Back on the Hill, pressing for livable communities

First, thanks for the support demonstrated by your comments on these pages. And for the respect shown even by those who may not agree with my ideas. I'm encouraged by the response, and I'm encouraged because this Administration is working faithfully toward goals that benefit all Americans.

Today, I was proud to address my former colleagues in the House of Representatives and co-present a DOT-HUD partnership to help American families gain better access to affordable housing, more transportation options, and lower transportation costs.

As I told House members, “One of my highest priorities is to help promote more livable communities through sustainable surface transportation programs.” That means roads, rails, and transit. It means safer passage for pedestrians, for bicyclists.

After housing costs, transportation takes the biggest bite out of the typical household budget. That's why a partnership between HUD and DOT can be so effective; we have the ability to ease the largest financial burden on many American families. We're talking about 60% of the average working American family's expenses. HUD Secretary Donovan and I can cut these costs by focusing our departments' efforts on creating affordable, sustainable communities.

As Secretary Donovan told the House members today, “This partnership will help expand every American family’s choices for affordable housing and transportation."

In Secretary Donovan, I have a great partner who gets the relationship between housing and transportation. In his Hill appearance with me today, he captured the need for joint action perfectly: "HUD’s central mission – ensuring that every American has access to decent, affordable housing – can be achieved only in context of the housing, transportation, and energy costs and choices that American families experience each day.”

That's why we've created a high-level inter-agency task force to better coordinate federal transportation and housing investments.

I'll have more information on this task force in another post, but you should know that I am quite comfortable pressing this joint initiative before my former House colleagues; I like an idea that makes sense. This idea makes sense.

Comments

[Gary Kavanagh]

Wow this past series of posts, I must be dreaming, upper level government officials are actually talking about walking, cycling, livable streets and connecting the dots between housing and transit. Halliuah!

[J. Lucas McKay]

Thank you Secretary LaHood! I live in Atlanta, and I think anyone who has seen it can agree that the way the city is structured - to maximize throughput of private automobiles - just doesn't make sense.

We need rail funding - and we need public transit funding. But most importantly, we need to get out of the mindset that wider roads equate to a better lifestyle. It's a fallacy, it pollutes, it may lead to obesity, and it pumps money out of the U.S. and into oil producing countries.

Thank you!

[BB]

"First, thanks for the support demonstrated by your comments on these pages."

Cycling and walking is much more sociable than driving a motor. I enjoy making people happy along my route it's contagious.

"Fast Lane"
Not really into that title though. I think the association of it all, tends to make me think of my autocentric society I live in. Must go fast can't slow down for no one.

[Andrew]

If its more expensive to ride the bus than to drive your car you'll always drive your car unless you don't have one. And because almost everyone has a car mass transit has to be really cheap. The other problem with mass transit is they stop so much so if you have to get somewhere fast you cant use the bus. If there was someway to reduce the number of stops.
And housing, as long as the property taxes are cheaper in the country, urban sprawl will continue and it will be more expensive to provide transit. If there was some way to make taxes cheaper the closer you were to the center of communities it would be different.

[Erik J]

Secretary LaHood,
I just want to thank you for your excellent work so far as our Secretary of Transportation. Frankly, you are a breath of fresh air for this agency that has been plagued by favoring highways over transit(just look at the blog title as evidence).

I am a college student majoring in Transportation Planning, and the simple fact that you recognize the connection between land use and transportation gives me hope for the future of our communities, our country, and our world.

A sincere thank you,
Erik

[Sandy Sorlien]

Yes, this is an exciting initiative. It's definitely time to make a statement by changing both the name of the blog and the highway photograph on the masthead. Consider the social justice aspects of your work, too. Creating and protecting safe walkable neighborhoods with transportation options will allow independence and dignity to those who do not or cannot drive: children, the elderly, the poor, and the disabled. Please visit our non-profit organization for freeware tools for walkable, transit-connected places. Thank you!
http://www.transect.org/
Sandy Sorlien
Philadelphia

[Katie]

A big and sincere thanks for your efforts to make our cities more walkable and bike friendly.

My boyfriend and I left New York City with one goal: find a walkable small town. We found it in Staunton, VA - a downtown that was never "modernized". We love that we live in a walkable small town... and very aware of how rare a privilege. I wish more people could walk and bike easily and safely.

Your efforts and others with you will go a long way to encourage healthy and happy living.

THANK YOU!

[Melissa Guilbeau]

I am so thankful that the Obama administration understands the concept of livable communities and is willing to take on the challenge of changing the way we've done business for nearly a half century. As a transportation planner working for a mid-size, largely suburban city, I appreciate what a challenge it truly is to change the mindset of elected officials, engineers and many in the community, to an understanding that transportation must be about more than the private automobile and that our development patterns are undoubtedly intertwined in this often complex relationship. Direction from the federal government, specifically in criteria established for funding eligibility, will go a long way in speeding up this paradigm shift.

[JL Merkling]

I have worked for many years with lower income and poverty stricken families through my church.

One of the things I have seen is that, unlike many other countries, not having a car is a LUXURY in the US. Without one, it is very difficult if not impossible to hold down a job, go to the grocery store, or access basic government services.

I am very grateful that this administration is willing to address this hidden tax on the poor.

