Our leaders think that we’re going to grow, and to satiate that growth, they’re calling for 400 miles (!!!) of new highways in the metro area over the next four decades. (In fairness, the plan does call for 320 miles of rail.)

What a boondoggle. What an environmental calamity. What an incredibly short-sighted 1950′s solution to a 21st century problem. What a waste of money.

Plus, how can we sustain that growth? I’m thinking in terms of water. With more growth comes the increased demand for more water. Water that is incredibly under-priced for desert living.

Do I need to remind you what happens when a region puts its entire economic development’s eggs in one basket? Phoenix was hit the hardest during this economic recession because our economy was because we had a growth-centric economy. Yeah, it provided fantastic revenues for the state when it was going gang-busters, but now that it isn’t, well…you know where I’m going.

Here’s my bold proposal: let’s institute a growth boundary around Phoenix. Like Portland, Oregon, for instance. Let’s force the 25 municipalities to play nice together and act in the region’s best interests. There’s minimal growth happening now, so this is the perfect wake-up call. Plus, there’s plenty of virgin land that’s been leapt over during the region’s explosive expansion. And there are a lot of places in Central Phoenix that desperately need attention.

Oh, wait, fixing what’s already here isn’t politically sexy.

-Edward Jensen

This is a textbook example of how the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, colloquially known as the Stimulus Package, is supposed to work.  These are shovel-ready projects that can be started earlier with the help of matching Federal funds.

The largest mass transit project in the country got under way Monday with the help of federal stimulus dollars, as public officials broke ground on a second passenger rail tunnel beneath the Hudson River.

The new tunnel will link New Jersey with New York and eventually will double capacity on the nation’s busiest rail corridor, running from Washington to Boston, Massachusetts, officials said.

Officials participated in the groundbreaking for the $8.7 billion project as commuter trains passed behind them in North Bergen, New Jersey, before entering the existing train tunnel, which went into operation in 1908.

[more at CNN]

It will be interesting to see how this progresses. I’m definitely going to keep track of this. Thank goodness for Google Alerts!

-Edward Jensen

I am undoubtedly one of your biggest fans.  Since you’ve been open for business, I think there have only been 15 days where I haven’t boarded one of your trains.  So there’s just one question I must ask:

What’s with these one-car trains?

This week (through last night), I have been on a Metro train eight times, and all during peak travel times (morning, lunch, evening).  Of those eight times, six trips have been on a one-car train.  Of those six trips, the train has been packed, standing room only.  When there is demand for people to ride the Metro, why cut capacity?

I understand that you’re trying to save some money, and given the current economic climate, it’s necessary.  But in reality, how much does it cost to operate a one-car vs. two-car train?  It would seem like the biggest cost – the operator’s salary – is the same whether they are driving a one-car train or a fifteen-car train.  Is the electricity to power a second car that much?  Or the maintenance costs?  If you planned your rolling stock purchase right, you should have enough cars to take one or two out of service while maintaining enough cars to keep two-car trains along the entire route.

If we look at wasteful spending on the Metro, it would be having the driver open all doors when it’s hotter than Hades outside when the air conditioning is running full blast to keep the cars comfortable.  Isn’t that what those yellow buttons on the doors are for: for people to open the train’s doors as they need while keeping the hot outside and the cool inside?  I know that when you tested that out in the winter, few people figured out that that’s what the yellow buttons were for.  So then, put a little sign on the outside of the trains to tell people to push the yellow buttons to open the doors.

When the infrastructure of the Metro was built for three-car trains (e.g. platform length), running one-car trains seems and looks silly.  I hope that you reconsider this, because you’re just reinforcing the notion that “buses can do everything trains can do,” which you and I know is completely not true.

-Edward Jensen

In the days since Metro’s been operating, I have heard drivers that have sounded the bell along the entire route without interruption.  For those who live along the route and for those who are on the train, this is rather annoying.  (If you’re on a train and you hear a clicking noise, that’s the bell ringing.) The standard procedure for Metro is to ring their bell once upon crossing an intersection, arriving a station, and again when departing a station.

Here’s what you do: if you’re on a train where the driver is bell-happy, send a tweet with the train’s number (e.g. 132B), where you are (e.g. Palm Ln/Central Ave), direction of travel (east- or west-bound), and, if not posting in realtime, the time (May 7th, 7.30am).  If you live near the Metro line, getting the time is incredibly important since you might not get the car/train numbers.  Most important, though: put the hashtag “#metrobell” so we can easily identify these tweets and pass along the drivers to Metro.

Please share (and retweet!) so this becomes most effective!

-Edward Jensen

For those familiar with Downtown Phoenix, there are two free shuttles that connect various parts of the area: the Downtown Area Shuttle, or DASH. One travels from Central Station to the Arizona State Capitol (Government Loop) and the other meanders around the area, traveling to the two stadia and up to Roosevelt St (Downtown Loop). Both shuttles operate from 6.30a-6.30p. For the Government Loop, this may make sense since that’s when state offices are open. But it doesn’t make sense for the Downtown Loop: the areas served by the Downtown Loop start to come alive after that shuttle service is finished for the evening.

