Summary: City Council Meeting Regarding Transit Fare Increases

On April 12, I attended a City Council meeting hearing where SunTran transit fare increases were being voted upon.

The reason for a fare increase in the first place was a decline in SunTran funding --> a result of City of Tucson cuts --> a result of the Great Recession. Basically, it came down to service cuts vs. fare increases. Most people, including me, agreed fare increases were a better compromise than service cuts.

The meeting was quite crowded. Many people spoke at the meeting, with the vast majority complaining about the increase of the low income fare from 40 cents to 60 cents. They argued that all the other fare increase were only by a margin of 25%, while the lower income fare increase was by a margin of 50%. The City Council, after some debate, agreed and decided to raise all fares across the board by 25%. However, this means that there is still a budget gap to be filled.

Two other important items arose:
1) Many city council member discussed the need for SunTran to do more advertising so they could gain more advertising revenue. The city councilors agreed that this was a good idea.

2) Councilor Romero recommended the development of a long term, 5 year plan for SunTran. This is a fantastic idea and it is hard to believe a long-term plan for SunTran does not currently exist. This is also a fantastic opportunity for the Living Streets Alliance to influence progressive long-term transit policy in Tucson.

What Do We Want?

Every day, I continue to learn more about the world. While I could easily write for pages about the infinite universe we inhabit, I will stick to the topic of transit today.

A few weeks ago, the website Next American City wrote about a study documenting the effects of technology upon people who decided to give up their cars for a week to use transit instead.

This 3 part article series, titled "Tech for Transit" (link for Part 3 + links to Part 1 & Part 2) was filled with fascinating information, but one chart really stood out:
Click to enlarge graphic
It describes very well why people choose cars over transit and vice versa. Understanding this chart is crucial if we want to understand the direction to take regarding urban transit development in regards to modern technology.

Then, I saw this article on the main page of Streetsblog. It shows just how much ca$h money is involved in maintaining corporate car culture! In essence, entire business models are dependent upon car retailer advertising. And we wonder why opposition to transit expansion exists...

Finally, this video:

In essence, smart phones + QR codes + historical videos and pictures of Central Park NYC = a more robust, educational and interactive park experience.

How can we relate this all to making our transportation systems better and more useable?

In life, we are frequently motivated by rewards. For example, many hours working = more cash money. Turning transit into a rewarding experience is possible. As shown by the Next American City article series, technology is helping to make transit into a more desirable option for transportation. Realizing the amount of money used for the auto industry made me realize how important it is to work closely with the auto companies in order to accomplish long-term efficient urban transport goals.

Please post any thoughts or ideas about this post in the comments section.

Tucson Transit Task Force and Imagine Greater Tucson: Methods of Shaping Our Future

April 6: First Tucson Transit Task Force Meeting - I met with small group of people from the Living Streets Alliance and from other local groups to brainstorm a strategy for addressing issues of transit funding, expansion and awareness. I learned much about the history of transit in Tucson, from the relationships between the various governing agencies down to the relationships between bus drivers and riders.

The primary reason for our meeting was the discussion of proposed transit fare increases that will be enacted within the coming months. Basically, SunTran has two options: 1) increase fares or 2) cut routes. Increased fares seems like best option but this can sometimes lead to less people using the service, creating even less efficiency overall. However, the propposed fare increases are relatively small and they are probably a better alternative to cutting service.*

Another big discussion topic was the relationship between SunTran and the university. The proposed fare increases would have the most dramatic effect on the discounted annual U-Pass for University of Arizona students. After the meeting was over, it was clear that the future of quality transit in Tucson depended on a close relationship between the university and SunTran. I will continue to drive home this important point within this group.

Last year, I prepared a presentation/proposal for free transit in Tucson for university students. This is a common policy in college towns across the nation, including my home town of Albuquerque. I tried to push my message for a few months but it always fell onto deaf ears. Now, with this new task force, I have a better opportunity to create constructive dialogue with the university.


April 7: Imagine Greater Tucson; The Big Reveal - I attended the "Big Reveal" presented by Imagine Greater Tucson.

What is Imagine Greater Tucson? From the website:

Imagine Greater Tucson is a rapidly growing, community-based effort dedicated to protecting and enhancing our quality of life in the greater Tucson region. Our goal is involve the people of greater Tucson in creating a shared vision for our region’s future, and catalyze the development of strategies to realize this vision.

What does this mean? I had a hard time deciphering it. The event and presentation was interesting but not very groundbreaking. The concepts presented were commonly understood regional goals, such as job growth and quality education. All the attendees appeared to be passionate individuals with a lot of great ideas on how to improve the direction of growth in the Tucson/Pima County region. However, they presented no possible methods that could be used to accomplish the goals they presented. Apparently, these issues will be resolved in future community meetings. Only time will tell.

