The Common Roots of NIMBYs and the Tea Party
Over at Atlantic Cities, Nate Berg notices a phenomenon that this blog has been describing for several years now: that NIMBYism skews older whereas younger people are much more supportive of new development:
The latest annual report from the Saint Consulting group pinpoints who those people are: Not surprisingly, older people tend to be most active in opposing new development, while younger people are more often in support.
The Saint Index recently released its 2011 results, based on surveys with 1,000 adults in the U.S. this summer, with the goal of understanding what types of projects are most likely to be opposed and why.
The report finds that people aged 56-65 are most likely to actively oppose new projects in their communities, while people aged 21-35 are most likely to actively support projects.
This should come as no surprise. People ages 56-65 are smack in the middle of the Baby Boom generation, a group raised in comfort and privilege unknown ever before (and arguably, ever since). They were taught that the suburban way of life, with single-family homes and quiet leafy neighborhoods was an essential part of what it meant to live a good life. And when they came of age, they participated in a reaction against the uniformity of modernism, rejecting designs and projects that ignored local conditions and environmental needs.
That alone set them on a trajectory toward NIMBYism. But it’s been dialed up with the economic crisis that is now in its fourth year. People ages 56-65 are among the last remaining people who still have their wealth and assets from the great 20th century boom. They’re the ones who got subsidized educations, were able to buy homes when they were still affordable, and earn a living when jobs and wage growth were still abundant. As the economic crisis unfolds, their instinct is to grip ever more tightly to what they have, and to adamantly refuse to share it with anyone else.
Combined with their obsolete attitudes about urban life, this creates the toxic NIMBYism that is now rampant across the United States. The practical effect is clear: a group of people who still have some remaining economic security are organizing to deny anyone else the opportunity to enjoy the same, out of a delusional belief that providing such opportunities can only come at their own expense. The result is a group of people determined to cling to the status quo no matter how badly it fails.
On the other side are young people aged 21-35 (a group that includes myself). They have no special attachment to suburbia. Either they see it as just one of a range of equally valid choices, or they see it as a flawed answer to the questions of how to organize modern society. Millennials prefer living in cities where transportation costs are cheaper, where there is more to do, and where people are building communities rather than fleeing from them. Millennials were not raised to believe suburbia was the Greatest Thing Ever.
But just as importantly, they were also raised or came of age when the suburban economic engine had begun to sputter and collapse. Boomers see suburban lifestyles and land use practices as essential to their prosperity. That’s no longer true, but their ideology blinds them to this reality. Millennials see this reality up close and as a result understand that urban development, density, and passenger rail are absolutely essential to their future. Without it, they will continue to be shut out of any chance at prosperity.
The NIMBYs either refuse to believe this or simply do not care. They remain guided by their belief that change comes at their own expense and therefore must be opposed at all costs.
In that, we can see something else that is worth noting. NIMBYs and the Tea Party are two sides of the same coin, two movements springing from the same roots.
Both NIMBYs and the Tea Party are dominated by people aged 56-65. Both are animated by a belief that 20th century America was ideal and that any change from its forms and practices is not only bad, but will undermine remaining economic prosperity. Both believe, firmly, that anything done to help provide economic opportunities to others, especially younger people, comes at their expense and therefore must be opposed. Both oppose passenger rail and anything that moves America away from dependence on the automobile.
Even their behavior is similar. If you remember the summer of 2009, the Tea Party movement first asserted itself by shouting down members of Congress at town halls. NIMBYs take a very similar attitude at public meetings, shouting down government officials and project supporters.
So what makes them different? The Tea Party is more focused on social conservatism and white supremacy, whereas NIMBYs are more focused on design conservatism and supremacy of their physical space.
Of course, in many cases NIMBYs and Tea Party activists are one in the same. That’s not always true, of course. But the key takeaway here is similarity.
