some government-paid pursuit? I'll go first: private all the way, always for a salary with obligations that exceeded the generally fictitious 40-hour week, and a tiny, not cost of living adjusted pension - in other words, the norm for most privately employed taxpayers that fund all this govunion largesse. So yes, I am outraged at having to pay fatcat govunionemployee pensions and will definitely be gone from CA when the enormous bill comes due. You can pay it.

Note to easternpacific: according to an article in local media about 6 months ago, most of the traffic 'engineers' are not engineers at all - several are city planners, some are sociologists - and have demostrated, as you point out, a notable lack in 'hard' skills, you know, math, queueing theory, all that boring stuff that goes into real traffic engineering. And as you point out, they are not even capable of measuring the width of a street. But boy do they get paid well. And the pensions. mmmmmm, yummy. At the expense of those who suffer their mistakes.
And a further note to EatTheRich: So let me understand this. If DC is in fact the most congested city in the world (thanks to enormous and ever growing government) and would be even more congested if allway ped crossings were not used, this means that the use of those crossings get no credit? In other words, partial solutions are of no value? All or nothing? So we shouldn't assess their potential benefits here?

Just because one's wage is determined hourly doesn't mean one's responsibilities are determined hourly. Not every hourly job is a service industry job. Anyone who has ever worked for a living knows this.

Vacation time and sick time are accrued in most public sector jobs. They are not simply handed out - you earn them as you go (typically around a day and a half a month for full time workers). Furlough and closures come by reducing the staff's salary. Proclaiming a "cushy, 4 day a week job" that comes out of the pockets of the workers is disingenuous. Most people - especially in this town and this economy - would rather have the money.

Not that it's ANY of your business, but I have three jobs (and I occasionally do consulting work), none of which are union and none of which are paid for by public money. Granted, two of my jobs are very part time, and one is full time, but whatever. That probably explains why I have under 30 posts, and you have over 450. Again, whatever.

Well, at least you yielded that "most congested" point. I guess it's the little victories. How about looking at communities with sustainable transportation models, rather than cities where they've let the problem get so out of hand? Looking at D.C. is a waste of time, but Santa Barbara's transportation issues are not unique and not unresolvable - they just require looking at alternatives that people like yourself would probably find impalpable. After all, if bulbs out are too complicated...

And you have three jobs because you can't hold one good one? Or, to give you the benefit of the doubt, you hold three jobs so you can continue to afford this beautiful, but ultimately failed and bankrupt community? Having lived in 9 other locations in the US over the past 40 years, I can tell you that SB contains some of the most spoiled and self-indulgent people I have ever met, many of whom seem to think they are due a lifestyle that they can only achieve through an accident of birth and government service and tax policies that favor longtime residents and are paid for by newer residents and the so-called 'rich'.

I love the idea of alternate energy and transportation models, when they are realistic, achievable, and scalable. But I absolutely despise the idea that some 25 year old with a degree in 'city planning' from UCSB who could not afford to live in SB without significant subsidies from parents, the government, and Prop 13 knows enough to plan my life for me.

Enough already, we are clearly at opposite ends of the spectrum. And I still have not seen a single original idea from you. We will continue to disagree on the issue of goveunionemployees and I'll remember your comments next time I'm in line observing the glacially slow pace of our local 'hapless bureaucrats'. And, as I said, when the bill comes due I'll be gone and you and those like you who seem to believe in all this largesse can pay for it.

To solve the overpopulation problem we could adopt Mexico's family planning policies which have reduced fertility rates to replacement level in that country. Similarly we could adopt Mexico's immigration policies which only allow those who are self-supporting and will not burden the taxpayers to gain residency. Finally, under Mexican immigration law, the SB police would be required to seek out and arrest illegal aliens.

Yes, we can't discuss overpopulation because the goal of destroying "white privilege" by ethnic transformation is far more important than maintaining our quality of life.

"Yes, we can't..."

-Revisionist

I believe, "Yes, we can't" was Obama's original campaign slogan. His campaign then adopted, "Yes we can destroy white privilege by ethnic transformation" but eventually shortened it to, "Yes we can" which seemed to have a nice Marxist ring to it.

Zero Population Growth was once a central plank in the environmentalist platform - and for good reason (where does environmental damage come from, if not people - fewer people=less damage). But since the birth rate varies dramatically by nationality, and any attempt to point that out is deemed 'racist' by the pc set, the topic has largely been dropped. But I'll raise it. One can look up US Gov stats on birth rates to find the answers, but one can also walk down any street on SB's East Side and count all the mommies walking 2 kids plus one in a stroller and one 'in the oven.. Not racist, just facts.

JohnLocke,

No, not facts, just interpretation of observation at a certain time and place. The UN and CIA agree that birth rates are slightly higher/1000 in Mexico, but not dramatically so as you state above.

I agree with you about population control BTW. I just find it difficult to filter through all the hyperbole when reading your comments.

Because you're so consistent with your emotionally charged, condescending voice, I find that, whenever I agree with you, I think I must be wrong.

Well King and John, I'd say we're all on the same page here. We're striking at the root.

As I've said before: I find it interesting that politicians cozy up for photo-ops with Planned Parenthood yet would dare address the issue of what is driving our rapid population increase for fear of being branded racist.

I must say your musings, billclausen, do take some peculiar turns.

Perhaps the decline of the ZPG movement in the US from your salad days is a result of the decline of the national population growth rate. .
http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=w...

Birth rates are an important indicator of and factor in development, and tracking trends in birth rates and fertility is critical to government planning.

Birth and fertility rates
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/peo...

+ crude death rates
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/peo...

= population growth.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/peo...

Birth rates typically fall with economic development. Countries with the highest birth, fertility and population growth rates are also among the poorest. Not one appears among the top 50 countries in terms of purchasing power parity.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco...

Some social scientists predict a disasterous collision of poor and rich worlds as a result of these trends.

"I must say your musings, billclausen, do take some peculiar turns."

Since I'm no longer locked onto the political grid I'm somewhat of a maverick.

By the way, back when the Hutu/Tutsi rift resulted in mass killings in Rwanda, I heard at that time the birth rate was 8.3 children per woman. (In fairness, I don't know what the infant mortality rate was) And to seemingly digress--but not so much since the issue of gun control comes up frequently on these blogs--the killings were done with in large part with machetes.

I noticed we have a new blogger named Kingprawn. Prawns are delicious and we dolphins love our seafood. Hey Kingprawn, we'd love to have you and your royal court for dinner...I mean have you OVER for dinner.

Invite your halibut friend too.

"SezMe, I don't believe for an instant that the traffic department looked at the D.C. solution...
--JohnLocke

Well, instead of living in a fantasy world, I actually called the city traffic planning department and talked about that pedestrian scheme. It is called "scramble" and it comes up, he said, about every 5 years here in SB.

It is not viable. It does not speed up pedestrians nor autos.

And, btw, I have been in the private sector nearly all my life. Before becoming self-employed over a decade ago, I was a partner in a multi-million dollar international engineering consulting firm and, myself, worked around the world.

Now, JohnLocke, that so many of your precious assumptions have been thrown in the dumpster, do you have the cojones to reconsider your lopsided world view. Oh, I thought not.

"Now, JohnLocke, that so many of your precious assumptions have been thrown in the dumpster"...

If you were truly interested in the environment, you would have put those ideas in the recycle bin.

@sixdolphins - Not everything can be recycled.