April 8: Featured on Tucson Velo - As previously discussed, the geovisualization created by my project group and I, "UA Campus Bicycle Geovisualization", appeared on local bike blog Tucson Velo. It was a well written post and I thank Mike for posting our unique Google mashup.

Thanks for reading and feel free to write comments. The more feedback I receive, the better.


*If you are personally interested in the bus fare increases, here is a list of the current fares and the proposed fares. The decision on these increases will be made at a City Council meeting next week. More information on this meeting can be found here.

Rethinking the Automobile: Communal Carsharing

American transportation, and especially "alternative" and "sustainable" transportation, is sometimes framed in a black and white, "car vs. everyone else" context. This type of framing is especially prevalent among certain portions of the population that only uses single occupancy vehicles to travel around. Since single occupancy vehicles use the majority of public road space, some (and let me emphasize the word "some") car users feel obligated to the road. As a result of this mindset, blowback can occur when space for cars disappears. This phenomenon has been most visible in recent weeks in the conflict over new bike infrastructure being constructed in New York City.



These arguments always confuse me. After all, more space dedicated to biking/walking/using transit usually leads to higher usage of these modes. Higher usage of these "alternative" modes leads to lower car traffic within the road network. This is a direct benefit for users of single occupancy automobiles.

A great way to reframe this argument could be through car sharing. Car sharing changes everything. "Car v. other" becomes "always using a car v. sometimes using a car."

Car sharing is not a new concept. It has been around for a long time in some regions, through it has experienced dramatic growth in recent years. Zipcar is the US leader in developing car sharing as a viable alternative for people who want to use a car occasionally.

However, car sharing is about to change and grow dramatically. This article, from the website TheCityFix, describes a new form of car sharing service appearing in Paris, France. The name of it is "Buzzcar" and it has potential to change the entire auto market. The reason for the appearance of this new type of car sharing are many, but technology and public policy both play large roles. This new type of car sharing is known as peer-to-peer or communal car sharing. It functions in the same way that peer-to-peer file downloading, or torrenting, functions. Basically, there is no central governing body; no one single entity controls the system. It is by the people and of the people. With communal car sharing, you control how much you want to charge for people to use the vehicle, how long they can use it, what condition it should be in, who the person is and much more. This has recently been facilitated through high ownership rates of smart phones and ubiquitous WiFi internet.

As of right now, communal car sharing is mostly restricted to small companies and areas where government regulations support the system. Auto insurance laws have historically restricted the growth of communal car sharing. Now, at least in Oregon and California, this is beginning to change. Since cars sit unused 95% of the time, this market has massive growth potential. Increased fuel prices will only feed this trend.


My recent endeavors
This evening, I attended my third Living Streets Alliance board meeting. We are finally making progress in creating a framework for this group. Trying to figure out how to best manage and divide the tasks we want accomplished will be difficult. Progress was made tonight with the creation of many task force groups, including a transit task force. I will be serving on the transit task force. I aim to address and research the proposed SunTran fare increases, as well as research the relationship between SunTran and the University of Arizona.

I am excited to begin formulating a tangible direction for the transit arm of the Living Streets Alliance. Now it's time for me to stop writing and begin researching.

All Things Tucson, Tech and Transport

Much has occurred in the past couple weeks since my previous post.


1. Cyclovia Tucson 2011. The event was amazing and everything operated very well. The estimated turn out was 10,000 people. I worked at an information booth on 4th Ave. and 30th St.

I do not frequently spend time in South Tucson so it was a great experience. I ate fresh tortillas, practiced speaking Spanish, listened to the blues band playing yards away from our booth and assisted people trying to navigate the 5 mile event route. Jorge, another bike ambassador, helped me staff the booth. We provided water, maps and advice to every spectrum of biker, older advanced riders to young enthusiastic beginners. I also rode the length of the route a couple of times.
I had a great time and I can not wait until the next one. For more Cyclovia Tucson 2011 coverage, visit Tucson Velo.

2. I have been working on another project for my GEOG416: Geovisualization class. For one of our assigned labs, my group and I decided we wanted to create a Google based geovisualization of various bike infrastructure within Tucson. Our focus was bike facilities in and around the University of Arizona. To collect data, we rode around the various pieces of bike infrastructure. We captured locations using photos and video. After the data collection was complete, we integrated the pictures and videos onto routes we had drawn on Google Maps. Here is the final product:


View UA Campus Bicycle Geovisualization in a larger map

As you can see, we have included a large quantity of data. However, if you zoom in on the map, the data quantity is less overwhelming. In the future, this geovisualization may be posted on Tucson Velo. I will report on this if it occurs.

