Transportation and Land Use Coalition Ninth Annual Summit

1
(No Transcript)
2
February 10, 2007

• Transportation and Transit
• For Scottsdale
• Thomas A. Rubin, CPA, CMA, CMC, CIA, CGFM, CFM

3
What to do AboutScottsdale Road?

• First, do no harm.
• Hippocrates, Epidemics

4
Scottsdale Road is a Unique Transportation Asset

• Scottsdale is a very long and narrow city, with
  only a very few continuous N-S roads
• Scottsdale Road is by far the most important of
  these, with both the highest capacity and most
  key trip generators
• If ill-conceived transportation improvements
  reduce its carrying capacity, there are no fixes
  possible

5
Scottsdale Road is the Designated High Capacity
Transit Corridor

• Mode Options
• Light Rail Transit (LRT)
• Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
• Modern Streetcar

6
Maricopa County Transit Modal Splits

• Home-to-Work/Work-to-Home
• Maricopa County 2.2
• City of Phoenix 3.4
• City of Scottsdale 1.3
• Maricopa County w/o Phoenix 1.3
• Even if transit share would triple, it would
  still be very minor dont mess what needs to be
  done on Scottsdale Road to carry people on the
  existing rubber tire modes.

7
Light Rail Transit

• What is now being constructed in Phoenix
• Exclusive guideway for trains, either entire
  length or very close
• This may be exclusive lanes for trains or city
  streets or freeways, or separate right-of-way off
  street
• Stations generally approximately one mile apart

8
Light Rail Transit II

• Generally two-three car trains
• Operating speeds
• When street-running, normally street speed limit
• Exclusive ROW, generally 55 mph
• National average approximately 17 mph
• Top normal LRT, 24 mph
• Exception LA Green Line, over 30 mph

9
Light Rail Transit III

• Costs/Mile Varies significantly, but from under
  20 million to hundreds of millions per mile,
  with most in range of approximately 40-80
  million
• Cost of Phoenix first line 1,412.12 million
  for 19.6 miles ? 72 million/mile
• Safety issue Grade crossings, particularly at
  speeds over 35 mph

10
Bus Rapid Transit

• Most physical and operating characteristics
  generally similar to LRT, but with rubber tire,
  vice steel-on-steel, wheels/tires
• Speeds and carrying capacities roughly comparable
  to LRT
• Capital cost of BRT generally lt50 of LRT,
  operating cost comparison varies but BRT
  generally lower

11
Bus Rapid Transit II

• With BRT, unlike LRT, guideway buses can operate
  off the guideway, serving as their own
  feeder/distributors
• Safety concern intersections, particularly with
  ostridge approach

12
Modern Streetcar

• Unlike LRT, streetcar tracks are in rubber tire
  traffic lanes on street streetcars, cars, and
  trucks use same lanes
• Generally, stops every block or two
• Speeds generally, 5-9 mph capable of higher
  speeds where traffic allows and stops are further
  apart
• Fairly short, generally about five miles

13
Modern Streetcar II

• Generally, less frequent service (10-15 minutes)
  than LRT or BRT
• Far lower overall carrying capacity
• Generally used as downtown circulator, not really
  usable as main line transit
• Capital costs vary widely, from as low as a under
  1 million/mile (Kensoha) to 25 million per
  (one-way) mile (Tacoma)

14
Impacts of Guideway Transit on Scottsdale Road

• LRT and BRT both require approximately 26 feet
  for two lanes of straight track
• Station platforms require an additional 20 feet,
  with 10 foot station requirement possible with
  some compromises in station quality
• Intersections with left turn lanes can become
  very complex, particularly two-laners
• Many minor thru streets become Ts

15
Impacts of Guideway Transit on Scottsdale Road II

• LRT and BRT generally require traffic signal
  cycle changes for best transit results
• Streetcar generally operates on same lanes as
  rubber tire vehicles, but there are many impacts
  due to slow speeds, frequent stops, turn
  requirements, and inability to get around
  obstacles such as collisions and power outages

16
What Would Guideway Transit Mean for Scottsdale
Road

• Potential LRT/BRT Impacts
• Conversion of traffic lanes for exclusive light
  rail use
• Reallocations of traffic signal cycle time to
  transit
• Elimination of left turn lanes at some
  intersections, conversion of two-laners back to
  one-laners at others