[Pamela Gill]

These goals are worthy indeed. It is wonderful to see large scale acknowledgment of the problems that have arisen as a result of complex and interrelated issues of housing, transportation, jobs, human health and the environment. Unplanned development and all that comes with it has slowly eroded many aspects of our lives.
I live in a town of 10,000 with most housing built after 1980 in subdivisions. The only sidewalks are in the town center and a few inside the subdivisions. The addition of sidewalks, connecting the neighborhoods, allowing people to walk to the store and cafe and post office, would be a simple, yet profound change for the better. The cost to do so, is prohibitive. I would like to add to the wish list for better communities, sidewalks.

[Chris]

Certainly a step in the right direction Secretary LaHood. And the public's comments are reassuring. But most comments are from planners/advocates of sustainable communities. Curious if there will be an effort to educate the public/lay person on the goals/ideals of such communities.

[Debra Foster]

Dear Secretary Lahood,
I live in Arizona and am totally put off by the fact that you would threaten our governor with no funding because you dislike something that Senator Jon Kyl said. How childish! We are supposed to be working together and all you guys want to do is bully all of us into doing what you want. We don't even have a voice in our government anymore. The stimulus bill is helping the poor and the rest of us be damned. You need to think about all Americans not only the poor. I think I should decide who I wish to help with donations, I should not be forced into helping people who do not help themselves. The tax increase on the rich will only lead to more job losses, more people without medical insurance and more people falling into the poverty level. HELP THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!

[Child Behavior]

This is wonderful information. It's great that they created a high-level inter-agency task force to better coordinate federal transportation and housing investments. Let's see what they come up with.

[Walt Brewer]

According to USDOT, transportation generates only 17% of GHG. But it should do its part to improve. However shifting auto users to mass transit in the wrong approach. Even if transit absorbs an unlikely 55% of travel, it can reduce GHG only 10%. Improving mpg of autos as planned by 2016 to 35.5 mpg reduces GHG by 40%. If trips can be reduced, of course, but there is no logical reason to coerce people out of autos at any level of use. And this does not take into accout the roughly 2 to 1 loss of travel time when mass transit is used. Improve autos with their on demand personal mobility. Stop wasting funds on mass transit!

[Skip Nash]

Dear Sir - News of another billion dollars being approved for the CARS program is disturbing to me. While I can appreciate the creative side of the program, it nonetheless further deepens are woes rather than eases them.
First of all, as a taxpayer I now am helping someone buy a new car, since the $2 billion will eventually be paid from my tax dollars. I have not purchased a new car since 1980. The reason is simple. The price of cars today and the short period of their useful lifespan make the purchase a poor financial decision. I drive a 1995 Volvo that I purchased for $3200 four years ago. It is paid for and I get 28 mpg. It has 278,000 miles on the original engine, has passed DEQ ever since I bought it without having to be repaired first, and I don't have to do much more than change the oil and buy new tires as time goes on. Why, Sir, should I have paid $28,550 for a Volvo equivalent, or $26,140 for a Saturn Vue? I would still be in debt trying to pay it off and the Saturn Vue will never last a quarter-million miles and more!
Secondly, the CARS program encourages folks to go into debt for only a marginal benefit. The math is simple. Turn in a paid for Ford Five Hundred that gets 21 mpg for the MUCH smaller Saturn Vue (4-cylinder version) at $21,640 (assuming the generous $4500 credit for my 'clunker') and I will save $32.03 for every 1000 miles I drive (assuming a steady gas price of $2.69/gallon ... dreaming, aren't I!) At that rate I will have to drive 675,000 miles just to break even!
Thirdly, it will in many instances place families in small vehicles that those they drove before, which will increase the chances of serious injuries in auto accidents.
Sir, I respectfully request that you as my elected representative stand firmly against any additional dollars being approved for the CARS program or any other program that has not been closely reviewed on a cost-benefit basis. You would not run a business that way and neither should we run our government that way.
In passing, it should not be overlooked that 80% of the new car purchases under the program are IMPORTS rather than domestic cars, which only strengthens the position of our trading partners, and weakens American enterprise!

[David James]

Climate change is not just a problem for the future. Recent global climate changes, such as warming temperatures and rising sea levels, likely reflect the effects of GHG emissions into the atmosphere over the past century. Even if drastic measures were taken today to stabilize or eliminate GHG emissions, the effects of climate change would continue to be experienced, and U.S. transportation professionals would have to adapt to their consequences.

In the light of these issues a response such as this from our Secretary of Transport Mr.LaHood is very brave and optimistic and shows his good interest in the welfare of our country and the world at large.

Bravo Mr.Lahood!

[Accident Compensation Claim Bruce]

This is wonderful information. It's great that they created a high-level inter-agency task force to better coordinate federal transportation and housing investments. Let's see what they come up with.

[Wall Clings Sarah]

Many politicians don't understand the correlation between housing and transportation. I'm glad that we have an intelligent Secretary of Transportation in the office. His appointment was a wise choice, in my opinion.

[tv from the internet]

Creating a harmony of operation between housing and transportation is a great idea. As you mentioned in the article, those costs are the largest for most households and they go hand-in-hand. I think it's a very logical and practical approach to bring both departments together.
Good work!

[Cyclist Jerseys Todd]

The way this idea is presented here sounds good. It's been nearly 2 years since this article was posted. Does anyone know how this partnership has turned out? I tried to find more information on it and wasn't really able to find anything out. I'm very curious to know the results of this.
Anybody?

[Wall Decals for Kids]

The article doesn't really deal with the issue of gas prices and how they affect the equation. I'm curious to see how the plans that they've made and the processes they've implemented are working now with the rising fuel prices.