3. At the request of Tucson BikeFest 2011 coordinators, I have designed a Google MyMap mashup to highlight events for the upcoming Bike to Work week, April 4 - 8.

View Tucson BikeFest: April 4th - 8th, 2011 in a larger map
As you can see, it is a relatively simple map with businesses listed and geolocated using various colored place marks. It is now live on the Bike to Work website and it was a fun project to work on. It also allowed me to discover which businesses are providing discounts and free stuff for the upcoming Bike to Work week.


4. I have joined a local non-profit startup called Open Tucson. The primary focus of this group is

to promote web and mobile technologies to foster civic participation through apps that facilitate communication between citizens and government, between citizens themselves, and that generally improve the quality of life in our community.

At my first meeting on Tuesday, we discussed a wide variety of topics including government and public policy, how to integrate technology with the government, local vs. state level data, transit data and much more. We are currently working on a project that includes live real time bus tracking data, QR codes, and bus stops. I will write more about this project once it is underway.

That is a brief summary of the projects I am either currently working on have recently completed. As always, i am working with the Living Streets Alliance on a variety of items. We will be having a meeting again soon. My search for a summer job or internship continues. However, the process continues to be fun, educational and exciting. I will be posting again soon with more information and ideas as they arise.

Please comment or email me with any questions or comments.

Thanks for reading!

The Central Avenue Corridor, Albuquerque, NM

In my GEOG 416E geovisualization class, we recently completed a lab. The premise of this lab was based on comparing the properties of Google Map/Google Earth vs. ArcGIS as geovisualization tools. For my project, I decided to do a cultural and spatial interpretation of the Central Avenue corridor in Albuquerque from a urban planning perspective.

Here is the result:

View Albuquerque's Central Ave. Corridor in a larger map

If you click on the "View Albuquerque's Central Ave. Corridor in a larger map" link, you can gain a better sense of the context of the route. I put place marks along the route on intersections I felt were relevant to the history of Albuquerque. Each of the place marks contain some sort of information about that specific intersection and its relevance.

My main goal with this lab was to show all the different types of land uses that exist along Central. One important aspect of this is the fact that Central used to be a part of Route 66, a historic highway that traveled from Chicago to Los Angeles before the interstate system was constructed. Much of modern day Interstate 40 = old Route 66.

My main motivation for creating this map was my memory of a round table discussion I attended last summer in Albuquerque. A large diverse group of stakeholders gathered in a downtown Albuquerque hotel to discuss the future of the Central corridor. Our primary reason for gathering was the desire to acquire a federal TIGER grant. The grant was to fund transportation and land use improvements along this vital and historic corridor.

After a few meetings, however, it became clear that moving in one single direction would be challenging. This makes sense, as Central is quite possibly one of the most diverse single corridors in the United States. It includes Downtown, Old Town (top tourist attraction), UNM (major university), Nob Hill (art district), the State Fairgrounds and much more.


A conclusion was never reached but the discussions stuck with me.

One group in Albuquerque, The Zipper, has tried to address the diversity of this corridor. They have marketed the Central corridor as a unique and fun place to shop, live and explore. Though they only address a portion of this amazing corridor, they should definitely be included in the process of developing this corridor in the future.

So now I have created this map. I wonder: would the existence of this map benefited the planning process? The ability to visualize place in a project can be quite valuable in these situations.

Look at my map. Click on the place markers. Is it user friendly? Is it educational? Let me know.

Thanks for reading!

New Title, New Vision, New Ideas

Here I am, back again.

I have not written in a very long time. This is due to the fact that I am in España (Spain)! I will be in Europe until early January and then return to the University of Arizona for one and a half more semesters.

The first item I would like to address is a project I have been working on with Parking and Transportation Services at the University of Arizona. Last year, I noticed an interactive map on the PTS website. It had some neat features, such as traces for various buildings on the campus, maps of parking zones and CatTran routes. However, the map left me wanting more transportation information, especially for SunTran, the Tucson city bus.

I visited PTS and talked to the person who created this map. He liked my ideas so much that he decided I should add the things I wanted to the map! How about that for innovative collaboration?

Though I made quite a few changes, the major ones were adding more SunTran stop icons (all stops within close vicinity of the U of A campus) and adding stop information to all of the stops (both SunTran and CatTran). Also, this map is now linked directly to the U of A home webpage. Here is the current live version of the map as it exists now. I am now listed as a collaborator. Though I have more ideas about things to add, I will wait until next semester to address them.



So, back to the title of this post.

