Steve Davis, Author at Transportation For America

About Steve Davis

Stephen Lee Davis is the AVP for Transportation Strategy at Smart Growth America.

Debunking the congestion index used to justify the policies that keep us stuck in traffic

Interstate 24 Traffic Originally uploaded by Transportation for America to Flickr.

The cycle is familiar by now. A study tells us what we all know: our roads are congested. We pour billions into new roads and lanes to “reduce congestion.” Then the study comes out two years later and just as before, our roads are still congested. There’s a call for new roads, new roads open up, we drive further and further, congestion goes up. Rinse and repeat.

Every two years, nearly every major media outlet in the country reports on a “congestion index” study that ranks metro areas and cities by their relative amount of traffic congestion. But a significant new report from CEOs for Cities suggests that there’s a fundamental flaw in that study from the Texas Transportation Institute, and by failing to accurately measure congestion or pinpoint what is producing it in our cities, we’re failing to truly understand the problem.

And when you don’t understand the problem, how can you ever really fix it?

Noah Kazis at Streetsblog most succinctly describes how the TTI study fails to see the whole picture:

Imagine two drivers leaving downtown to head home. Each of them sits in traffic for the first ten miles of the commute but at that point, their paths diverge. The first one has reached home. The second has another twenty miles to drive, though luckily for her, the roads are clear and congestion doesn’t slow her down. Who’s got a better commute?

Shockingly, the standard method for measuring traffic congestion implies that the second driver has it better. The Texas Transportation Institute’s Urban Mobility Report (UMR) only studies how congestion slows down drivers from hypothetical maximum speeds, completely ignoring how long it takes to actually get where you’re going. The result is an incessant call for more highway lanes from newspapers across the country.

The reason why we find ourselves in this situation is because our current federal transportation policies virtually guarantee it. There’s no financial incentive for anyone to measure congestion accurately or improve it — states just get a big load of federal transportation money with few strings attached. Congestion doesn’t get better in large part because states and metro areas aren’t required to reduce congestion or try to shorten or reduce trips with their federal money.

If a state wants to spend some of their federal money on a new comprehensive metro transit system to provide drivers some relief by giving them an additional option as well as taking cars off the road, the process takes years longer and is far more complex. What state, given the choice, would choose to invest in projects that take 4 times longer to get approved and require more local money to build? (Transit projects have about 50% of the cost paid by the federal government, highways get around 80%.)

As this new study demonstrates, the lack of proper metrics to measure success (or mostly failure) is emblematic of the need for reform.

If the ultimate point is to make smart transportation policy, we need to look at a lot of different factors that affect people’s lives. Fixating solely on interstate throughput, while failing to offer other travel and living options, has led our state departments of transportation to invest billions to create a result that is choking the lives out of our regions and isn’t making life better for the vast majority of commuters.

The good news is that places that are attempting to reduce trips and congestion by investing in diverse transportation options are actually showing progress. Regions that have been aggressively investing in additional travel options, eliminating trips, reducing trip length, creating more places to live close to jobs or more effectively managing demand have seen their congestion numbers get better, according to the CEOs for Cities report.

All of this is just one more giant sign pointing to the need for a truly reformed transportation program that can more accurately measure the problems we face, prescribe solutions that will work, and get out of the way as we unleash those solutions on the traffic that is killing our productivity and choking our regions while we motor along at 10 mph with no other option.

Once a critic, now a supporter, Ohio Rep. helps make complete streets bill bipartisan

Rep. Steve LaTourette (R-OH) probably learned the hard way earlier this year that safe, accessible streets for bikers, walkers and all users don’t tend to have any party affiliation, and he is to be commended for proving his support for complete streets by signing onto the House complete streets bill last week, becoming its first Republican cosponsor.

On behalf of our thousands of supporters from communities across the country who think that it’s important that our transportation network be safe and usable by everyone, we’d like to thank Rep. LaTourette for signing on to the Complete Streets Act of 2009, making the bill bipartisan in the House. He joins sixty other co-sponsors in supporting good transportation planning practices that ensure that the safety of everyone using the road will be taken into account – whether they are driving, bicycling, walking, or catching the train or bus.

For some strange reason at the federal level, complete streets have been unfortunately maligned as a partisan issue, with Republicans in Congress hesitant to formally support the principles in a bill, resulting in the strange dynamic of Congress being far behind the curve of their state and local counterparts where politicians and leaders of all stripes have supported complete streets from the state level on down to the big city, metro area, county and small town — no matter their party affiliation.

“With 23 states and more than 140 local governments adopting Complete Streets policies, it has become clear that this is not a partisan issue – and that this is a change in transportation priorities that Americans want to see nationwide,” said Barbara McCann, Executive Director of the National Complete Streets Coalition.

Charlotte Complete Streets-East Boulevard Originally uploaded by Complete Streets to Flickr.