17
What Would Guideway Transit Mean for Scottsdale
Road II

• Elimination of most/all of non-intersection left
  turn lanes, such as at shopping malls
• Elimination of street parking
• Conversion of most/all non-arterial street
  crossings into T intersections
• No stopping zones no pick-ups, drop-offs
• LRT and Streetcar would have overhead catenary
  wires

18
What Would Guideway Transit Mean for Scottsdale
Road III

• In certain locations along the ROW, potentially
• Wiping out every structure and parking lot on the
  East side of the street
• Wiping out every structure and parking lot on the
  West side of the street
• Wiping out every structure and parking lot on
  both sides of the street

19
What Would Guideway Transit Mean for Scottsdale
Road IV

• Modern Streetcar impacts would be less drastic
• Modern Streetcar would likely operate for only a
  relatively short distance along Scottsdale Road
  because it really isnt much of a transportation
  system
• Although it would probably not require traffic
  lane takes, there would be negative impacts on
  road capacity

20
What Would Guideway Transit Mean for Scottsdale
Road V

• For the core traditional downtown area, LRT/BRT
  would require so much street width that rubber
  tire traffic would be extremely limited or
  entire blocks of existing structures would have
  to be removed
• The consideration of any of guideway transit
  option for this section of Scottsdale Road could
  lead to consideration of entire elimination of
  rubber tire traffic

21
Modern Streetcar is NOT a Main Line
Transportation System

• I took or computed annual passenger-miles for six
  streetcar systems that are either fully modern
  or similar in how they operate Kenosha, Little
  Rock, Memphis, Portland, Tacoma, Tampa
• A four-mile stretch of six-lane Scottsdale Road
  carries about the same amount of passenger-miles
  in a day
• And none of these streetcars carry freight

22
Modern Streetcar Real Estate Development Stories

• Little Rock 1.2 billion in real estate
  development generated from 20 million investment
  in streetcar system
• Portland Streetcar 2.28 billion from 89
  million
• Tacoma 1 billion from 89 million
• Tampa -- 1 billion from 56 million

23
Modern Streetcar Real Estate Development Stories
II

• City Development Daily Riders /Rider
• Portland 2,280,000,000 8,500 268,000
• Tacoma 1,000,000,000 2,424 413,000
• Tampa 1,000,000,000 1,548 646,000
• Little Rock 1,200,000,000 423
  2,800,000

24
Modern Streetcar Real Estate Development Stories
III

• What Can we Learn From This?
• A rooster crowing at dawn may believe that it
  is causing the sun to come up, but you shouldnt
  be taking real estate investment advice from a
  rooster.
• or a light rail/streetcar booster.

25
Freeway Level of Service (LOS) Criteria

• Level of Service Max Speed Max Service Flow
• A 75.0 750
• B 75.0 1,200
• C 71.0 1,704
• D 65.0 2,080
• E 53.0 2,400
• F lt53.0 gt2,400
• (Above is for Free-Flow Speed, which has nothing
  to do with the speed limit, of 75 mph.)

26
Reason FoundationGalvin Mobility Project

• A series of professional papers on mobility
• First ones have been published, available at
• http//www.reason.org/transportation/
• Many more now in works
• Im doing one on the relationship between transit
  and traffic congestion

27
Interim Report

• I had my associate do the analysis for two UZAs
  to test the data
• Figured, what-the-heck, do the regressions and
  see what we get
• Overall expectation? Not much connection
  congestion is basically a supply-and-demand thing
  and transit is just a small percentage of total
  transportation in most UZAs.
• So, heres the results for Portland, Oregon

28
(May I have a drum roll, please?)
29
(No Transcript)
30
THERE YOU HAVE IT FOLKS PROOF POSITIVE THAT
TRANSIT CAUSES CONGESTION
31
not
32
Well, Why Not?

• Rule 1 Correlation is not causation.
• 20 data points for one UZA is just a bit thin for
  drawing this type of conclusion.
• Most important, what possible direct causation
  could there be between, all else equal, an
  increase in transit usage presumably, taking
  vehicles off the streets and congestion getting
  worse?