New Title: I decided to change the title of this blog (yet again) to "Urban Transport Revolution: Ideas for a More Intelligent Future". Why the name change?

The new name is more broad because my posts and ideas have become more broad. Though I am primarily interested in transportation, I am also interested in EVERY facet of urban life.

In addition, transportation does NOT exist in an isolated bubble; its success or failure depends on a huge variety of factors, with walkabiltiy being a huge part of the equation. Changing the current paradigms of American transportation policy will truly require a revolution. Though some cities and states are beginning to understand the work necessary, there is a long struggle ahead of us.


New Ideas: Maybe there are not new, but they are important.

Walkable mixed-use density = successful transit. This equation may look simple, but it is incredibly complicated. Some think density is the primary factor in transit success, but it's only one part of the equation. If these dense areas are:

a) dense single use and not mixed use (miles of apartment buildings without a grocery store)
OR
b) dense and not walkable (divided up by lots of fences, walls, major busy streets, etc.)
OR
c) walkable but not dense (dense is a vague quantifier, but basically anything with only single family homes)
OR
any other combo, transit is not guaranteed success. Sure, there are a few examples of these outlier patterns leading to quality transit ridership, but they are not easy to find.

Jarrett Walker, in his blog Human Transit, goes into these issues with more depth.

Once the governments controlling the cash understand the connections between all these things (plenty of other people [PDF] already do), the revolution can begin.

Anyway, that's all for now. Hopefully, I will be posting more often now.

Ciao!

Goodbye ABQ Ride, Hola España

I have not posted for a long time. This has been due to the fact that I have been extremely busy working at the ABQ Ride offices and preparing to study abroad in Alcala de Henares, España.

This summer, I had a paid internship at ABQ Ride. During my time there, I managed to accomplish my major goal: to resign the ABQ Ride System Map. To give you an idea of the major changes I made to the system map, here is the old one:



As you can see, it is hard to read, cluttered and complicated. Here is my new one:



If you want a direct link to the map on the ABQ Ride website, here is the location.

My priorities for the revised map were an easy to read key and cleaner, less cluttered lines. Another priority I had was showing a better distinction between the lower frequency routes and the higher frequency routes.

Interestingly enough, almost as soon as I was done with the new map, Jarrett Walker of Human Transit wrote a great post about the importance of frequency-based transit maps. Local blogger John P. of Carfree in 'Burque wrote a post in response to the Human Transit post; it included an ABQ Ride Frequency Map. Johns map happened to include many of the elements I added to the new map. This entire situation highlights the potential power of the interconnected Internet to influence ideas and policy.

Though I admit my new map is not perfect, it was the best I could do with the time and resources provided to me.

In addition, this summer I also created 4 other ABQ Ride maps for each of the major system transfer/transit centers: Alvarado, Uptown, Northwest and Central & Unser. Other than the Alvarado map, none of these maps previously existed in any form. I hope these documents can help people more easily navigate the ABQ Ride system.

This summer, I learned many things about life in the office, transit planning, politics, bureaucracy, transit funding, the City of Albuquerque, ABQ Ride and many other things. There is one very important point I would like to write about at this juncture; it is a major difference between the transit system in Tucson (SunTran, which serves an average of 13,534 daily riders) and ABQ Ride (which serves an average of 7,948 daily riders).*

Since both metro areas have a very similar population (and similar demographic indicators as well), one would expect similar ridership. What gives?

Local geography helps to explain the differences: in Albuquerque, the city is divided up by 2 major interstates (1-25 and I-40) + Paseo del Norte + the Rio Grande river basin; in Tucson, the street grid is relatively well connected, with the only major freeway (I-10) skirting the edge of town.

There is also another reason for the difference:

Regional vs. local.

Tucson has a single REGIONAL transportation system. This means that there is one service provider for all the local transportation needs. This makes sense, as Tucson is a relatively small isolated metropolis.

Albuquerque, on the other hand has both a REGIONAL and LOCAL transit provider: ABQ Ride is local, while Rio Metro (the group running the Rail Runner) is regional. This means that funding is DIVIDED between these separate agencies.

How can Albuquerque expect to create a seamless, efficient network when the cash is split up between two different agencies? Though this issue may not be the deciding factor behind the ridership differences in these two cities, I believe it is an important issue that should be discussed by local leaders. After all, I'm not sure Tucson would have received federal dollars for their modern streetcar project without the unified force of a REGIONAL transportation system.

This was my major observation about ABQ Ride vs. Tucson/Suntran vs. regionalism/localism vs. transit networks in general.