Before its road diet, Charlotte’s East Boulevard was a four-lane, undivided road, that carried over 20,000 per day! Now, East Blvd–with its bike lanes, center turn lane, and curb ramps — is a complete street. Photo: Charmeck.org

We’d certainly like to hope that Rep. LaTourette’s signature on the bill — a product of responding to the voice of his local constituents — will open the floodgates for more House Republicans to support a bill and an idea that has broad support across the country in the local areas they represent. We’re sure there are dozens of House Republicans who are supportive of this idea but have been hesitant to be the only member of their party on the bill at such a polarized time in D.C.

When Rep. LaTourette made his comments back in April of this year about biking and walking to Secretary LaHood in a hearing, he was overwhelmed by the outpouring of comments from residents of his district who agreed with the Secretary that it was high time to treat biking and walking as legitimate and equal forms of transportation.

So local advocates from Walk and Roll Cleveland worked with Mr. LaTourette to bring him on board, sharing information with him about the economic benefits of building infrastructure to serve bicyclists and pedestrians and local bicycle shop owners also visited him. It certainly didn’t hurt that the Ohio Department of Transportation has been showing interest in developing a statewide policy, according to the folks at the National Complete Streets Coalition, or that Cleveland’s metropolitan planning organization adopted a policy 7 years ago.

Members of the National Complete Streets Coalition were pleased with the development.

“In signing on to the Complete Streets bill, Rep. LaTourette has started what could become a significant step toward safer more user-friendly streets for everyone, whether they walk, drive or ride,” said AARP Senior VP for Government Relations and Advocacy David Sloane. “Many Ohioans have seen the benefits of Complete Streets policies in their hometowns; AARP looks forward to the rest of the nation sharing that opportunity.”

Are you represented by someone who hasn’t yet signed onto the Complete Streets Act of 2009? Follow the lead of these Ohio advocates and start calling your representative and organizing meetings to help them see that this idea has broad support back home where their votes are.

Being able to use a street safely — no matter your age, ability or mode of transport — isn’t a partisan idea. Help get that message across in Washington.

Learn more from the National Complete Streets Coalition.

DOT poised to move on a long-term transportation bill in 2011?

When President Obama made his announcement on Labor Day about investing in infrastructure, most media outlets focused in directly on the $50 billion amount that would be spent up front to jumpstart infrastructure investment — something we already noted last week. But he also talked about the need for a reformed long-term transportation reauthorization, the full six-year bill that would provide certainty for job creation and the economy.

Here’s a quote from the release that accompanied the President’s speech:

The President proposes to pair this with a long-term framework to reform and expand our nation’s investment in transportation infrastructure. Since the end of last year, when the last long-term surface transportation legislation expired, these investments have been continued on a temporary basis, even as the trust fund to finance them has fallen into insolvency. If we are to enjoy the benefits that come from a world-class transportation system, Congress must enact a long-term reauthorization that expands and reforms our infrastructure investments and returns the transportation trust fund to solvency.

So the million dollar question has been, when will we see this bill? With Congress unlikely to pass anything of substance between now and the election and an already full docket for the likely lame duck session to follow, what is the administration or USDOT saying about moving a bill forward?

As much progress as has been made by the House transportation committee thus far, introducing a full bill proposal all the way back in July of 2009, both chambers have been waiting for the White House to declare the transportation bill a priority and to put their significant weight behind it. Now it sounds like that day could be just a few months away.

In a meeting with advocates this week, Secretary LaHood said that they have the go-ahead from the White House to move a six year bill in 2011, with a full proposal accompanying the President’s budget request for FY12 in February, according to USDOT sources.

The question remains as to whether or not that will be a full bill, or merely the administration’s principles for a bill, but in either case, this is at least a glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel for our long wait for a transformational transportation bill. Which, we remind you, expired one year ago in just a few days. (See the clock above on our web site.)

Don’t let transportation get lost in the political shuffle; send a letter to your local paper

Newspaper pile Originally uploaded by Valerie Everett to Flickr.

When President Obama announced his vision on Labor Day for investing in 21st century infrastructure, he put our country on the right path toward smart transportation reform — a path that could transform communities across America and create desperately needed jobs.

But his bold vision to invest in safer streets, road and bridge repair, and high speed rail immediately came under fire from many of the usual suspects who prefer the current system of earmarks and oil industry tax breaks.

We need to respond to these attacks on transportation reform – publicly and quickly – to show the country and our lawmakers that the plan’s supporters greatly outnumber its critics.

Take 5 or 10 minutes and write a letter to the editor of your local paper today

Letters published in local papers are read carefully by members of Congress and their staffs – they represent the pulse of their communities. Getting a flood of supportive letters published will go a long way in helping shore up support for a transformational change in our country’s approach to transportation.

Plenty of old guard transportation insiders in Washington, DC – from the highway lobby to the oil companies – would love to see us pour twice as much money into the same old broken system, but we stand with Americans who want accountability for how we invest in transportation, ensuring that we invest in things that can get us moving again and create the most jobs.

Write your letter of support now – we’ll give you talking points to make it fast and easy, and we can even send your letter for you! Use our tool to write and submit a letter to your local paper.

USA Today on infrastructure spending: what do Americans want?

USA Today had a timely graphic up yesterday, considering the continuing media coverage around President Obama’s recent proposal for infrastructure spending and a reformed long-term transportation bill.

