The Madison Paradox
Madison "progressives" currently find themselves with a paradox on their hands, and I don't think they even realize it. City progessives want two things which end up being diametrically opposed to one another.
The first item is the ban on tall buildings downtown. City progressives want to preserve the view of the state capitol building. Therefore, new developments which could bring big businesses, residential space, and retail downtown are stymied, because often their building needs exceed the height limit. Instead they build a facility out on the west side of town on the belt line, or they build east of Interstate 90/94/39 near Highway 151. What this accomplishes is both spreading the city out over long distances, and also spreading the distance between people's homes and their jobs. This results in more traffic as people travel greater distances between work and home.
The second item is to supposedly remedy the first: Public transportation. In their very simplistic view of things, Madison progressives think that if they offer more public transportation, then they can deal with the greater traffic congestion on Madison roads. There is a huge flaw in this logic, though. Public transit is more successful the greater the population density of an area. In highly dense areas, you need less track and less energy to transport the same number of people as in less dense areas, and this is what makes public transportation economically feasible. People in highly dense areas are also more likely to use that public transportation, because it is more convenient for them to ride 10 blocks in an elevated train or a trolley than it is for them to drive. But in areas of lower density, it is more convenient for someone to drive 2 miles than it is for them to ride in public transit, because they may need to travel 7 blocks just to get to a stop. So in less dense areas, you get fewer customers for the public transit because it is less of a convenience.
So here's Madison's paradox. If city progressives continue in their refusal to allow the downtown to be developed upward, then they are going to see continued growth outward. If they allowed skyward growth downtown, then they would have a lot of residents, a lot of retail and entertainment, and a lot of business offices in a smaller area, and people are going to prefer to use public transit over using their cars. But as long as they refuse to allow this skyward growth, the city will continue to grow outward, and it will be less and less economically viable to maintain public transit, as it will be less convenient for riders (which means fewer riders) and it will be more expensive to transport each individual rider, because the distance they'll need to travel will be further.
Madisonians, you can have your beautiful view and clogged roads or you can obscure your view and have fewer cars on the road, but you are a big city now, and you can't have both.
(Cross posted at Jiblog)
The first item is the ban on tall buildings downtown. City progressives want to preserve the view of the state capitol building. Therefore, new developments which could bring big businesses, residential space, and retail downtown are stymied, because often their building needs exceed the height limit. Instead they build a facility out on the west side of town on the belt line, or they build east of Interstate 90/94/39 near Highway 151. What this accomplishes is both spreading the city out over long distances, and also spreading the distance between people's homes and their jobs. This results in more traffic as people travel greater distances between work and home.
The second item is to supposedly remedy the first: Public transportation. In their very simplistic view of things, Madison progressives think that if they offer more public transportation, then they can deal with the greater traffic congestion on Madison roads. There is a huge flaw in this logic, though. Public transit is more successful the greater the population density of an area. In highly dense areas, you need less track and less energy to transport the same number of people as in less dense areas, and this is what makes public transportation economically feasible. People in highly dense areas are also more likely to use that public transportation, because it is more convenient for them to ride 10 blocks in an elevated train or a trolley than it is for them to drive. But in areas of lower density, it is more convenient for someone to drive 2 miles than it is for them to ride in public transit, because they may need to travel 7 blocks just to get to a stop. So in less dense areas, you get fewer customers for the public transit because it is less of a convenience.
So here's Madison's paradox. If city progressives continue in their refusal to allow the downtown to be developed upward, then they are going to see continued growth outward. If they allowed skyward growth downtown, then they would have a lot of residents, a lot of retail and entertainment, and a lot of business offices in a smaller area, and people are going to prefer to use public transit over using their cars. But as long as they refuse to allow this skyward growth, the city will continue to grow outward, and it will be less and less economically viable to maintain public transit, as it will be less convenient for riders (which means fewer riders) and it will be more expensive to transport each individual rider, because the distance they'll need to travel will be further.
Madisonians, you can have your beautiful view and clogged roads or you can obscure your view and have fewer cars on the road, but you are a big city now, and you can't have both.
(Cross posted at Jiblog)
posted by Jib @ 3:02 PM
<< Home