Link to vision document – By Kairos Design Group

Strongtowns highlighted that Lower Macungie introduced the term Stroad into our Rt. 222 corridor study. Thanks to our consultant Craig Bachik. Craig and I had Stroad conversations starting at stakeholder meetings about a year ago.

This post is largely for my Strongtowns friends and fellow supporters. I wanted to post some pictures of our local Stroads for context to demonstrate what we are dealing with.

When I ran for office I really did try to as clearly as possible campaign on a Strongtowns influenced platform highlighting how land use decisions relate to long term fiscal resiliency. The simple message resonated with voters.

Lower Mac’s side by side Stroads: Dangerous. Low value. Expensive.

LMT’s side by side STROADS

• 2 lane divided Stroad – Built with highway geometry.
• Posted 45 Mph – Local “speed trap”.
• Sequence of traffic signals including one of the most dangerous intersections in the region. 
• Fails to move cars any quicker or more efficiently than adjacent roads.

Our local speed trap. 2 lane divided highway posted with an artificially low 45 mph speed limit

One of the most dangerous intersections in the region

The Rt. 222 Boulevard – Lower Macs target for de-Stroadification triage.

Current conditions:

• 3 lane Stroad (2 overly wide travel 1 suicide lane)
• In stretches very abrasive place for pedestrians. In most cases ped and bike facilities totally non-existent.
• Portions of the corridor have suffered from disinvestment and some traditionally commercial areas now experience high rates of vacancy.
• Today the corridor contains: 2,233,000 +/- SF of Retail/Office • 2,487,600 +/- SF Warehouse/Office • 130 +/- Residential Units • 13,150+ Parking Spaces
• There are currently little or no residential uses in the corridor.
• Large areas of impervious coverage exacerbate existing storm water and flooding issues.
• Parks and open space are not well connected to residential neighborhoods; many recreation areas are only accessible by automobile.

3 lane Stroad. What should be the townships “bread basket” in terms of a resilient taxbase, today is filled with low value, low density development despite massive infrastructure investments in the corridor.

The bones are here for repair. The sycamore trees planted by General Trexler are protected and form the foundation of a multi-modal high value Boulevard.

2. Preserve and enhance cultural and historic resources. Celebrating the corridor’s  history requires more than preservation. New development should respect the traditional character found in much of the study area. For example the historic sycamore trees. 

3. Promote municipal cooperation. The future of Hamilton Boulevard depends on the ability of both Lower and Upper Macungie Townships to work together to solve interrelated land use and transportation issues.

4. Road Diet – Creating complete streets that accommodate vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists will lessen auto dependence and lead to a more balanced transportation system.

6. Enhance access to public transit. The corridor already contains the region’s transit network (LANTA). Existing investments can be maximized by improving the accessibility and effectiveness of public transit. 

7. Encourage higher value/higher return land use and development patterns.  Mixing land uses, and providing a range of housing options can reinforce the corridor’s sense of place and improve quality of life.

8. Seeking low cost but high return incremental opportunities for placemaking.

Capture Value. The Boulevard is the key to the townships long term fiscal resiliency.

In this article Charles Marohn outlines the problem with the otherwise well intentioned Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The requirements when regulated and applied in a clumsy top down fashion leave little wiggle room for smarter more cost effective approaches. This “orderly but dumb” approach often results in forcing ADA compliant facilities literally in the middle of nowhere but leaves downtowns, town centers and other multi modal corridors neglected.

A local example? Throwing money away on walking facilities on the Rt. 222 bypass. I am a big supporter of multi-modal streets and sidewalk facilities as a long term value play for communities. Problem is obviously, the bypass is a place no sane person whether disabled or otherwise would (or should) ever walk. It’s fundamentally designed as an un-safe place for pedestrians. And it should be as a road designed (albeit poorly) to get cars through an area from point A-B quickly and efficiently.

Rt. 222 Corridor – streets, stroads and roads.

But here we have the expensive pedestrian facilities to cross a 4-lane divided highway. The result of clumsy top down policy leaving no room for nuance or interpretation in line with local land use goals.

Sidewalks to nowhere on the bypass, a place no one should be walking.

The problem:

“Like any top-down regulation, a lot of times [the ADA] gets boiled down to checklists and bureaucratic regulation,” Marohn told me. “There are a lot of times when MnDOT has standards about how a signal will go in. It will detail all the ADA elements, the lowered curb, the rumble strip, the different things for people with vision impairments. It’ll have all this stuff and they’ll go out and build it, but it’s out in the middle of a cornfield where there’s nobody walking anywhere.”