33
But, All Else Isnt Equal in Portland

• First Portland Light Rail Line was largely funded
  with Federal Interstate Transfer funds
  Portland (or, more properly, the Mayor of
  Portland, with assistance from other officials)
  decided to give up an urban Interstate that had
  already been approved and funded to build this
  line.
• An urban freeway has several times more
  transportation work capacity than any light
  rail line

34
But, All Else Isnt Equal in Portland II

• Building this light rail line required taking out
  a pre-existing HOV lane from a freeway that had
  higher transportation work values than the light
  rail line
• Building light rail on surface streets has
  reduced road capacity on these arterials and made
  crossing movements more difficult

35
But, All Else Isnt Equal in Portland III

• Portland (Metro, Tri-Met, State, et al) have
  largely decided to not implement road capacity
  improvements as demand increases
• Portland et al have adopted LOS F as the
  official target while this is the result in
  many UZAs, at least the others are officially
  trying to do better, not worse

36
So, can transit actually cause congestion to
increase?No, not by itself.But, as a
component of an officially adopted program of
interesting transportation decisions, a case
can be made.
37
Measurement Metrics

• Number of Lanes or Tracks x
• Vehicles or Trains per Hour per Lane/Track x
• Vehicles per Train x
• Passengers per Vehicle
• PASSENGERS PASS A POINT x
• Speed
• TRANSPORTATION WORK (Passenger Miles Index)

38
How to Tilt a Modal Comparison

• There are many different methodologies, and
  variations, for comparisons
• Almost all are valid, and useful when properly
  utilized by people who know what they are doing
• It is very easy to misuse metrics to make them
  appear to show that your desired result, your
  modal selection, is the right one
• WATCH OUT FOR PEOPLE WHO PLAY GAMES WITH DATA AND
  METHODS

39
How to Tilt a Modal Comparison II

• To make your favored mode look better, show
• ..............Road... .Rail....
• Location Entire Metro Area Length Peak Load
  Point
• Time Frame All Day Peak Hour
• Metric Transportation Work Passengers Past a
  Point
• Methodology Actual Theoretical f/Rail, Actual
  f/Road
• Freight Include Exclude

40
Examples of What to Watch Out For

• Cynthia Sullivan, Chair, (Seattle) Central Link
  (light rail system) Oversight Committee, When
  this system is up and running, Northgate to
  SeaTac, in 2020, it will carry as many people
  every day as I-5 does today.
• Center for Transportation Excellence It would
  take a twelve lane freeway going in one direction
  to equate the same amount of capacity of one
  light rail line.

41
(No Transcript)
42
Passenger Carrying Capacity Modal Comparisons

• ..L.A. Blue Line..
• ..CFTE..... Peak Peak El Monte/ NY Port
• Light Real World. Load Trip Busway
  Authority
• LOS E ..Rail.. LOS E LOS F .Point. ..Ave..
  HOV Lane Bus Term
• Trains/Hour 20 12 12
• Cars/Train 6 2.5 2.5
• Cars/Hour 2,000 120 1,800 2,100
  30 30 1,218 515-779
• Occupancy 1.25 125 1.15 1.15
  150 80 4.36 32-48
• Passengers 23,187-
• Past a Point 2,500 15,000 2,070 2,415
  4,500 2,400 5,310 34,685
• Speed
  55 25 15 24 56.9
• Transportation Work Index 113,850 60,375 37,500 56
  ,700 302,166
• E Index 1.00 .53 .33
  .50 2.65

43
Vehicle Carrying Capacity

• The number of persons in a vehicle is key to
  carrying capacity.
• The Kinkisharyo light rail vehicle selected for
  Phoenix light rail are described on the Valley
  Metro web site as, have a capacity of 200.
• The Skoda modern streetcar used in Portland and
  Tacoma is shown with a maximum load of 140.

44
Cost Metrics

• Federal Transit Administration Financial Capacity
  Analysis
• 1. Is there funding to operate existing transit
  system?
• 2. Is there funding for capital renewal and
  replacement of existing transit system?
• 3. If answers to 1. and 2. are yes, then, and
  only then, is there funding to construct and
  operate the proposed system expansion?

45
FTA 49 USC 5309 New Start Tests

• The new metric is Incremental Cost Divided by
  Transportation System User Benefit.
• Incremental Cost is calculated in accordance
  with detailed procedures.
• Transportation System User Benefit is
  expressed in time equivalent units, which is
  basically travel hours saved.
• The old metric, which is still reported, is
  Incremental Cost per Incremental Passenger, aka
  Cost per New Passenger.

46
Annualized Project Cost

• Simplified, the Cost for old and new metrics
  is
• Annualized Capital Cost
• Annual Operating Cost
• Other Cost Changes (such as savings in
  operating costs for pre-existing transit
  lines)
• Annual Cost (usually, 20 years out)
• Annualized Capital Cost spreads original
  capital costs of assets over their specified
  useful lives.