Anyways, that all has come to an end and I am now in Spain. I will be here for the remainder of the year, studying Spanish and other assorted things. I will try to blog as often as possible, but I will be studying full time so we shall see.

So, as always, IT'S TIME FOR A TRANSPORTATION REVOLUTION!

---

*All the data used was acquired from the Brookings Institute website from the interactive State of Metropolitan America Indicator Map. If you have not played around with this incredible interactive data set DO SO NOW! It is chock full of interesting, interactive demographic data from across the United States. Have fun!

The Layers of NYC

Yesterday, I spent the day touring New York City. I saw many interesting bits of urbanism, from the World Trade Center construction site (which, after years of delays, is finally being reconstructed) to the High Line (an old raised urban railroad that has now been turned into a spectacular park/public space).

New York City is a place like no other, especially in the context of America. Its density and population is unrivaled by any other urban area in these United States. It's transit system is not only extensive, but it is also used by a majority of the population. The city has recently received positive attention from the urban planning world as a result of the new planning director in NYC Janette Sadik-Khan. Her new policies on creating bike friendly and pedestrian friendly infrastructure have caught the eye of planners across the globe.



When I visit places like NYC, I try to figure out what exactly makes the city such an interesting and desirable place, both to live in and to visit. Parts of the answer may be obvious (such as Central Park), but some aspects of the city seem like true turn-offs. The streets are filled with speeding, stinky cars. The subway stations are old, dirty and hot. The traffic is terrible, and it is almost impossible to find one peaceful, quiet spot in the entire city.

So why go?

For people who live there, the simple answer might be employment. But in my opinion, time is the thing that truly makes this place fascinating.

Since people have been living on this little island for such a long time, layers and layers of culture, history and urbanism have been created over time. One could walk for 3 blocks and hear 20 different languages, We were sung to by an African-American trio on the subway (they were pretty talented). There were 4 different bands playing at one single relatively small park we visited (Washington Square Park).

This kind of culture can not be created overnight.

The people who argue about the urban/surburban divide never touch on the issue of time. Cities are usually more interesting places than suburbs simply because the cities have existed for a longer amount of time.

Mix of use is also incredibly crucial. When buildings have a mix of uses (basically residential + anything else) they allow people more options about where they live and work. This allows for a variety of transportation options: walking, biking, roller-blading, skateboarding, bus riding, train riding or even automobile driving. People are always clamoring for more options in life; auto dependent development does NOT provide many options.

Overall, time has led to the creation of city filled with layers. It has layers of culture and layers of infrastructure. It is an organically growing place with constant movement and evolution. Some call it the City that Never Sleeps. What allows the city to stay awake all night?

One important aspect of that is the 24/7 subway network. When you have a transportation network running all day and all night, people will use it all day and all night. This is especially true in a city such as NYC, which has high density and a robust diverse economy.


How can we create incredible places such as NYC? Time is one very important ingredient.

A great public transportation network also helps.

Capping Freeways vs. Taking Them Out: Lessons from the Big Dig

Today, I spent a lot of time ambling around a recently built park in Boston. It is called the Rose Kennedy Greenway, and it is a nice public space. It is diverse, containing fountains, benches, flowers, lawns, long walkways and sculptures. The greenway is surrounded by densely populated areas, providing a green space for many who previously did not have one. The linear aspect of it makes it an ideal place for walking, running, biking and other forms of recreation.

Why is this park so unique?

It is located on top of I-93, a major interstate highway.

The Big Dig, completed in 2006, was the most expensive public works project in recent American history. At the cost of $15 billion dollars, a major raised freeway was torn down, placed underground (with added lanes), and covered with a greenway/park. The results speak for themselves: when cars once flew by at 70 mph, people now run and play frisbee.

On the other hand, $15 billion dollars is a lot of cash. What if there was a cheaper solution? What if all that money was used to restore and refurbish every decaying Boston subway line instead?

Though this project is unarguably a major benefit for the city of Boston, it is truly just a small Band-Aid upon many gaping freeway scars. One of these scars occurs just steps from my hotel, where I-93 continues uncovered. This section of freeway is surround by decaying buildings and homeless people. The cars flying by are loud and polluting. Even where the highway is covered, there are smaller connector roads where the car speeds are still high. Taxi drivers recklessly fly around corners, causing pedestrians to run in fear. There are no bike lanes in this area, forcing bike riders to dodge pedestrians on the sidewalk.

Beyond this, there are vast parking garages surrounding this new park. There massive buildings do not contribute to street life, and their presence encourages people to continue driving.

What am I getting at?

Freeways are only one small part of the problem; all of the car based infrastructure is the real wound.

What if instead of covering the freeway, the freeway had been removed instead?