 

And the logical advice:

“While it’s easy to find places where ADA improvements seem silly, figuring out what to do about them can be difficult. One of Marohn’s key pieces of advice is that transportation engineers should spend more time listening to people with disabilities about what they want, and where they want it, instead of blindly following a top-down checklist. ”

 

25 years after the ADA, sidewalks still speak louder than words

First if ADA is going to mandate the curb cuts etc it should also require and make sure they go somewhere. And second roads need to be defined by contextual purpose. Let’s NOT put walking facilities on 4 lane divided highways. Let’s focus the money where we get the most bang for the buck. Where walkers are in danger today. Lastly, not building #dangerous by design roadways from the get-go is a much cheaper strategy then applying lipstick on a pig.

More information:

STRONGTOWNS: Chuck talks to Heidi Johnson-Wright, an ADA coordinator in Miami Dade County, about the Americans with Disabilities Act.

I’m probably nuts for writing about education cause it’s a hyper-partisan mine-field littered with special interests and an ingrained “team mentality”. As a township commissioner I have no influence on these conversations. I have no team and I’m not interested in joining one. I just want to step outside the echo chambers for a minute.

But here goes nothing. I try hard to remain agnostic. Step away from the partisanship and just look at the big picture. To that end, you can somewhat do so since in our American education system we have 49 relatively independent systems to compare. I always go back to how are we doing vs. other states as a baseline. In the US we have 50 laboratories to study.

I also understand that the broke system we have today has in the past affected the township. This is because as we scramble to apply band-aids to a system overly reliant on local taxing bodies to sustain the unsustainable by chasing ratables we’ve made some awful land use decisions “for the school district”.  As I often say it’s a rob Peter to pay Paul mentality. Low value development gives the district a band-aid windfall but hurts the township financially long term. But that’s what we get when we are constantly playing catch up. You can’t even blame the district for what is a rational response to a broken system.

So how do we fix it? First some things I know based on comparing our system to other states: (determining baselines) Often we look at PA in a vacuum. To me that is an irrelevant exercise that only serves the status quo. To do so when we have the ability to benchmark against 49 other states makes no sense.

1. Pennsylvania is among the tops in total education spending. Meaning we have one of the most expensive systems in the nation. (29 Billion dollars)

Full stop.

Again, we have one of the most expensive systems in the nation. Pennsylvania today also has some of the highest paid teachers in the nation. Not saying good or bad. I’m just saying what is.

Gov. Wolfs proposal represents the highest net tax increase in the nation. More and more revenue? A solution unrelated to the problem.

Other things I know: While we do not have a revenue problem, we definitely have a funding equality problem. Both state to local ratio but also district to district. We might also have a “bang for our buck” problem meaning a correlation problem. Higher spending does not necessarily mean better outcomes. There are other states that spend far less money and have far better outcomes. The Wolf budget ignores the structural problems that lead to our overly expensive (based on efficiency) system and doubles down on revenue. More and more and more money always.

There are literally a half dozen priorities that are more important than revenue. Revenue relating to total spend is NOT the problem in Pennsylvania. But there are also items Democrats are demanding that I haven’t heard Republicans willing to address. Cyber Charter reform is one example. I support school choice, but on equal funding footing.

As I’ve said in other posts I dip my toes into this topic from a viewpoint that both parties seem to have masters they are unwilling to upset. That’s a political problem we have to overcome. As I’ve also said I would support a severance tax on extraction of a state natural resource in line with other states. (a resource that we have a PA constitutional obligation to protect) But, only if it directly relates to property tax reduction on a revenue neutral dollar to dollar basis. Meaning shifting burden away from homeowners. What we have on the table today in the Governors budget is very simply the nations most extreme tax grab with some extra smoke and mirrors shell game property tax reduction.

Bottom line is structural reform means changes to the system. Not band-aids, not stop gaps, not windfalls but fundamental changes. Looking at things that are broken and fixing them. They can be transformative but also can be subtle.

Let’s get out of the echo chamber and find the middle ground. SB1 is critical reform. In some circles it already represents a compromise bill. But we must start somewhere. And we have to do it now. No signature on that bill is a non-starter since it is the structural reform we need. If that means Republicans need to cave on severance tax, so long as it’s tied to REAL property tax reduction and not a revenue grab I think it’s a deal that needs to be made.

Resources:
Teacher Salaries by state
Quality rankings of education in 50 states
Public Education finances: US Census