The author of the Atlantic Cities post, Nate Berg, also looked at demographic data and suggested that NIMBYism will grow worse, at least for a time:
Overall, however, NIMBYism is on the rise, according to the report. Nearly 80 percent of U.S. residents oppose any new development in their community. It’s the highest level of opposition recorded in the report’s six-year history, and the first time since 2008 that the amount of opposition has increased.
But the report also finds that, when asked about development in light of the recession, more people support new projects. About 70 percent of respondents say they’d be more likely than usual to support new development in their communities in the context of the recession. Those most likely to support projects are again on the younger side, filling in the 21-45 age range.
What I expect will happen is an analogue of Occupy Wall Street. That movement is in many ways a reaction not just against the financial elite but also against the Tea Party, which functions as the shock troops of that elite. Before too long I suspect we will see a growing reaction against NIMBYism too. “We are the train riders and apartment dwellers” may not be as compelling a chant as “We are the 99 percent” but nevertheless the same logic will apply.
As more and more people are getting shut out of prosperity, they will push back harder and more loudly against those who are holding those doors shut. Occupy Wall Street has come for the Tea Party. Millennials, who dominate Occupy Wall Street, will soon come for the NIMBYs as well.
Bottom of the line is that a large proportion of nimbyism would go away if the rail authority were to agree to put more of the line underground. They don’t to do this for obvious cost reasons, but given the project’s overall price tag, I think that burying the line in sensitive areas to avoid and litigation would be an easier way to go. Plus they need to think long term – this line will be around for over 100+ years, so if you are going to do it, you may as well do it RIGHT.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 9:49 am
How are you planning to pay for it? This is the thing about NIMBYs – they think the way to go is attack the project’s funding. So they are making it actually harder to produce a project design they can live with. I think this is because of the age of the NIMBYs – they don’t believe in passenger rail, because they came of age when rail was in a temporary crisis, when oil was cheap and everyone was going to drive everywhere. So rather than trying to fund tunnels, they believe they can just get what they want by killing the project.
This is why we fight NIMBYs. If they were standing with us to fight for more funding, then we could have a strong and effective alliance. The door is always open.
joe Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 7:18 pm
CARRD says the project’s a waste, not that it’s just ugly or intrusive.
Many NIMBYs are older – my generation. Our childhood in northern states was de facto segregated. In 60-70′s Chicagoland one side of 12th street was white Berwyn, the other side was black Chicago. Public transportation projects open up towns to “the other”. Dudes from SoCal getting off in Handford or PAMPA and walking the streets. NIMBY!
HSR is disruptive. PAMPA is worried their location location location advantage and high rents will be upset by the ready and easy access to lower rent cities. NIMBY – don’t upset my high priced property value.
Nadia Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 10:24 pm
Exactly where do you see CARRD saying this project is a waste or ugly or intrusive? Link please!
Drunk Engineer Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 10:17 pm
Hilarious. What an utter lack of perspective.
Pacheco necessitates $10+ billion in duplicate infrastructure. Tunneling under a rinky-dink community college is how “more funding helps solve a lot of these problems”. And if Palmdale is $4 billion and 12 minutes slower, that’s money well spent.
But tunnel/trench in Palo Alto? Oh my goodness, too expensive!
Alon Levy Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 11:18 pm
$1-4 billion more. I wish Tejon were guaranteed to be $4 billion cheaper.
My father, a member of said NIMBY demographic but mitigated by his Hubert Humphrey Liberalism, put it well- on a broader level these movements (as well as the rise of Christian fundamentalism) arise from fear of and a reaction to the profound changes occuring in American society- the disappearance of the extended family as well as the disintegration of the nuclear family, the isolation and soullessness of the suburbs, and the “browning” of the American populace- with Obama as president, their visceral fears were crystallized into a real person, and the tea baggers arose.
synonymouse Reply:
October 18th, 2011 at 9:40 pm
My son-in-law, who is a early 30-something carrying a whole load of student loan debt, thinks the occupiers are dips. Ditto for all three daughters in the 20-30 range.