First, the graphic:

Though we can’t see the rest of the questions or the context, it affirms a few things we already know about Americans’ attitudes about transportation — as evidenced in our own 2010 national poll — and how to fund what we need.

While Americans are actually voting in favor of taxing themselves to improve transportation in state and local ballot measures at a rate of about 70 percent, they often know exactly what they’re going to get in those cases: a new bridge, an expanded transit system, a system of repaired roads, or the like. But the federal program is much fuzzier in most people’s minds. The current system is broken and unaccountable, and putting more money into a broken system is like trying to bring more water up from a well using a bucket with a hole in it.

As James Corless wrote in an Infrastructurist guest post yesterday, “Some of the old guard transportation insiders in D.C. would be thrilled with doubling the overall size of our transportation program and pouring more money into the same broken system, but Americans know better. They want more accountability, safer streets, and more transportation options so seniors can maintain their independence and low wage workers can get to jobs.”

It’s also interesting that the sentence to the left of the poll summarizes it as “Americans would rather use tolls than taxes to build more roads,” when it could have just as easily been “Americans are OK with building no new roads if it means raising the gas tax or instituting tolls to pay for them.”

Maybe the poll asks the wrong question?

We’re not in favor of a moratorium on any new roads whatsoever, but this survey clearly reinforces the fact that Americans in urban and rural areas have moved beyond the idea that the solution to every transportation problem can and should be a new road.

We cooperated on a poll in 2009 with the National Association of Realtors, showing that Americans don’t think expanding roads and highways are the best use of scarce transportation dollars:

“As the federal government makes its plans for transportation funding in 2009, which ONE of the following should be the top priority?”

Maintaining and repairing roads, highways, freeways and bridges	Expanding and improving bus, rail, and other public transportation	Expanding and improving roads, highways, freeways and bridges	Not sure
50%	31%	16%	3%

And as our 2010 poll showed, more than four-in-five voters (82 percent) say that “the United States would benefit from an expanded and improved transportation system, such as rail and buses” and a solid majority (56 percent) “strongly agree” with that statement. Fully 79 percent of rural voters agree as well, despite much lower use of public transportation compared to Americans in urban areas.

If you saw this graphic and your curiosity was piqued, perhaps it’s worth going back and poking through our national poll for a fuller picture.

National Geographic on Dangerous by Design

We mentioned this on Twitter when the issue came out back in July, but National Geographic had a nice one-page feature on Dangerous by Design, our study from 2009 ranking metro areas on their relative danger to those on foot and bike, focusing on Florida’s overall risk based on having 4 of the top 10 most dangerous metros. In the last 15 years, more than 76,000 Americans have been killed while crossing or walking along a street in their community, and it’s high time that more attention was paid to this preventable loss of life that we far too often ignore or simple believe to be inevitable.

Click the image to download a PDF of the one-page article, and while you’re at it you could just go ahead and subscribe to one of our country’s best magazines for only 15 bucks.

Access denied: gaining a disabled person’s perspective

We’ve talked a bit here for nearly two years about the need to make our streets safe and accessible for all users — whether young, old, walkers, bikers, drivers, or wheelchair users. Almost every time we post pictures like this or this showing inaccessible conditions on our streets, it’s a reminder of how shocking it is that we build infrastructure in our communities that is almost impossible for certain citizens to use comfortably or at all.

Yesterday, we got an invite to add one of our photos to a Flickr group we’d not noticed before. Taking a few moments to scan through all 50 or so pictures can give you fresh eyes for looking at the streets and sidewalks around us.

Some of the problems in these photos are certainly systemic issues with how we build and design our streets or other public spaces. Some others, like having doors open outward, result from a lack of understanding or a failure of design. Until you’ve been in a wheelchair trying to get down the street to the movie theater or the drugstore, you probably don’t notice doors that are slightly too narrow, ramps that are too steep, or sidewalks without entry ramps.

They’re not all transportation-related, but this group’s photos are well worth a look.

Wildkat: Access Denied!

Walk Score expands into Transit Score; housing plus transportation costs

An exciting new service that launched this morning from our friends at Walk Score will help people all across the country find out how transit-accessible a home or a neighborhood is while gaining a better understanding of the true cost of buying a home — the cost of housing plus transportation.

Starting today, when you visit Walk Score you’ll also get information about nearby transit options, commuting details, and the expected cost of housing plus transportation. Some of the new features:

A Transit Score for the 40+ cities that provide open transit data. See the list of cities here
By entering a work and home address, you can get custom commute reports for all cities showing hills on your route for biking or walking, nearby transit lines, and travel times and directions based on mode. Select walking, biking, transit or driving and see the route update dynamically. (See example below)
They’ve also joined with the Center for Neighborhood Technology to allow users to calculate their expected transportation costs to give a fuller picture of the cost of a home.
They’re partnering with the real estate site ZipRealty to have this provided with all of ZipRealty’s home listings. So anyone looking for a home on their site will get exposed to these ideas on a regular basis.

