14 Jun
2002
14 Jun
'02
7:51 p.m.
INNOVATION BRIEFS Advisory
July/August 2002
==========================================
Abstracts of the latest issue of Innovation Briefs are now
available on our website at:
http://www.innobriefs.com/abstracts/2002/july02.html
+ New Census Data Provides a Reality Check
+ Relieving Highway Congestion
+ The Myth of the Underfunded Mass Transit
+ Financing Future Transportation Needs
Part I: Short-Term Revenue Enhancements
+ Toward a Hydrogen-Based Future
+ "HOT Networks"
For a full version, subscribe to Innovation Briefs
at an introductory annual rate of $50.
Note to our congressional and federal government subscribers:
If you are experiencing serious delays in receiving
"snail mail," you may request e-mail delivery of
Innovation Briefs by contacting us at korski(a)erols.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
INNOVATION BRIEFS
10200 Riverwood Drive, Potomac, MD 20854-1536
Tel: 301.299.1996; Fax: 301.299.4425
Email: korski(a)erols.com
#################################################################
#################################################################
#################################################################
#####
#####
#####
#################################################################
#################################################################
#################################################################
15 Jun
15 Jun
12:16 p.m.
Ken:
As one of those who happens to support the Smart Growth movement you can
rest assured that I was not at all "surprised" by the new data in the Year
2000 Census. Most of us who follow these things, even casually, knew full
well that the aggregate trends were (and are) still going in the "wrong"
direction. Lets remember, the Smart Growth movement is just a "babe in the
woods" and it may take decades for the message to take hold.
Perhaps the message of Smart Growth will not take hold and perhaps there are
some land speculators who still expect to derive huge profits from sprawl
and the proliferation of large lot McMansions. So be it.
But it is not the job of the "new Census data" to send us a message that all
of the Smart Growth ideas are a "failure". And it was never the message
from the Smart Growth folks that the car was going to be obsolete at any
time in the future.
It is the job of planners to seek out solutions that best serve our
communities. And, as we dig into the census data, we will most likely find
some exceptions to the overall trends that will tell a good story about
Smart Growth and its benefits.
Ed Herlihy
Reston, VA
PS. OK, I fully agree the CTPP may not the best list to start a discussion
about the merits of Smart Growth. If the list moderators have a suggestion,
I will be glad to move the discussion to a more appropriate forum, if there
is one. Any suggestions?
----- Original Message -----
From: "C Kenneth Orski" <korski(a)erols.com>
To: <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net>
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 8:51 PM
Subject: [CTPP] INNOVATION BRIEFS Advisory
INNOVATION BRIEFS Advisory
July/August 2002
==========================================
Abstracts of the latest issue of Innovation Briefs are now
available on our website at:
http://www.innobriefs.com/abstracts/2002/july02.html
+ New Census Data Provides a Reality Check
+ Relieving Highway Congestion
+ The Myth of the Underfunded Mass Transit
+ Financing Future Transportation Needs
Part I: Short-Term Revenue Enhancements
+ Toward a Hydrogen-Based Future
+ "HOT Networks"
For a full version, subscribe to Innovation Briefs
at an introductory annual rate of $50.
Note to our congressional and federal government subscribers:
If you are experiencing serious delays in receiving
"snail mail," you may request e-mail delivery of
Innovation Briefs by contacting us at korski(a)erols.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
INNOVATION BRIEFS
10200 Riverwood Drive, Potomac, MD 20854-1536
Tel: 301.299.1996; Fax: 301.299.4425
Email: korski(a)erols.com
#################################################################
#################################################################
#################################################################
#####
#####
#####
#################################################################
#################################################################
#################################################################
12:25 p.m.
undoubtedly you will
AEP
----- Original Message -----
From: Ed Herlihy <ed.herlihy(a)comcast.net>
To: <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net>
Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2002 1:16 PM
Subject: Re: [CTPP] INNOVATION BRIEFS Advisory
Ken:
As one of those who happens to support the Smart Growth movement you can
rest assured that I was not at all "surprised" by the new data in the Year
2000 Census. Most of us who follow these things, even casually, knew full
well that the aggregate trends were (and are) still going in the "wrong"
direction. Lets remember, the Smart Growth movement is just a "babe in
the
woods" and it may take decades for the message to
take hold.