Some would argue that absolute chaos and gridlock would instantly occur; I disagree.

If this freeway had been removed, than vehicle drivers would learn that driving in this area would no longer be pleasant or efficient. They would either drive to the edge of it and park, sit in traffic, or bike, walk and take public transit.

Did I mention that there are multiple subways stops that directly border this park/freeway?

What if that money had been used to improve the aging metro system instead?


Here is what would occur:
Time after time, when road capacity is reduced, less people drive. As a result, less road capacity would mean less parking structures would need to be constructed. Instead of a ten story parking structure, a ten story mixed use building could be built in its place.
The people living and working in this building would not be as interested in driving since driving would be challenging in this freeway free area. Their use of a new transit system (built instead of the buried highway with the same $15 billion) would further enforce the idea of transit being a wise investment.
They could also use the new state of the art bike network (built with an extra few million leftover form the original $15 billion) to get where they need to go. Bike sharing systems would provide options for people who would prefer not to buy their own bike (more news on global bike sharing systems here).
The variety of options provided to them at all hours of the day would more than make up for the lack of a car. Zipcars and other car sharing systems would help to fulfill the desire the take a spontaneous weekend trip or a jaunt to Ikea.

How should we spend our precious transportation tax dollars?

I have some ideas...

Land Use AND Transportation: The Importance of Understanding the Connection

Sometimes, when people discuss transit and transportation, they discuss the issues of transportation as if they were separate from land use policy and zoning. The truth is, these two things are linked very closely.

For example, if you wanted to walk or bike to the store from your house, would you be more likely to use these modes if there were many multilane roads/highways to cross to get there? What if a bus stop you needed to access was located on the other side of an interstate? How likely would you be to use these modes?


Good luck getting across this by foot or by bike.

If we do not start to realize the link between land use and transportation, we are in for a rude awakening when gas prices begin to rise again. Luckily, the Obama administration recently announced that there would be a partnership developed between HUD and DOT to build "sustainable communities".

Though I doubt any fully sustainable communities will be created in the very near future, this partnership is a great first step towards developing walkable, bikable livable communities. Lower income housing should also be more closely developed in conjunction with transportation. A recent study, the Housing and Transportation Affordability Index, showed that affordability of housing goes way down in exurban areas when the cost of transportation is added in. Data for the Albuquerque metro region is here, and data for the Tucson metro region is here.

This link has been documented for years, but having this great new interactive data set will allow people to see the link between land use and transportation more closely.

Power to the People: Take Power from the States and Give It to the CITIES!

Today, I came across this great article from the site Next American City.

The article basically discusses the problem with federal money being distributed to state governments:

Indeed, the strength of state governments in making transportation decisions is one of the primary culprits for the highway-dependent state of the American landscape, in addition to the federal urban renewal policies and Interstate Highway legislation that are more typically singled out for blame. This fact comes to the serious detriment of metropolitan areas, which lack the fiscal ability and legal right to make full decisions about their transportation futures.

Why does this occur?

That’s because the politics of almost every state are dominated by rural and suburban constituents, or, in other words: car drivers. The urban transit users, pedestrians, and bike riders are typically at the back of the pack when it comes to representation.

The author of the article, Yonah Freemark, calls on Washington to "stem that state power". However, he offers no alternative way for distributing federal money. He seems to be in favor of the Feds having more power in distributing the money.
This issue is also covering in this blog.

I agree with Mr. Freemark: urban areas should have far more power. Money should not even be funneled in to the Feds in the first place; more tax money should be staying within localities. The amount of money each locality has would be based on the amount of economic activity occurring in each given metro area. In the case of money being distributed from a Federal level, it should work the same way: the more valuable the metro area to the economy, the more money it gets.

However, since I am talking about this issue purely from a transportation standpoint, I can see many problems with money being distributed in this manner. Since everything is so road and highway oriented, how could anyone guarantee all the money would not just be used for building new highways?

One solution could be the idea of Federal matching of funds: the more money localities would contribute to non-road projects, the more money would be provided by the Feds for transportation.

Overall though, the main point:
The Feds can not just keep throwing money at states for whatever transportation projects they want. State governments will continue to prioritize road and highway projects because that is the popular thing to do in many jurisdictions (especially the rural ones).

Let the majority be represented. Give urban areas far more political power.

Update (5/8): Here is another blog that discusses this very issue. It suggests giving the power to MPO's (Metropolitan Planning Agencies). All metro areas with a population above 50,000 are required to have MPO's, so it makes sense to distribute federal money through these organizations. In Albuquerque, the MPO is MRCOG, and in Tucson the MPO is PAG.