Together with the Center for Neighborhood Technology, Walk Score and CNT have done more than almost anyone to help raise the visibility of the issue of housing and transportation costs in the minds of consumers and adding transit to the mix is the next obvious step. After all, you may live in a neighborhood with a 75 Walk Score but you’re a five minute walk away from a bus or train that can take you to a neighborhood with a 100 Walk Score in just a few more minutes. Being able to walk to and use a variety of of other transportation options expands your “walkshed” — something that Walk Score doesn’t recognize on its own.

When you search for the Walk Score now, you also get a Transit Score. And if you live in one of the 40 cities with open transit data, you can enter a second address and get a commute report, complete with directions. As an example, here’s a commute from a neighborhood north of downtown D.C and the T4 America office., where some of our staff live and ride their bikes to work. Click on the bike commute, and it shows you the profile of the hills, the time and mileage, and the route on a map:

These commute reports will be available for all cities, though the transit data will be left off for cities without open data.

Now I know what you’re thinking: only 40 cities with transit data? Indeed, Transit Score unfortunately only has access to a limited set of open transit data, because not all agencies have chosen to open up this publicly-owned data as a public resource. But there’s hope. You can petition your local transit agency to release their data publicly to make exciting tools like this and others possible. Visit www.citygoround.org to see a list of the 695 agencies with no open data and find information on how to request your local agency provide that data. (Read our post about the release of CityGoRound.)

Transit Score was supported by the Rockefeller Foundation, and had this to say in the official press release this morning:

“The Rockefeller Foundation’s transportation initiative is committed to helping Americans re-think our transportation future as a way to expand economic opportunity, and we are excited about the potential impact Transit Score will have in helping Americans make more informed decisions about where they will live and work,” said Benjamin de la Pena, Associate Director at The Rockefeller Foundation. “Transportation costs are often the second highest expense for working Americans and Transit Score will give families more control over their household budgets by providing them with information about their transit choices.”

The housing+transportation calculator is cool, but at the risk of going on too long on a Monday morning, if you really want to dive into finding out more about housing and transportation costs today, you need to check out Abogo from the Center for Neighborhood Technology. Type in an address, and it gives you the cost you can expect to pay for transportation at that address and an estimate on emissions. With one glance at the color, you can see where transportation costs are low, and where they are higher, helping to make a more informed decision.

These kinds of tools are certainly important for helping consumers make more informed decisions when purchasing a house, but the greatest value is really what they do to help shatter the myth that the cost of a home is the only major cost of a home. With multiple trips taken each day to all the places we need to go, the locations of our homes have profound impacts on our pocketbooks, wallets and time. We applaud Walk Score, Transit Score and CNT for working hard to make the case that we need more walkable, transit-accessible places in our communities — and that the market is demanding them.

Blueprint America on complete streets in Atlanta

Do yourself a favor and check out this short video from PBS’ Blueprint America series that aired on the program “Need to Know” recently.

The overall package is about “disappearmarks” — earmarks totaling millions in the last federal transportation bill that have never been allocated or spent, according to the Sunlight Foundation. But this story from Atlanta focuses much more specifically on how unsafe, incomplete streets that don’t adequately meet the needs of all users in Atlanta results in pedestrians that have little choice but to take their lives into their own hands each and every day, just to get to work, school, or the closest bus stop.

They used the numbers from Dangerous by Design, our report on pedestrian safety nationally, to help give some broader national context to the situation in Atlanta.

Watch the full episode. See more Need To Know.

What does the FREIGHT Act really mean for our freight and ports?

Port of Oakland originally uploaded by ingridtaylar

There were a few questions bouncing around via Twitter and elsewhere about the new FREIGHT Act introduced yesterday by Senators Lautenberg, Murray and Cantwell. We issued a joint press release with a few other groups, but it’s worth spelling out in plain language some of the benefits of the bill.

For context, it’s worth understanding how freight transportation policy currently works now to understand how much of an improvement this bill would provide.

Today, there is no national freight program or specific national policy. There’s no dedicated federal transportation money that states, regions or ports can spend to improve throughput or operations at ports, intermodal facilities and freight corridors. And among the traditional federal transportation programs, freight rail projects in particular (much like passenger rail) aren’t eligible projects.

So if a port is congested or wants to expand, there’s little available federal money to spend directly on rail or any other mode. Your choices are highways or highways. When a state or port does spend to improve operations, there is no accountability to make sure they’re actually reducing port/freight congestion, moving freight faster, or reducing air pollution in surrounding communities — a significant issue of environmental justice.

Under this new bill, there would finally be a coordinated national policy for freight and ports across the country, and for the first time public health and air quality surrounding freight hubs and facilities become strong criteria for awarding dollars.

No matter what ports decide to spend money on to improve their operations, they’d have to consider air quality, greenhouse gas reductions, and noise and water pollution in the surrounding communities with future federal investments. On top of that, there would be a merit-based grant program for projects that do the best job of improving freight operations while using money most effectively and hitting the benchmarks laid out in the bill.

Benchmarks? The goals in the bill set a powerful framework for accountability, spelling out what they money should accomplish, so taxpayers can know that their money is being spent wisely.