Perhaps the message of Smart Growth will not take hold and perhaps there
are
some land speculators who still expect to derive huge
profits from sprawl
and the proliferation of large lot McMansions. So be it.
But it is not the job of the "new Census data" to send us a message that
all
of the Smart Growth ideas are a "failure".
And it was never the message
from the Smart Growth folks that the car was going to be obsolete at any
time in the future.
It is the job of planners to seek out solutions that best serve our
communities. And, as we dig into the census data, we will most likely
find
some exceptions to the overall trends that will tell a
good story about
Smart Growth and its benefits.
Ed Herlihy
Reston, VA
PS. OK, I fully agree the CTPP may not the best list to start a discussion
about the merits of Smart Growth. If the list moderators have a
suggestion,
I will be glad to move the discussion to a more
appropriate forum, if
there
is one. Any suggestions?
----- Original Message -----
From: "C Kenneth Orski" <korski(a)erols.com>
To: <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net>
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 8:51 PM
Subject: [CTPP] INNOVATION BRIEFS Advisory
INNOVATION BRIEFS Advisory
July/August 2002
==========================================
Abstracts of the latest issue of Innovation Briefs are now
available on our website at:
http://www.innobriefs.com/abstracts/2002/july02.html
+ New Census Data Provides a Reality Check
+ Relieving Highway Congestion
+ The Myth of the Underfunded Mass Transit
+ Financing Future Transportation Needs
Part I: Short-Term Revenue Enhancements
+ Toward a Hydrogen-Based Future
+ "HOT Networks"
For a full version, subscribe to Innovation Briefs
at an introductory annual rate of $50.
Note to our congressional and federal government subscribers:
If you are experiencing serious delays in receiving
"snail mail," you may request e-mail delivery of
Innovation Briefs by contacting us at korski(a)erols.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
INNOVATION BRIEFS
10200 Riverwood Drive, Potomac, MD 20854-1536
Tel: 301.299.1996; Fax: 301.299.4425
Email: korski(a)erols.com
#################################################################
#################################################################
#################################################################
#####
#####
#####
#################################################################
#################################################################
#################################################################
2:26 p.m.
Ed,
Calling smart growth a "failure" depends on whether you're an optimist or a
pessimist. When critics call mass transit subsidies a "failure" because
private
vehicle transportation keeps increasing its share of the market, I contemplate
what it would be like for people now dependent on mass transportation if there
were no subsidies -- transit service would be greatly curtailed (or nonexistent)
from what it is today. I like to think of the glass being half full, not half
empty.
For smart growth, can we estimate what human habitation would be like, if the
polices in place today, had not been enacted? Measuring such effects are not
easy, but would be helpful in forming support for new or revised measures.
Perhaps a comparative study of trends in several areas that have adopted
different policies might provide some insights. Filtering out the many
variables affecting growth would be the primary challenge if such an
investigation were taken.
George Wiggers
Forest Heights, MD
Ed Herlihy wrote:
Ken:
As one of those who happens to support the Smart Growth movement you can
rest assured that I was not at all "surprised" by the new data in the Year
2000 Census. Most of us who follow these things, even casually, knew full
well that the aggregate trends were (and are) still going in the "wrong"
direction. Lets remember, the Smart Growth movement is just a "babe in the
woods" and it may take decades for the message to take hold.
Perhaps the message of Smart Growth will not take hold and perhaps there are
some land speculators who still expect to derive huge profits from sprawl
and the proliferation of large lot McMansions. So be it.