Here’s the proposal: get rid of the DASH Downtown Loop and replace it with a free-ride zone on the Metro Light Rail that extends from the Roosevelt St/Central Ave station to the 3rd St/Washington & Jefferson St stations.  Most major downtown areas have a free-ride zone to encourage people to take public transport to get from one part of the downtown to the other.  Phoenix should not be different.

It would work by not having fare enforcement officers check between the Roosevelt/Central Ave station and the 3rd St/Washington & Jefferson St stations.  There would still be ticketing machines at those stations so people who need to go outside of the free-ride zone can buy their tickets.

-Edward Jensen

“The creation of good-paying jobs is a major goal in this national recession,” Frank Busalacchi, coalition chair, said. “Additionally, the public demand for expanded passenger rail service is high, and our goal is to meet that demand as quickly as we can. I applaud Congress and the Obama administration for creating this significant pool of important, new funding.”

The coalition, formed in 2000, has grown to include 31 states and two public authorities. At least 35 states are developing plans for expansion of services or new services.

The projects identified by state coalition members are spread out geographically, bringing a significant number of new jobs to many regions.

The projects will also draw on a wide range of labor categories, and will provide operational and capacity benefits to passenger and freight operations. Proposed projects include:

• Track improvements, such as double tracking, welded rail and tie replacement to increase capacity and reliability;
• Sidings to allow fast passenger trains and slower fright trains to pass each other.
• Universal crossovers to provide capacity for shared-use corridor passenger and freight operations.
• Grade crossing improvements such as gates and lights.
• Advanced signal and train control systems to increase safety and operational efficiency of both passenger and freight rail operations.
• Station improvements.
• Equipment rehabilitation and acquisition.

“These projects require not only a large number of workers, but call on a wide range of skills,” Chairman Busalacchi said. “They will put people to work, and create significant improvements in passenger and freight operations across America.”

Busalacchi also is secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, and was a Congressional appointee to the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission.

[press release source unknown, found on Trains for America blog]

So I read an article from the online Arizona Republic that reported that Glendale, one of the partners in the metro area’s light rail system, is considering changing its route from serving its historic downtown to serving Westgate and the University of Phoenix Stadium.  The route that Glendale wants would be an extension of the I-10 West route, traveling up SR-101 to the area.

Glendale is pushing to change the route of the first light-rail line planned for the West Valley, seeing greater value in taking the line to the city’s bustling stadium district than its quaint downtown. But it’s likely an uphill battle, as Phoenix officials say they can’t provide the financial support that Glendale needs from them.

Building the alternative rail route would cost hundreds of millions of dollars more, require months of extra planning and support from other Valley cities. Backers of the new line argue it would boost regional economic growth and reduce the crush of rush-hour traffic along congested stretches of freeway. It could also ferry football fans to University of Phoenix Stadium, as well as hockey and baseball fans to nearby games.

[source: Rebekah Sanders and Scott Wong, The Arizona Republic]

The success of this line lies in having Phoenix fund the portions of the extension that are in Phoenix (from the 79th Ave/Interstate 10 station until SR-101 and Camelback Road, about six miles) fund the remaining two miles.  Mayor Gordon and the City of Phoenix have said that there is no money for this extension.

I bring this up to go back to a post I wrote on 28 February 2009 – “Contemplating METRO’s extensions” – about a light rail extension that connects the existing twenty-mile line to both Downtown Glendale and Westgate/University of Phoenix Stadium.  The key to linking Downtown Glendale and Glendale’s stadia lies in utilizing Grand Avenue as a principal corridor.  This 14.5-mile link would also connect the state government offices via Washington and Jefferson Streets: 7.3 miles would be in Phoenix while the other 7.2 miles would be in Glendale.  To illustrate the line, I created a map (click here).

I encourage you to read the full article by Rebekah Sanders and Scott Wong.  Their article also reports on a proposal by Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon to link the light rail to ASU’s West campus.  I don’t see how that will work, but then again, I haven’t seen any proposals on that suggested route.

At the least, it will be interesting to see how this turns out.  I’ll be watching…

-Edward Jensen

Those frightening experiences are all too common. But it doesn’t have to be that way, as anyone who’s ever strolled down a tree-lined sidewalk or ridden on a well-designed bike lane can attest.

We have a chance right now to get Congress to change those old road-building habits and make sure our streets are safe and inviting for everyone who uses them – not just those driving cars.

Make sure your representatives and senators become co-sponsors of “complete streets” legislation.

One-third of Americans either can’t drive or choose not to. Yet, most communities around the country are laced with roads that are inhospitable, at best, to people traveling by foot, bicycle, or public transportation. For older Americans, children, and people with disabilities, these kinds of streets are especially dangerous.

Complete streets dramatically change the fabric of a community, making it possible for children to walk and bike to school safely, giving seniors more security traveling to appointments, and providing everyone with safer, greener and more convenient ways of getting around without their cars – a smart option, considering almost half of all our trips are under three miles.