Quelle farce. A good part of the Tea Party is convinced that all politicians are crooks. Just like a lot of people on the left. The libertarian-libertine faction of the Tea Party is ready to legalize everything – Open City. Your loathed senescent NIMBY’s will be high as a kite on legal weed out there in a big block party with all the other age groups. The Tea Party is a passing fad but disgust with political machines and their corruption lives on from generation to generation. Tammany Hall is remembered.
Face it, everybody knows that the infrastructure stimulus is just another Big Dig, another contractor racket. Let our 3 DC crones sign over their burgeoning fortunes to Bechtel. I’ll keep my fistful of dollars, thank you.
Peter Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 5:49 am
Because personal anecdotes and hyperbole are the best way to refute surveys and studies. Of course, how could I have missed that!
synonymouse Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 10:37 am
Surveys and studies are mostly propaganda, mostly self-serving, mostly tweaked.
The notion that there is a great “Fathers and Sons” generational gap out there amongst the general populace is preposterous. The last deep divide was during the Vietnam War, when the WWI and WWII generations that had been thru the Depression refused to take up credit card spending habits and were slow to recognize the Vietnam War was a monumental neo-colonial error. Even McNamara finally fessed up to it. The invidious role of the Church in attempting to reassert its dominion over Vietnam has been pushed under the rug.
I must admit the current generation would benefit from having a grandmother who would regularly remind you that you did not appreciate the value of a dollar, a lesson learned during the Depression.
And let’s not forget that our 3 DC crones are stone 1 percenters. What a travesty. Talk about generational gap.
But let’s leave it to Ron Dellums to brighten the day. Seems, unlike the crones, he is broke and has signed up to lobby for some GOP causes. I have some empathy for his newly found honesty and humility. And really it was not his fault people were surprised his stint as mayor of Oakland was so passive. When he announced his candidacy I said first thing he will do when elected is roll back in the chair, put his feet up on the desk, and light up a “j”. And then do basically nothing.
http://www.ktvu.com/news/29525390/detail.html
joe Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 7:20 pm
Keep listening to AM radio and FOX cable news.
Nathanael Reply:
October 21st, 2011 at 6:34 pm
Your kids will be joining Occupy or whatever it metamorphoses into in a few years, I’d bet. After a while, people decide that joining the dips is better than debt slavery.
I grew up very close to my grandmother (born 1912) and my father (born 1932), as well as fairly close to my other grandmother (born 1909) and I think I am one hell of a lot more in touch with “Depression era” mentalities than your average 35-year old.
And you are not in touch with those mentalities, syn. One of my grandmothers was warning before she died that it looked like the 1920s all over again…. she knew what she was talking about. There *is* a generational divide; I’ve managed to jump it by being raised by old, pre-Boomer parents.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 18th, 2011 at 10:00 pm
Robert, I think you are just a little bit harsh on the NIMBY’s. I don’t think they really want to limit prosperity–or freedom–to anyone.
However, they have a severe–really severe–problem in that they have only one idea of what prosperity and freedom look like. To them, the vision of freedom and prosperity means you work hard, you earn your money, and your taxes pay for the things you actually use or are otherwise useful. Nothing wrong with that, but. . .
How are you going to get a job when either (a) the work is now in Mexico or China, or (b) just doesn’t currently exist because we made too much of some things and we have a saturated–soaked!–market in houses and all the stuff that goes in them, and cars, these being two things we make or made until recently?
Taxes? How many people really know how much their cars are subsidized? How many people know about the real subsidies for other things? To them, rail service of any kind looks like a waste of money, a “give-away” to freeloading bums who won’t find a job.
I brought this up to a coworker at the unemployment office here. He made the comment that older people in this age group have seen “too many of the wrong changes.” This stands in contrast to the many positive changes seen by older people before (the commercialization of air service, television, space travel, modern medicine, victory in WW II).
In contrast, the current older group we have been discussing have seen many negative changes. A partial list includes defeat in Viet Nam, the disgrace of Watergate, too much rough language and nudity in movies, a general increasing coarseness in culture (including what I call “droopy drawers”), the loss of jobs, multiple oil shocks, increasing prices of things with no real adjustment for them to deal with these increases, and a lot of general decay–in short, the loss of their way of life as it once looked.
