Reminder - Robocars aren't PRT

A pair of thoughtful pieces on driverless cars (Driving Sideways, NY Times, 7/23; How will the driverless car affect the design of our cities? Treehugger, 7/25) are a welcome contribution to the discussion of the problematic nature of 'robocars.'

However the small size of pod transit (PRT) vehicles still serves to confuse them with driverless cars in the minds of many.

So let's reacquaint ourselves with what pod transit is and is not (chiefly):

Caution on public-private partnerships

Public-private partnerships have been in vogue in the arts, education, and other facets of civic life for a while, and now they're coming to transit projects (The Planning Report, 7/8).

I suppose PPP sound appealing to the American ear, conditioned by corporate media to the couplet 'Private Good/Government Bad.'

But the public sector exists for solid economic and political reasons, no finer an example of which being the delivery of transit service.

Which is to say patterns and levels of service are critical determinants of urban form and function as well as civic life, and therefore there is an overriding public interest in planning, funding and operating transit systems.

The Human Factor

What does it mean to be a sustainable business? If you look at how a lot of companies and groups portray themselves, something's missing.

• Your Silver LEED building is impressive and beautiful. The rainwater catchment and onsite composting are nice touches. But oh, you forgot to get health insurance for your employees.
• The coffees you sell are delicious, organic and shade grown -- but it's not fair trade. And you use biodegradable sporks -- but your all-part time staff don't get any benefits and have to get health care paid by Medicaid, as if they are working at Walmart and not a self-styled 'sustainable' business.

What these (actual) example companies miss is the reality that they aren't truly sustainable if their workers are treated as disposable resources.

Bad Supreme Court News...

...if you're a fan of planning and common sense environmental protection:

Private property advocates cheer Supreme Court ruling
By Michael Doyle | McClatchy Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON — A legal dispute that started with Florida wetlands ended Tuesday in a Supreme Court victory for conservatives and private property advocates nationwide.
     In a 5-4 decision that could impede government regulators at all levels, the court effectively made it harder for public agencies to demand property or money in exchange for issuing a land-use permit. At a certain point, the conservative majority reasoned, these demands amount to an unconstitutional taking of property without compensation.

A wrinkle in the CRC debate

Every so often I turn my attention to the Columbia River Crossing project, the plan to -- among other things -- replace the Interstate 5 bridge between Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington.

Because the plan is to include the means to send Trimet MAX light rail across the river to Vancouver, I suppose it's been easy to lean toward support of this freeway enhancement program, while dismissing the (voluble) opposition as north-of-the-river manifestation of right-wing, anti-government, anti-transit resistance to progress.

But now comes The CRC Mega-Highway Project, a three part series beginning today at the Seattle Transit Blog.