Reduce delays of goods and commodities entering into and out of intermodal connectors that serve international points of entry on an annual basis.
Increase travel time reliability on major freight corridors that connect major population centers with freight generators and international gateways on an annual basis.
Reduce by 10 percent the number of freight transportation-related fatalities by 2015.
Reduce national freight transportation-related carbon dioxide levels by 40 percent by 2030.
Reduce freight transportation-related air, water, and noise pollution and impacts on ecosystems and communities on an annual basis.

For example, a port in a coastal city in California would have to consider the impacts on the health of those communities surrounding the port. Would investing in more freight rail capacity ease congestion, lower overall emissions, and reduce local air pollution? These are the kinds of questions that would have to be answered.

“A truly multimodal national freight program that is accountable to measurable performance targets and benchmarks is something the U.S. has needed for a long time,” said James Corless, director of Transportation for America in our press release.

“We applaud Senator Lautenberg for recognizing that our freight system can move our goods from coast to coast and power the economy while also being part of the solution for many of our most pressing problems: air quality, dangerous emissions, oil dependence, and congestion on our highways and interstates, to name just a few.”

Video: John Robert Smith on helping politicos see the importance of passenger rail

In this short video, former Meridian, Mississippi Mayor and current T4 America co-chair John Robert Smith talks about the project to build a new multimodal train station in downtown Meridian when he was mayor, proposed cuts to Amtrak that happened shortly afterward, and how a few key Senators championed funding for Amtrak after seeing how ordinary people outside of D.C. depended on that service.

“I don’t know what this talk around DC is about livability not having anything to do with rural areas…”

Earlier this week, we hosted 15 of our partners from rural areas across America for a two day “fly-in” focusing on the transportation needs of rural areas and small towns. We hosted a briefing at the Capitol in the morning and then these partners from all over the country, from Virginia to California, took the message up to their leaders in Congress through dozens of meetings with legislative staff or Senators and Representatives themselves.

Kathy Moxon, the director of Redwood Coast Rural Action in (extreme) northern California, a participant and speaker at the briefing, took a few moments in between meetings at the Capitol to talk to T4 America about this idea of “livability” in rural areas that some in Congress have been questioning.

We wanted to know more about the view from rural northern California — is livability a rural value?

We’d like to thank Kathy for coming to D.C and participating in the fly-in and giving us a few minutes of her time.

Center for Public Integrity on the transportation lobby

The Center for Public Integrity’s Transportation Lobby project visited South Florida to discuss the grassroots impact of lobbying activity in the nation’s capital, featuring a nice mention of Transportation for America. Video is 7 minutes long, but well worth your time. Narrated by CPI’s Matthew Lewis.

Secretary LaHood on T4 America’s poll: “People want better options”

Secretary LaHood at our petition delivery last November

We got some superb media coverage last week on the release of our national poll and there’s an engaging discussion underway today on the National Journal experts blog, but we wanted to especially highlight a terrific post today from Ray LaHood, U.S. Secretary of Transportation, on his official DOT blog.

While LaHood was showered with gratitude from many for his statement at the National Bike Summit that bicyclists and pedestrians should be accommodated in our transportation network and no longer treated as second-class citizens, he also took a verbal lashing from some defenders of the transportation status quo — but not the pulse of the American people, as our poll clearly shows.

While having the concrete numbers from a bipartisan national survey is encouraging and helpful, Secretary LaHood says that most notably, our poll echoes the same drumbeat he’s heard all around the country from people in big cities, small towns and all the places in between during his first 14 months in office.

This is precisely what I’ve been talking about here in this blog with regard to livability, transit, and walking and biking. I have traveled all over this country in the past 14 months, and everywhere I go people want better options. Options that offer reduced greenhouse-gas emissions. Options that offer reduced fuel-consumption. Options that offer better health. Options that bring communities together.

Now, let me make this absolutely clear: I never said we would stop repairing, maintaining, and–yes–even expanding roadways. I said only that it’s time to stop assuming that putting more cars on more roads is the best way to move people around more effectively.

This survey demonstrates that, by and large, the American people get that. I never doubted them, but it sure is nice to see the numbers.

So, thank you, Transportation For America, for that 82%-strong vote of confidence.

The pleasure is all ours, Secretary.

New poll shows Americans strongly support public transportation; more walking & biking

American voters overwhelmingly support broader access to public transportation and safe walking and biking, according to this new national poll conducted for Transportation for America and released to the media today this afternoon. With the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee ramping up efforts to draft a new long-term transportation bill before the end of the year, the results should be instructive to Senators.

You can read the full details about the poll, including a full presentation on the findings at https://t4america.org/resources/2010survey

More than four-in-five voters (82 percent) say that “the United States would benefit from an expanded and improved transportation system,” including modes of transportation like rail and buses. An overwhelming majority of voters agree with this statement — no matter where they live. Even in rural America, 79 percent of voters agreed with the statement, despite much lower use of public transportation compared to urban Americans.