But it is not the job of the "new Census data" to send us a message that all
of the Smart Growth ideas are a "failure". And it was never the message
from the Smart Growth folks that the car was going to be obsolete at any
time in the future.
It is the job of planners to seek out solutions that best serve our
communities. And, as we dig into the census data, we will most likely find
some exceptions to the overall trends that will tell a good story about
Smart Growth and its benefits.
Ed Herlihy
Reston, VA
PS. OK, I fully agree the CTPP may not the best list to start a discussion
about the merits of Smart Growth. If the list moderators have a suggestion,
I will be glad to move the discussion to a more appropriate forum, if there
is one. Any suggestions?
----- Original Message -----
From: "C Kenneth Orski" <korski(a)erols.com>
To: <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net>
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 8:51 PM
Subject: [CTPP] INNOVATION BRIEFS Advisory
> INNOVATION BRIEFS Advisory
> July/August 2002
> ==========================================
>
> Abstracts of the latest issue of Innovation Briefs are now
> available on our website at:
> http://www.innobriefs.com/abstracts/2002/july02.html
>
> + New Census Data Provides a Reality Check
> + Relieving Highway Congestion
> + The Myth of the Underfunded Mass Transit
> + Financing Future Transportation Needs
> Part I: Short-Term Revenue Enhancements
> + Toward a Hydrogen-Based Future
> + "HOT Networks"
>
> For a full version, subscribe to Innovation Briefs
> at an introductory annual rate of $50.
>
> Note to our congressional and federal government subscribers:
> If you are experiencing serious delays in receiving
> "snail mail," you may request e-mail delivery of
> Innovation Briefs by contacting us at korski(a)erols.com
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> INNOVATION BRIEFS
> 10200 Riverwood Drive, Potomac, MD 20854-1536
> Tel: 301.299.1996; Fax: 301.299.4425
> Email: korski(a)erols.com
>
> #################################################################
> #################################################################
> #################################################################
> #####
> #####
> #####
> #################################################################
> #################################################################
> #################################################################
16 Jun
16 Jun
10:57 a.m.
Ed -
Perhaps my point of view will become clearer if you see the entire
Brief, which is attached. Unlike you, most "smart growth" and
anti-automobile crusaders refuse to accept the implications of the
trends revealed by the 2000 census. You would understand what I mean if
you took part (as I do) in some of the other forums devoted to "smart
growth" and anti-automobile proselytizing, such as CNU (Congress of New
Urbanism), STPP and TLC-net. Unfortunately, many "smart growth" and
anti-auto zealots are not as reasonable and clear thinking as you. They
do not let facts interfere with their ideology.
Regards,
Ken Orski
----------------
Ed Herlihy wrote:
Ken:
As one of those who happens to support the Smart Growth movement you can
rest assured that I was not at all "surprised" by the new data in the Year
2000 Census. Most of us who follow these things, even casually, knew full
well that the aggregate trends were (and are) still going in the "wrong"
direction. Lets remember, the Smart Growth movement is just a "babe in the
woods" and it may take decades for the message to take hold.
Perhaps the message of Smart Growth will not take hold and perhaps there are
some land speculators who still expect to derive huge profits from sprawl
and the proliferation of large lot McMansions. So be it.
But it is not the job of the "new Census data" to send us a message that all
of the Smart Growth ideas are a "failure". And it was never the message
from the Smart Growth folks that the car was going to be obsolete at any
time in the future.
It is the job of planners to seek out solutions that best serve our
communities. And, as we dig into the census data, we will most likely find
some exceptions to the overall trends that will tell a good story about
Smart Growth and its benefits.
Ed Herlihy
Reston, VA
PS. OK, I fully agree the CTPP may not the best list to start a discussion
about the merits of Smart Growth. If the list moderators have a suggestion,
I will be glad to move the discussion to a more appropriate forum, if there
is one. Any suggestions?
7985
days inactive
7986
days old
4 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Alan E. Pisarski -
C Kenneth Orski -
Ed Herlihy -
George Wiggers