These groups do a lot of regional transportation planning, so it makes a lot of sense to give these agencies more money, and power.

Update 5/12: Here is great article about the history of road funding. It discusses how the acceleration of the car based transportation system led to money being taken from local control and given over to state and federal control. This [PDF] is the longer article that this previously linked article was summarizing.

We MUST focus on getting our transportation money back to the local authorities. State leaders generally do not understand the idea of "sustainable transit". Metro regions do and they need the money now, more than ever, to invest in sustainable transportation options.

CNM and ABQ Ride: Working Together?

For everyone reading this post not from Albuquerque, CNM is the local community college in the Albuquerque metro area. ABQ Ride is the local transportation agency in the city of Albuquerque.

CNM and ABQ Ride do not have best relationship.

Sure, there are a few ABQ Ride routes that access the CNM campuses. Sure, ABQ Ride acknowledges the existence of CNM. However, compared to the amount of support received from ABQ Ride by UNM, almost no attention is payed to CNM. After all, the 3 Rapid Ride routes all pass by UNM.

How many CNM campuses are served by even one Rapid Ride route?

Hint:0

A closer partnership between CNM and ABQ Ride should be a no-brainer:
1. CNM is the largest secondary education institution in the state
2. CNM students, just like UNM students, have free access to transit. One reason the Rapid Ride has been so successful has been the fact that it serves UNM, a huge bank of citizens with free transit passes.
3. Community college attendees generally have average lower income than UNM attendees, making them perfect candidates for improved transit access.

The reasons behind the lack of a partnership between CNM and UNM are understandable. First, UNM has one major campus; CNM has many campuses scattered across the city.

Here is a map of the CNM campuses:

As you can see, there are many campuses with many locations. This is significant because many students take classes at multiple CNM locations. For the purposes of this post, I will focus on the three largest CNM campuses: Main, Montoya and Westside.

Connecting Montoya and Main: The Montoya campus is currently poorly served by bus service. Main is also lacking significant connections.

The current bus situation for Montoya: Two routes nearby (the #1 and the #5), but none that are even close to the front door of the campus.

The current bus situation for Main: Two bus routes-the 96 Zuni (which only runs on weekdays, stopping at a frequency of once per hour) and the 16/18 BUG (which has an extremely inefficient convoluted route). Solutions to improve the 16/18 are discussed here as well.

My solution: 1 new bus route and 1 enhanced bus route.

The enhanced bus route would follow the current route of the 96 Zuni route, but it would be enhanced by having a significant amount of distance added to it. The majority of this added distance would be the continuation of this route along Morris until it reaches the CNM Montoya Campus.

The route would look like this:

View 88 Morris/Zuni in a larger map

The two place marks on here are the two existing CNM campuses that this route would serve.

The benefits of this alignment are discussed in further detail in this previous post.

The other route I propose is a Rapid Ride route along Montgomery and University Blvd. The southern terminus would be the airport and the eastern terminus would alternate between CNM and the Montgomery/Tramway Park and Ride (on weekends, all the Rapid Ride trips would end at Montgomery/Tramway and on weekdays, the terminus would alternate between trips).

The route would look something like this:

View 725 Montgomery/University Rapid Ride in a larger map

Once again, the place marks designate CNM locations. This route also serves UNM and the UNM Hospital, which is growing very rapidly. This route would complement the current #5 route along Montgomery. This is similar to a route I proposed on this Duke City Fix post, which was then later discussed on this post.


Connecting the Westside campus to the ABQ Ride System: Currently, the Westside campus is served by zero bus routes. This is understandable, considering the sprawling nature of its location. However, it is relatively close to the Northwest Transit Center, making it a good candidate for the terminus of a regular weekday route with half hour frequency.

The route would follow this alignment:

View 101 McMahon/Ellison in a larger map

The marker on the left is the Westside CNM Campus, and the marker on the right is the Northwest Transit Center. This route would be guaranteed success, based on the theory of anchoring transit lines discussed in paragraph five of this post:

So transit planners are always looking to anchor their lines. Anchoring means designing a line so that it ends at a major destination, so that there will be lots of people on the vehicle all the way to the end of the line. A line with strong anchors at each end will have more uniform high ridership over the whole length of the line, and a much more efficient use of capacity overall.

Let's review:

Currently, all CNM students, and all UNM students, have free ABQ Ride bus passes.

CNM needs to have a closer relationship with ABQ Ride.

Three (3) new bus transit lines would vastly improve this connectivity.

Cyclivia in Tucson: The Posibilities for the Future

This past weekend, Tucson had its first cyclovia event.


On Sunday, from 10 AM until 2 PM, four sections of different streets were closed off to automobile traffic, freeing the streets for non-motorized activities for miles. This page has more information, and this blog has a good write up of the event.