Some in Washington believe that building or expanding more roads is the best way to tackle congestion — but the majority of Americans don’t agree with them. Three-in-five voters choose improving public transportation and making it easier to walk and bike over building more roads and expanding existing roads as the best strategies for tackling congestion. (59% to 38%).

Click the graphic to read more about the poll. Find something interesting or surprising? Share it with us in the comments.

T4 America co-chair testifies before Senate on rural transportation

Mayor Smith speaking at the T4 America platform launch in 2009.

Mayor John Robert Smith, T4 America co-chair and President of Reconnecting America, testified before a Senate committee today about the transportation challenges facing rural areas and small towns — and offered six practical suggestions for how the federal government can help them meet these challenges head-on.

Far from being left behind or left out of federal transportation policy, Mayor Smith’s recommendations provide a clear road map for boosting the economies of Main Streets across America and connecting small cities and towns to increased economic opportunity. As the former Mayor of Meridian, Miss., and the board chair of Amtrak, he has experience on almost all sides.

The word may have connotations of big cities and tall buildings, but our small towns are decidedly “urban” — at least in the sense that many residents live decently close to a town center or square, with a street grid that gives people the option to walk. Schools may still be within walking distance in the town’s core, kids ride their bikes around town, families walk when they can, and these historic downtowns are still magnets for business and community events.

But while major metro areas are battling gridlock and congestion, smaller towns are looking at issues of access, ensuring that residents have good connnections to economic opportunities — and that they can get where they need to go quickly and affordably.

“Long commutes, volatile energy prices, and shifting demographics all impact the prosperity of these communities,” Mayor Smith testified this morning. “Many small towns and rural areas lack the financial resources, planning capacity, or authority to implement solutions to their transportation needs. A bold new policy is needed at the federal level to meet those needs.”

He knows a thing or two about how transportation decisions can affect economic opportunity on Main Street after years as a mayor. “In my own hometown [Meridian, Miss.], through investment in our downtown and the creation of a transportation hub, we bolstered the local economy and reversed the decline of our historic buildings and city center. Other communities like ours can experience that same revitalization if our country will commit the resources needed to enhance the economic competitiveness of existing communities,” he said.

Download this Brief (pdf)

Mayor Smith, T4 America and our many partners in rural areas that developed these recommendations are seeking to provide a framework for residents of our small towns and rural areas to have the transportation options they need so they’re not stranded without options.

Residents of these areas are demanding good transit networks, safe streets, bridges that don’t fall down and highways that aren’t cracked and potholed.

Mayor Smith’s testimony to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee coincided with the release of a whitepaper on rural transportation entitled “Principles for Improving Transportation Options in Rural and Small Town Communities,” which describes T4 America’s recommendations in much greater detail.

You can read his full testimony here.

And read the official campaign press release.

Atlanta-area transit system 14 days from shutting down, 2 million rides disappearing

C-Tran Clayton County Transit Service Eliminated

Flyer from the Clayton County C-Tran website, which advertises their service as “Tomorrow’s Transportation Today.”

Clayton County, one of metro Atlanta’s five core counties — Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Airport is partially in Clayton — will terminate all transit service in 14 days. The transit service, which provides over 2 million rides each year on buses “full to bursting” with riders, according to MARTA CEO Beverly Scott, will shut down service entirely, leaving the 50% or more of C-Tran riders with no regular access to a car stranded.

Public transportation (or anything that provides people with mobility) is really about access. It gives people access to opportunity, access to daily needs, access to a job, access to life — and maybe even the means to improve the quality of that life.

One story highlighted in October in this piece from the Atlanta Journal Constitution shows the vital connection that C-Tran makes for one Clayton County resident:

Twenty-year-old Bridget Milam takes Clayton County’s bus system, C-Tran, wherever she goes. She takes it to Brown Mackie College in Atlanta, where she’s getting an associate’s degree in early childhood education. She rides it to her job at a day care center. She has never had a car and can’t afford one now. C-Tran is her lifesaver. Not for long.

…[she] may have to put school and her day care job on hold. “It means I have to find a job closer to home, in walking distance,” she said. “It would probably be fast food.” …Milam expressed frustration that she will “have to settle rather than doing something that could further my career.”

Access to the opportunity that public transit provides can mean the difference between becoming a teacher one day — or a future of asking customers if “they’d like fries with that?”

Despite a proposal to raise fares dramatically, the deficit was still at $1.3 million, and the 5 county commissioners voted 4-1 last year to shut the service down completely, asserting in a statement that “paving roads is a primary duty of the county. Public transit isn’t.”

The Georgia Regional Transportation Authority disagreed strongly with that view. “In Georgia, local roads are a local responsibility, and local transit is a local responsibility,” GRTA Deputy Director Jim Ritchey told the AJC.

Unfortunately for Bridget Milam and thousands of others in Clayton County who depend on C-Tran each day to get to work, class, the doctor or pretty much anything else, Clayton County leaders don’t see it that way — leaving them stranded at the station come April 1.

If you’ve been affected by cuts in transit service or fare increases — especially if you’re in Clayton County, Georgia — tell us your story and we’ll help share it with Congress.