I have a certain amount of understanding, if not sympathy, due to being the throwback that I am. However, this group, for some reason, seems to have little ability to reason. Instead, they have become frightened (somewhat understandable), and somehow have come under the influence of what I consider right-wing hucksters such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Michele Malkin. They are told the problems of America are not their fault–and it’s true, they worked hard and earned what they have. They are fearful of losing both their achievements and their country–and I think they have good reason to have this fear.
Unfortunately, the hucksters blame hippies, environazis, feminazis, homosexuals of both genders, socialists, Communists, unionists, abortionists, atheists, and “liberals” in general–and these people eat it up. Basically, instead of being honest about the ailments of the country (say, that oil dependence and its associated security risk is driven by our driving dependence), the hucksters play to the fears of this generation–that the “liberals” are plotting to take away your guns, your cars, your money, your freedom. The “liberals” are doing this because they hate America, and our precious FREEDOM!(tm)
I’ve listened to some of the noises from Limbaugh and others recently. I couldn’t stand it for more than a few minutes. So much vitriol, so much anger, and so much that is just plain untrue (think of George Will a while back saying the idea of trains is to bring the unruly American population under control). Some of this stuff is stranger than “Dr. Strangelove;” I keep hearing echoes of Sterling Hayden’s General Jack D. Ripper and his paranoia about plots against “our precious bodily fluids.”
I’ve personally heard geezers say they would never buy an hybrid car, much less a straight electric, apparently because it was some plot to get us into wimpy cars instead of he-man American iron. Apparently, bicycles are considered wimpy, too, despite the condition some people are in who ride them (Lance Armstrong is a wimp?) Trains are for those little Japanese robots and effeminate Frenchmen, and besides, they belong to the days of the horse and buggy. Peak oil? There’s plenty of oil if we get rid of those pesky regulations that keep the water clean, so we can drive all we want, we don’t need those trains.
I’ve actually heard much of this. I suspect others here have heard or seen it, too.
As Swing Hanger and his dad put it, the NIMBY-TEA Party-Christian fundamentalist movements do come out of fear, of really seeing decay–and as far as that goes, they are right. But they also place the blame on the wrong people.
It is incredibly sad to see my country fall into such a state of cowardice, stupidity, and plain blindness.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 18th, 2011 at 10:18 pm
General Jack D. Ripper: Your Commie has no regard for human life, not even of his own. For this reason men, I want to impress upon you the need for extreme watchfulness. The enemy may come individually, or in strength. He may even appear in the form of our own troops. But however we must stop him. We must not allow him to gain entrance to this base. Now, I’m going to give you THREE SIMPLE rules: First, trust NO one, whatever his uniform or rank, unless he is known to you personally; Second, anyone or anything that approaches within 200 yards of the perimeter is to be FIRED UPON; Third, if in doubt, shoot first then ask questions later. I would sooner accept a few casualties through accidents rather losing the entire base and its personnel through carelessness. Any variation of these rules must come from me personally. Any variation on these rules must come from me personally. Now, men, in conclusion, I would like to say that, in the two years it has been my privilege to be your commanding officer, I have always expected the best from you, and you have never given me anything less than that. Today, the nation is counting on us. We’re not going to let them down. Good luck to you all.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 18th, 2011 at 10:22 pm
General Jack D. Ripper: Mandrake, do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, why, there are studies underway to fluoridate salt, flour, fruit juices, soup, sugar, milk… ice cream. Ice cream, Mandrake, children’s ice cream.
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: [very nervous] Lord, Jack.
General Jack D. Ripper: You know when fluoridation first began?
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: I… no, no. I don’t, Jack.
General Jack D. Ripper: Nineteen hundred and forty-six. 1946, Mandrake. How does that coincide with your post-war Commie conspiracy, huh? It’s incredibly obvious, isn’t it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That’s the way your hard-core Commie works.