The purpose of a cyclovia is to allow all uses other than automobiles on the streets. The problem with doing this in Tucson is the quality of the pavement. Most sections of the route were not smooth enough to allow for skateboarding, long-boarding, roller blading and other activities that require smooth pavement. This is unfortunate because some members of the community really enjoy these activities and would love to have an entire street to participate.

Overall though, it is hard for me to be pessimistic about this event. There were a lot of people out participating and interacting with the built environment in a more sustainable way. When people move more slowly through a place, they can interact with it better. They can see how bad of condition the streets are in and contact the city, demanding improvement. They can find neat restaurants and cafes they never previously noticed.

The best thing about cyclovia is taking street space away from cars. Though it was only for 4 hours on one day of the year, it represented an opportunity to take back the streets. For too many years, American transportation policy has dictated that cars are the only way to get around efficiently.

This is simply not true. Plenty of places in America are easily accessible by foot, bike or transit.

For the places that are not yet accessible,efficient land use policy can help to change this unfortunate reality.



It is also telling that much of this cyclovia route will soon be home to the route of Tucson's first modern streetcar. Construction will begin this fall (Oct./Nov. 2010), and according to project managers, the project will be complete in about 15 months. This means that next year on April 18th, the cyclovia route will look very different.

In five years, the route will probably be very different as well. Construction on the streetcar will have been completed for a long time. Development will probably be occurring along the route, and the recession will hopefully be far over.

However, the real question should be what will the first Tucson cyclovia route look like in ten years? Only time, and progressive planning policy, will tell.

A Gas Tax Solution: Not All Urban Areas Are Created Equal

Let's face it: our infrastructure is broken. As population and road growth increases every year, less and less money is dedicated to essential infrastructure. As a country and people, what should we do? How can the government help?

I have read many articles recently discussing the idea of a gas tax in order to pay for our currently broke infrastructure system. I personally think this is a great idea; after all the gas tax has not risen much since the 1970's and since then, we have added a lot of infrastructure (especially roads) to our national network.

However, a blanket gas tax is so politically unpopular (especially in "tough economic times") that it will probably not happen for a long time, if ever. Therefore, I have a different solution: a gas tax based on zip codes.

The United States is not built in a uniform manner. Therefore, it should not have the same gas tax everywhere. For example, let us compare Manhattan, NYC with rural New Mexico. Both places have the same gas tax. However, virtually all the people who are driving cars in New York City are wealthy; most of the car drivers in rural New Mexico are car dependent and probably middle class or poor.

Based on this analysis, the gas tax should be different in different areas based on car dependency. If the gas tax goes up by 20 cents in NYC, it would hardly impact how people traveled around. If the same amount of taxation was applied to rural New Mexico, it would dramatically affect everyone who lived there on a wide variety of levels.

The gas tax should be raised incrementally based on where people live and work. This may sound complicated, but it can be made easier by the wide usage of zip codes. Zip codes comprise a small enough area that they could be used for this sort of analysis. If you live in an area with no public transportation, low density and low walkability ratings, you would have a small gas tax increase. If you live in an area with good public transportation, you would have a larger increase, and so on.

One of the biggest problems with this would be people traveling outside of their city to find area codes with lower zip codes. This could be countered by the use of credit cards. Since most people use credit cards for gas anyways, the card reader could scan where you live and charge you accordingly. Since this system would be costly and problematic, the easier solution would be to have very little initial difference between prices in the different areas. If a rural area has a 4-5 cent price difference from the urban area, there would not be significant numbers of people traveling to the rural areas for gas.

The advantage of this type of gas tax would be the ability to reward areas with more transit options. The extra tax dollars would go towards enhancing transit and livability in whatever urban area the zip code correlated with.

The most important part of this plan would be development incentives. New development approval would be tied in part to the gas tax in the given zip code. If the gas tax is low, development taxes would be high. If the gas tax is high, the development taxes would be low. It would create an incentive system for creating livable communities. Through this system, gas taxes could be used to make livable and walkable area more livable and walkable, as well as encourage non-livable and non-walkable areas to develop differently.

Though this idea is still a work in progress, I think it has potential to become a blueprint for change. Though I think the gas tax should definitely be raised, this kind of taxation would affect different people differently. Income taxes are applied based on how much is made; let's look at gas taxes based on how much, and where, gas is needed.


Let's Review:

Gas tax increase is a must

Should not be applied the same to everyone

More taxes for people who depend on gas the least

Less taxes for people who depend on gas the most

Taxation based on zip code

Still just a moderate increase for everyone at first