Local governments are already leading the way. More than 80 state and local governments have passed ordinances mandating that new road construction provide a full menu of transportation options to meet the needs of everyone using the road. Now we need Congress to take the next step.

This week, Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa and Congresswoman Doris Matsui of Sacramento introduced legislation into Congress that would require all state and metropolitan transportation authorities to adopt and begin implementing complete streets policies within two years.

But they won’t be able to make complete streets into law without more co-sponsors on Capitol Hill.

Ask your representative and senators to become co-sponsors of this bold national complete streets initiative.

Complete streets are cost-effective, allow people to fight climate change by leaving their cars at home, improve safety for everyone using the road, and encourage active lifestyles that will reap benefits for a generation. We must change the status quo and make our streets safe and accessible for everyone, and that change can start with this complete streets legislation.

[source: Ilana Preuss (Outreach and Field Director, Transportation for America)]

In the interest of fairness, I am going to repost Ms. Lazich’s comments (in blockquote and italic format) with my comments at the end.

Governor [Jim] Doyle’s (D) proposed 2009-11 [Wisconsin] state budget includes a provision that would allow southeastern Wisconsin, Dane County and the Fox Valley to develop regional transit authorities (RTA’s). The RTA’s would administer bus systems and commuter rail lines and be funded via local sales.

Last month at a meeting in Milwaukee, the governor informed business leaders that federal stimulus money might be used to construct a high-speed passenger rail system linking Chicago to Minneapolis with stops at Milwaukee, Madison and possibly Green Bay.

Who knows? There might even be talk in the not too distant future about light rail.

I would caution that before the state gets into a mass transit frenzy, a review of a column written for Caranddriver.com by Patrick Bedard during October 2008 is in order. Bedard correctly pinpoints what he calls the “intractable” problems with mass transit.

The most problematic aspect of mass transit is the cost and its funding source. Transit systems carry an expense that is far and above what participating riders are ready and willing to pay. Bedard writes, “Think of it this way. Every time a Los Angelino gets on the Metro Rail, he lays out a buck and a quarter, more or less, depending on his destination, and the taxpayers kick in about three and a half bucks. Next time you ding your credit card for gas at $4 per gallon, imagine getting back a check from the government for almost $3 a gallon.” He cites a Cato Institute study that finds three of every four dollars spent on transit comes from taxpayers.

Other mass transit problems: users fail to value the service to pay the full tab, the lure of federal funds generally results in construction of costly projects, and systems rarely stop at desired destinations.

Even if more riders materialize during, for example, a huge spike in gas prices, remember that mass transit has operating costs, too.

Here is Bedard’s column.

The Cato Institute is one of this nation’s leading conservative think-tanks.  Their policy proposals tend to favor the so-called “American Dream”: suburban living that requires the use of an automobile.  Anyway, the study in question, “A Desire Named Streetcar” by Randal O’Toole (one of the nation’s leading anti-transit advocates) contains many statements left out completely or contrary to reality.  The Center for Transportation Excellence (did a response to Mr. O’Toole’s article, and you can read it here.  So if it true that transit is subsidized by the taxpayers, what about your coveted highway system?  What reinvestment does a highway system bring to the community? Whereas a transit system brings money back, a highway system brings nothing back.

Mr. Bedard’s column, summarized, is an application to the customary anti-transit talking points brought up in Mr. O’Toole’s report.  He lists three of his “concerns” about mass transit, the last of which is that transit “never stops by the supermarket to bring you and the groceries back to your driveway.”  If one lived in a true urban environment, one would find that they would not need to travel to the supermarket because they could walk from their residence to a market to pick up their goods.

I think that something the anti-transit spokespeople are trying to do is apply the suburban lifestyle to urban living.  The two, while they do share some similarities, are different.  There is the market example I gave above, but other things come to mind.   An example of the above: Before moving to Midtown Phoenix in 2006, I lived a typical suburban neighborhood in Glendale.  There is a niche townhome development that is located near the intersection of 51st Ave and Olive Ave but is completely designed away from that intersection.  (I should note that there are two supermarkets at that intersection, a couple restaurants, movie-rental places, etc.)  Straight line from the edge of the development to the intersection is 470 feet.  Google Maps returns the driving directions to get from the edge of that development to that intersection as 0.6 miles (about 3,100 feet, or 6.5 times farther).

I bring this up to show that smart urban development does not solely requre the automobile to get from point A to point B.  Suburban development faces away from the main artery streets thus requiring an automobile to travel down to the neighborhood market, urban living is mixed-use (i.e. private residences above businesses/shops) and oriented toward the major arteries thus making things accessible.

Another thing: Consider the environmental aspects of transit.  This is a no-brainer: the emissions from fifty people in fifty separate cars is significantly greater than either those fifty people in a bus (one vehicle on the road instead of fifty) or in a train (electrical power).

Food for thought.

-Edward Jensen