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Uh, Jack, Jack, listen… tell me, tell me, Jack. When did you first… become… well, develop this theory?
General Jack D. Ripper: [somewhat embarassed] Well, I, uh… I… I… first became aware of it, Mandrake, during the physical act of love.
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Hmm.
General Jack D. Ripper: Yes, a uh, a profound sense of fatigue… a feeling of emptiness followed. Luckily I… I was able to interpret these feelings correctly. Loss of essence.
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Hmm.
General Jack D. Ripper: I can assure you it has not recurred, Mandrake. Women uh… women sense my power and they seek the life essence. I, uh… I do not avoid women, Mandrake.
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: No.
General Jack D. Ripper: But I… I do deny them my essence.
Donk Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 12:54 am
D.P. – You really have outdone yourself this time.
Loren Petrich Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 11:51 pm
That’s why it seems to me that such people live in groves of birch trees. John Birch trees, of course. That bit about our precious bodily fluids and flouridation was inspired by the John Birch Society’s opposition to flouridation of water supplies — it was supposedly some Communist plot or something like that. The JBS’s founder even maintained that Dwight Eisenhower had been a Communist, that he was part of the great Communist conspiracy.
Nathanael Reply:
October 21st, 2011 at 6:37 pm
“too much rough language and nudity in movies, a general increasing coarseness in culture (including what I call “droopy drawers”)”
This is kind of a fiction — or wishful thinking if you will. I think people raised in the upper or upper middle classes don’t realize how coarse culture actually was for most people in the 19th century through the 1930s. For upper class people, sure it was less coarse then. For lower class people, *it is less coarse now* than it was in 1900. This is an artifact of Victorian double standards.
Personally, I would like more nudity in movies and less violence. The violence sickens and disgusts me, whereas the human body is supposed to be natural and beautiful, eh?
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 21st, 2011 at 6:40 pm
Well, I have admitted to being a throwback. . .
Nathanael Reply:
October 21st, 2011 at 6:39 pm
“As Swing Hanger and his dad put it, the NIMBY-TEA Party-Christian fundamentalist movements do come out of fear, of really seeing decay–and as far as that goes, they are right. But they also place the blame on the wrong people. ”
Yep.
Of course, the people who are most responsible for the decay — the kleptocrats who lie about “free markets” while stealing everything which isn’t nailed down — are making a very deliberate effort to misdirect everyone. Fairly successfully.
When I first started reading the post, I thought it was a guest post by D.P. Lubic. You could have at least given him a shout-out for the generational thing…
Off Topic:
Article in Daily Wildcat about APRIG promoting passenger rail in AZ
http://www.wildcat.arizona.edu/index.php/article/2011/10/arizona_rail_a_longer_trip_to_a_much_shorter_commute
Arizona PIRG promoting passenger rail between Phoenix and Tucson. 36 page report.
http://www.arizonapirg.org/edfund
“The study determined that the best option for the state would be to construct a high-speed passenger rail in an incremental fashion. Under this option, the govern- ment would initially make upgrades to the existing rail lines to allow for passenger trains. Over time, as ridership develops and funding becomes available, the lines would be upgraded for high-speed travel. This construction schedule would allow the region to quickly take advantage of the benefits of passenger rail, while laying the foundation for more advanced rail in the future.36 “
Nathanael Reply:
October 21st, 2011 at 6:40 pm
This “existing” line has the advantage of having minimal-to-no freight traffic. It’s also very straight.
People who are opposed to change are not necessarily opposed on principle. Some people are opposed to change because of lack of trust, as in the government will take our tax money and our land and subject us to years of building upheaval to make a system that nobody wants. There is too much bad experience out there and too many memories of bungled projects. Trust is the keyword here and the government must rebuild trust.
Sadly, HSR is one of the obvious low hanging fruit to do that, as the promised benefits will almost certainly be delivered. But the HSR authorities need to reach out and convince them of that. If it need be, take a couple on a field trip to Japan or Spain and show them the benefits. The investment is worth it.