UPDATED: Like this touching story that Carmen, a now former C-Tran rider, shared with us on that page:

Hello. My name is Carmen and I’ve been a passenger on CTRAN’s paratransit service for as long as they have been in service. I work for Delta Air Lines and use the service to get back and forth to work. At this time, I have to move closer to my job in the Fulton County area. This is a hardship because now I have to cancel my lease agreement with my current apartment complex in order to move. They have been very helpful but I really did not want to move because of the negligence of Clayton County managing the taxpayers’ funds. Not everyone can afford to move at the last minute. I truly hope that Clayton County uses the funds they do have in reserve, as mentioned by Eldrin Bell, to keep CTRAN running. If the Commisioners or their family members were in our position maybe they would look at the situation differently. But of course those that are not affected are not concerned at all and that is a shame they are not here for the people.

Update 2: Read this superb and touching story from the LA Times on the last day of service.

U.S. Transportation Department makes good on promise to ensure our streets are made safer

Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood issued a exciting new directive yesterday that officially shows DOT’s support for improving safety for walking and bicycling and the importance of integrating them into transportation systems — treating them as equal modes of transportation.

Last fall we released a report chronicling the tragedy of 76,000 preventable pedestrian deaths over the last 15 years. “Dangerous by Design” took a hard look at our often unsafe streets that are engineered for speeding traffic with little or no provision for people on foot, in wheelchairs or on a bicycle.

DSC_0376 Originally uploaded by Transportation for America

When that report was released, we asked supporters like you across the country to sign a petition to Transportation Secretary Ray Lahood asking him to support Complete Streets at DOT, and more than 4,100 of you responded. We took that petition directly to Secretary Lahood back in November of 2008, and afterward, he told T4 America, “the right of way “belongs to pedestrians and bicyclists as well. The DOT Safety Council is going to look at this report and work with advocacy groups to ensure our streets are as safe as possible.”

Yesterday, Secretary Lahood and DOT responded by turning his words to us from November into official DOT policy with the release of a DOT “policy statement.”

The DOT policy is to incorporate safe and convenient walking and bicycling facilities into transportation projects. Every transportation agency, including DOT, has the responsibility to improve conditions and opportunities for walking and bicycling and to integrate walking and bicycling into their transportation systems. Because of the numerous individual and community benefits that walking and bicycling provide — including health, safety, environmental, transportation, and quality of life — transportation agencies are encouraged to go beyond minimum standards to provide safe and convenient facilities for these modes.

Or as he described it more simply on his Fastlane blog yesterday, “This is the end of favoring motorized transportation at the expense of non-motorized.”

We applaud the Secretary’s work on this issue and are especially thankful for the thousands of you who wrote a letter to Congress or signed our petition to Sec. Lahood urging him to use all the powers at DOT’s disposal to make safe, complete streets the norm all across America. Your voices were heard, and policy has changed.

“This is an issue that has been ignored far too long, even as thousands have died or been injured unnecessarily just by doing something as simple as trying to cross the street,” said T4 America director James Corless.

“We thank Secretary Lahood for his leadership at DOT and for elevating this urgent issue to the level of prominence that it deserves. Americans deserve have a safe route for walking to the store, walking their kids to school, or walking to the bus stop at the end of their block to get to work. Taking these simple steps to consider the needs of everyone who uses a street — bicyclist, pedestrian, or wheelchair user — is exactly what we were hoping for when we took our message into Secretary Lahood’s office last November. It can help us stay healthier by giving us one more option for travel, and Secretary Lahood is spot-on when he says that it’s a key part of making livable neighborhoods.”

This certainly doesn’t mean that the issue is over. As Barbara McCann with the National Complete Streets Coalition reminds us, there is still no official federal requirement for complete streets on projects the feds spend money on. And only a fraction of states, cities, and towns have rules on the books requiring them to ensure the safety of all users when they build or retrofit a street or road.

DOT is saying all the right things in this statement, but they need the legislative authority and money from Congress to line up with their excellent intentions.

So we’ve taken a first step. A big, important leap into a safer world for everyone who uses our streets. But there is more left to do.

Transit grants out the federal door, but what about the cuts?

Park and Ride Ribbon Cutting Originally uploaded by WSDOT

Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood is (rightfully) touting the great news on his blog this morning that the Federal Transit Administration met their ambitious deadline for distributing 100% of the transit funds from the stimulus package. That’s great news, but it should be accompanied by the sobering reminder that these public transportation systems that get people to work each day largely couldn’t use that money to keep from having to cut service at a time when it’s needed the most.

The FTA has now doled out 881 grants totaling $7.5 billion since the stimulus was signed last year, and LaHood notes that these grants have funded the purchase of nearly 12,000 buses, vans and rail vehicles; construction or renovation of more than 850 transit facilities; and $620 million in preventive maintenance to keep systems running smoothly.

But what about the hundreds of agencies cutting back service, raising fares, or laying off workers — like the terrible story from Atlanta we chronicled last Friday, where 25-30% of all service may be history come June?