Duncan Black was on a similar theme this morning.
http://www.eschatonblog.com/2011/10/assholes_19.html
joe Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 7:25 pm
Former Irvine CA resident and now urban hipster in Philli – commie without a car.
http://www.eschatonblog.com/2011/10/cant-co-exist-with-all-cars.html
My concern for HSR – too much parking at HSR stations makes it unwalkable. A moat of parking to keep out pedestrians.
The Ridership model assumes cars – riders are needed to pay bills so the HSR station MUST. HAVE. PARKING. 6,600 for Gilroy, 6,000 for Palo Alto. Why not emphasize bus/taxi/walk and build a few garages off site and see if people really want to drive to HSR.
an inspired and pointed critique of the PB-CHSRA scheme from the Altamont blog:
http://www.altamontpress.com/discussion/read.php?1,64728,64764#msg-64764
I could not have put it better myself.
Common Roots of NIMBYs and the Tea Party?
But of course. How obvious. They both weigh the same as ducks.
Who are you, who are so wise in the ways of science? I dub you Sir Cruickshank, Knight of the Turn Table.
RisenMessiah Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 1:42 pm
Look, Richard, I know… Steve Heminger is Baby Boomer, but Quentin Kopp, Diridon, and Nancy Pelosi sure aren’t!
There’s a much easier way to describe what Robert is saying: currently the US population is a bimodal distribution that skews to the right and older. That in and of itself isn’t remarkable. It’s that because of immigration law reform, the older half of the distribution is very homogeneous in terms of things like race, education levels, and the like. The left half is very diverse and has none of the hallmarks of the older generation.
Slowly, over time the distribution will even out and no longer be bi modal. However to get there, more Baby Boomer have to die and transfer their wealth to their children. At some point this decade that will happen, and there will be a full-fledged political and economic realignment in the country. My estimate was 2014 as it relates to the voting-age population. Until then, it’s going to be gridlock as NIMBYs, Tea Partiers, and the rest bide their time.
synonymouse Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 2:01 pm
Sounds like ivory tower sociological fantasies to me.
Explain the transition from hippies to Reaganites ca. 1980 amongst the younger generation.
How about the emergence of rap presumably from the ruins of rock and disco? Gang-bangers are the centurions of your new world hsr order? Doubt they will give up their rides.
And then there is the UK where according to the catechism of triumphant worldwide stilt-a-rail Gordon Brown should still be reigning over hsr hog heaven. Instead they elected a lord of Austerity. Wilson to Thatcher to Brown to Cameron. It is called a see-saw from right to left and back again. Natural order of things. No need for fanciful notions about “nimbyism”. Quel crock
D
RisenMessiah Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 4:16 pm
You just proved my point. If you don’t understand how you just proved my point or are too prideful to admit as such, send an email to this guy :
http://www.usc.edu/schools/sppd/faculty/detail.php?id=25
By the way, do you know how strange it feels to have YOU tell me that I’M spewing fantasy?!?!?
http://bit.ly/nePzHq
joe Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 9:13 pm
What Reaganite transition? It’s a myth. GOP demographics are shrinking; it is then aging and white party about to fall below 33% in California.
synonymouse Reply:
October 20th, 2011 at 10:45 am
In 1980 the post boomers hated Carter and loved Reagan. It was, imho, a revulsion against hippie-dip.
Who can know for sure, but I suspect that for every “occupier” out there there may be quietly aborning 3 neo-cons. And most all the immigrants I know are more conservative than native sons. They hate taxes.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
October 20th, 2011 at 10:57 am
The post boomers were 16 in 1980, they weren’t old enough to vote.
Nathanael Reply:
October 21st, 2011 at 6:53 pm
You’ve got the demographics *completely* wrong. Part of this is that people are utterly mixed up about generational names. So I won’t use generational names.
The last generation which had a plurality who adopted Reagan ideology were born 1965-1975, roughly, marking the end of a right-wing trend which had run for a long while. (Reagan himself was elected by much older people, since this group couldn’t vote; it’s not a coincidence that he was the oldest President ever.)
Since that point, every generation has gotten more populist economically, less imperialist, more environmentalist. And in terms of clothing, sex, drugs, and living arrangements — more libertarian. Though interestingly more personally conservative in tastes and more “socially responsible” in some sense (less of “do your own thing”, more of “do your part”). In terms of transportation, they’ve been less interested in cars and more interested in trains. I count all these as “liberal” moves, your definition of liberal may vary.
The usual “generation” names are unhelpful in describing where the changes come. Originally the “Me Generation” referred to the Reaganite group. “Generation X” has been used to referred to the Reaganite group *and* the group immediately after it. I’m actually in a “baby bust” period, so everyone forgets to give my generation a name — I believe some call it “Generation Y”, but usually not.
Alon Levy Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 10:09 pm
The Conservatives are even more pro-HS2 than Labour. Brown didn’t lose because of opposition to the extreme cost of HSR in Britain; he lost because a) the non-Tory voters split between two parties, and b) both he and Clegg were too proud to join with the small regional parties in a progressive coalition.
Nathanael Reply:
October 21st, 2011 at 6:55 pm
While Clegg has disgraced himself by rolling over for crazy Tory austerity policies, all the evidence from the period shows that it was specifically Labour who was too proud to form a coalition. Clegg actually made an effort.
People ages 56-65 are smack in the middle of the Baby Boom generation
The Census Bureau defines the Baby Boom as 1946-1964. Middle of the baby boom would be 1955 by that definition. 2011-1956=55. Some definitions put it as early as 1943. Some as late as 1966. Still puts the middle of the baby boom someplace in the mid 50s. Someone who is 60 or over is in the beginning of the baby boom. Someone who is 56 is nearly at the middle. Someone who is 46 is at the end.
What a stupid survey. I’m sure that the more likely truth is that Nimbyism increases (correlates better with) with wealth. Almost be default – myself excluded, people get wealthier as the age – higher salaries in later careers, having puchased stocks and homes decades ago. Not to mention the chance of inheritances from parents. Being 65 doesn’t mean you oppose a HSR line thru’ the Peninsula, but having a $5 million home near the tracks probably does. Try building a freeway thru’ San Marino near Pasadena.
I can’t believe that anyone takes such a survey seriously. Why not ask what the breakdown is by race, or religious affiliation, or sexual orientation? It’s offensive to seniors.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 4:21 pm
“What a stupid survey.”–Trentbridge
I’m not so sure, assuming the questions were properly worded. The patterns in the infrastructure sections look like what I’ve been seeing for 20 years. What is missing from the survey is a comparison of how things looked in this regard 20 years ago and how it changed. Because of this, it looks now to be an old-young fight, which it largely has now become. But 20 years ago, it would have looked like a conflict with people over 70 and under 40 against people between 40 and 70–what I have called the “difficult, in-between age” in regard to rail projects.
http://saintindex.info/infrastructure
http://saintindex.info/special-report-energy
http://saintindex.info/special-report-linear
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 4:21 pm
On the TEA Party itself:
http://saintindex.info/special-report-the-tea-party
joe Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 9:10 pm
Age carries with it experiences and cultural prejudices as well as a greater probability of owning land near HSR ROW.
In the world I grew up, public transportation was equated with urban blight and the minorities. We had de facto segregation and problems with white-flight and block-busting. Projects were opposed because of fear of neighborhood change. Cities were run down, bankrupt and dying. That’s the world these wealthy PAMPA grew up and HSR is a project that will let people from LA ride a public train to their doorstep.
Nathanael Reply:
October 21st, 2011 at 6:56 pm
No. Lots of wealthy people are pro-change or even YIMBY.
It’s age.
@Robert: Clem’s blog has (for the last month) a piece on Redwood City’s proposed development of parcels adjacent to the existing Caltrain station. This might be worth an article on an opportunity for TOD and/or missed opportunities.