Unfortunately, the FTA’s hands were tied with the rules for the grants set by Congress, which meant that almost all of the money had to be used to purchase new equipment or perform maintenance, even if those agencies couldn’t afford to hire or train the new drivers to operate the buses or railcars. We say “most of the money,” because a group of lawmakers were able to successfully include a provision in a separate bill during the summer that made it possible for local transit agencies to spend up to 10% of their transit stimulus money on operations. But in many places like St. Louis, where the deficit was ten times the $4.6 million they could now spend on service, that’s not enough to keep from having to make drastic cuts or lay workers off, even while getting an influx of federal money.

With a full transportation bill likely months away, in the short term we need to urge the Senate to include money in any future jobs bills to help keep transit systems running.

With millions who depend on these systems each day to get to work, making sure that reliable transit service doesn’t disappear will help get them to their jobs quickly and conveniently each day, ensuring that many of them stay employed.

Transit riders in Atlanta face massive cuts, “wholesale restructuring” of service

Eastbound Originally uploaded by robholland

A family on an eastbound MARTA rapid rail train in Atlanta.

Transit riders in Metro Atlanta will soon require a new system map to find their way because the current map is about to be ancient history, a document fit for use only by archivists and history buffs. Of course, this would only apply to those who still have a bus or train to wait for after MARTA goes through with massive cuts this year. This story from the Atlanta Journal Constitution was included in a few headline posts from the usual suspects earlier this week, including one of ours, but the desperate situation in Atlanta is worth a closer look.

Wrap your head around this number: MARTA is facing a budget deficit of $120 million, on an operating budget of $399.1 million, making their deficit nearly a full third of the operating budget.

As a result, the cuts the agency is forced to consider are downright shocking. More than half of Atlanta’s 131 bus routes could be cut entirely, and rail service will be cut severely. Wait times for a train could be as much as 30 minutes on weekends before 7 a.m. and after 9 p.m., and even rush-hour train intervals could be as much as 12 minutes. The AJC pegs the cuts as approximately 25-30 percent of all service.

While the loss of routes or the inconvenience of long waits and increased transfers will result in some riders going back to their cars or finding other options, what about the thousands who depend on MARTA as their transportation lifeline to reach work, get to the doctor or pick up their kids at school? The “lucky” ones might have an alternative, a longer wait or less convenience. But too many riders will be left completely stranded, unable to get to important destinations as routes disappear entirely in the South’s biggest metro and the economic core of the state.

The popular refrain among some Atlantans is that MARTA is a bloated bureaucracy that wastes money. The truth is far different. MARTA enjoys the lowest cost per-mile of passenger rail service for any heavy rail system in the United States, and survives on a penny sales tax from two counties, with no dedicated funding stream from the State of Georgia. They are the largest transit agency with no such dedicated funding source in the country.

Atlantans: Tell us your story of how these cuts will affect you.

This year’s situation was narrowly avoided last year when the Atlanta Regional Commission, the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the region, found a way to transfer $25 million in last year’s stimulus funds to MARTA. In return the agency spent $25 million of capital funds on infrastructure improvements around their stations like better sidewalks, crosswalks, and other vital bike and pedestrian improvements to improve access.

The creative deal with the ARC was necessary because by a curious — and old — piece of state law, MARTA has to evenly split their tax revenues between operations and capital funds (they have a capital budget of $388 million this year), meaning they aren’t even able to set their own operating budget.

The Georgia State Senate passed a bill that would have removed that rule, allowing MARTA the flexibility to set their own operations and capital budgets. This would have enabled the agencyto basically plug budget holes with a share of (formerly) capital funds — never an ideal situation, but one that would have staved off dramatic fare increases and wholesale cancellation of service. Unfortunately for Atlantans, that bill died in the Georgia State House on the last day of the legislative session, leaving many upset and frustrated at the State’s failure to act.

Even with the funds from the ARC, MARTA had to raise their base fare $0.25, and weren’t able to restore all of the service that had been proposed for cuts, though they did avoid the drastic step of closing down service entirely one day a week.

MARTA Board Chairman Michael Walls pointed out that this was no permanent solution to the crisis, noting “this is a one-time infusion of funds” in a MARTA press release. “We are facing increasing deficits in the coming fiscal years. It is imperative that we identify a permanent, dedicated source of funding for transit as soon as possible in order to avoid more drastic cuts in the future,” he said.

That future has become the present, so what will the State do this time? Will they remove the barrier that prevents MARTA from making their own budget? At a broader level, what help will the federal government provide for the hundreds of other transit agencies facing this same crisis? Will they turn their back on the millions who depend on public transportation each day?

Want to do something? Here are three things you can do:

Tell Senator Harry Reid to include funding for keeping transit systems running in the next round of jobs-creation legislation he’s planning to bring to Congress.
Tell us your story! How are these cuts going to affect you in your daily life? Will you be going back to your car? Will you be stuck with no way to get to work? We want to know.
If you’re in Atlanta, join up with the Citizens for Progressive Transit or the Area Coalition for Transit Now Facebook page calling for Gov. Perdue to call a special legislative session. These groups are also joining with others in Atlanta to organize a “Ride MARTA” day in late March to drum up support statewide.