( Clem has covered most of the details, such as constrained ROW and no guidelines for developers to accommodate future expansion of the ROW, but your blog seems to be picked up by others more )
Off topic although somewhat related: OCTA is spending $600 million to grade separate seven more crossings.
Alon Levy Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 5:20 pm
Any explanation for why a grade crossing elimination costs $86 million?
Peter Baldo Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 5:55 pm
That’s just what those things cost! We have one being built in Downers Grove, IL for $59 million, and that’s the easiest location for a crossing in the area! Construction takes 5 years. I can’t imagine what it would cost at a more built-up location.
http://metrarail.com/metra/en/home/about_metra/capitalprojects/construction_projectupdates/Belmont_Road_update.html
http://www.downers.us/construction-updates/other/belmont-road-underpass
Alon Levy Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 6:37 pm
Hmmm… grade-separating the Chuo Line between Mitaka and Tachikawa cost $1.8 billion (link, p. 36), including 18 grade separations over 13 kilometers, of which 4 are in a trench (link).
Note how this was regarded as primarily a project benefiting cars, and therefore the government paid 85% of the cost, requiring JR East to only kick in 15%.
joe Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 8:56 pm
Downers Grove, Ugh!
Looks like it’s more than an crossing elimination.
Lots of stuff being built but from the maps, doesn’t seem like a pleasant city core like Hinsdale and stops eastward.
Nathanael Reply:
October 21st, 2011 at 6:58 pm
You have to keep both the road and the railroad running while the grade separation built.
If you eliminate both of those requirements, you might get the price down to $43 million (and it would be done much quicker). That remaining price is the price of heavy construction, which is EXPENSIVE. VERY VERY EXPENSIVE.
Spokker Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 11:49 pm
I wonder if the grade separations in OC are considered road spending or transit spending.
Risenmessiah Reply:
October 20th, 2011 at 8:19 am
Transit.
Off topic, but fun: SNCF commercials:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=I1Ndayz4LPE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjYfUhlCVlU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwGu2FQaiC4&feature=related
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 19th, 2011 at 9:15 pm
More French flair:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jn8UPj2kalw&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q3cnPYh-qw&feature=related
Special for Andre: Corsican rail trip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hz6vbeO3ouw
Andre Peretti Reply:
October 20th, 2011 at 3:03 am
You understand why I said CHSRA’s PR was crappy.
By the way, we also call our Corsican trains “TGV”: Train à Grande Vibration. Which is a bit unfair since most worn-out rails have now been replaced and the vibration is not as “grande” as it used to be.
ericmarseille Reply:
October 20th, 2011 at 5:20 am
The first one is a blinder.
So good I thought Michel Gondry was behind it first.
(Note, American friends, that Metronomy’s lyrics are totally irrelevant to the French public)
The other thing is that a lot of older NIMBY people are likely to be those stereotypical “busybodies” who have nothing better to do than complain about projects. It never does cease to amaze how, with a project like this, one that even commands popular support, the voices of a few loud people can derail it.
More on the generational shift, but be forewarned, there are a couple of what look like cranky trolls in the comments section:
http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/10/19/five-ways-market-research-paints-bright-future-for-public-transit/
And more on the generational issue from a bike perspective, in this case as a result of a pro-car ad that some though was hard on bicyclists (off topic, but sounds familiar):
http://allaboutcities.ca/what-gms-anti-bike-ad-tells-us/
The ad in question:
http://www.grist.org/list/2011-10-12-gm-bikes-will-make-you-unattractive-to-ladies
I am surprised at the amount of comment that is circulating on this apparent embarrassment at GM. Maybe this generational shift is bigger and further along than I thought.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
October 21st, 2011 at 10:00 pm
More on that goofy anti-bike ad from the Infrastructurist; take note of the long comment by the retired oil company man:
http://www.infrastructurist.com/2011/10/18/can-carmakers-and-bicyclists-get-along/comment-page-1/#comment-58320
Another item I missed, but which may be of interest here:
http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2011/05/11/washington-california-and-the-curious-case-of-the-railway-to-somewhere/