47
Annualized Capital Cost

• Asset Type Useful Lives Factor
• 40-foot Bus 12 years .126
• Pavement 20 years .094
• Rail Cars 25 years .086
• Track, Electric,
• Structures 30 years .081
• Land 100 years .070
• Factors math is the same as for a 7 mortgage
  for the designated number of years of life.

48
Benefits

• User Benefits and New Passengers are outputs
  of transportation planning models, which must be
  approved by FTA.
• Cost per New Passenger was implemented because
  Feds believed the same riders were being shifted
  to more expensive transit modes, for no real
  transportation benefit.
• Change was made to new metric because opponents
  of many new starts projects were use cost per
  new passenger values to show it would be cheaper
  to least each new rider a car often a luxury
  car.

49
Example of Cost/New Passenger Confusion

• Frankly, light rail is very expensive. With
  respect to virtually all new systems, it would
  have been less expensive to lease each new
  commuter a car in perpetuity in some cases, a
  luxury car, such as a Jaguar XJ8 or a BMW 740i.
  Wendell Cox, 2000
• This one is a real howler. To put it into
  perspective, a new BMW 740i goes for 62,900.
  APTA estimates that approximately 13,000,000
  people use transit on a typical weekday.
  13,000,000 times 62,900 would be 817.7 billion
  almost half of the annual federal budget.
  Paul M. Wyerich and William S. Lind

50
This response is extremely disquieting while
the difference between cost per passenger and
cost per new passenger may not be readily
apparent to lay persons, for people who are set
forward as experts by the primary public transit
industry association in the U.S. to not
understand the distinction is somewhat akin to
listening to a sermon by a priest who has never
heard of the Ten Commandments.And then for that
industry association to actually publish this
comment under its own name,
51
The Role of Transportation Modeling

• Transportation Modeling, as performed for
  purposes including new starts projects
  refinement and analysis, is a highly complex
  process that can be almost impossible for lay
  persons, or even decision-makers, to understand.
• The cost per user benefit metric, and even the
  older cost per new passenger metric, are also
  often very difficult for even some people who
  should know better to comprehend.

52
The State of the Art in Transportation Modeling

• Not good.
• Following are from a presentation the 2004
  Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, by
  James Ryan, FTA Deputy Associate Administrator
  for Planning, who was, in essence, the FTA chief
  modeling techie.

53
Results from the 1990 Assessment of Ridership
Forecasts
54
Results from the Updated Assessment of Ridership
Forecasts
55
(No Transcript)
56
Other Problems with Plans

• Case Study Los Angeles County Metropolitan
  Transportation Authority Bus Rapid Transit
  Orange Line
• The entire transportation reason for a 325
  Million, 13-mile Guideway Bus Rapid Transit,
  instead of Rapid Bus which does not have any
  exclusive/ semi exclusive guideway and would have
  cost lt500,000 per mile was to save run time.
• Or was it?

57
(No Transcript)
58
Problems with Construction Cost Projections

• There have been many cases of very significant
  cost overruns on transit guideway projects.
• While, in recent years, the cost increases
  following the execution of a Full Funding Grant
  Agreement between the Federal government and the
  grantee, have been moderated greatly (but not
  completely), there have still been major problems
  with increases between the first and most
  important decision point which is usually when
  the voters are asked to approve a tax for transit
  facility construction and the ultimate
  construction cost.
• The following page shows one of the most massive
  such cost increases for a transit guideway.

59
(No Transcript)
60
What are the Costs and Impacts of Attempting
to Increase Transit Ridership by Alternative
Means?

• Over the past 25 years, Los Angeles has been a
  huge case study re the impact of radically
  different transit investment programs.
• From FY82-FY85, a program of rolling back the
  then 85 cash fare to 50 produced a 40
  ridership increase in three years, by far the
  most successful such demonstration in modern
  American transit history.
• Over the next 11 years, to FY96, the fare were
  increased back to 85, then to 1.10, and finally
  to 1.35, as over 60 of the MTA transit
  subsidies went for rail construction and
  operations and ridership fell.

61
What are the Costs and Impacts of Attempting
to Increase Transit Ridership by Alternative
Means (concluded)?

• At the end of December, 1996, MTA entered into a
  Consent Decree to settle a Federal Title VI
  (discrimination in the utilization of Federal
  Funds) lawsuit, requiring it to drop the price of
  monthly passes back to 42, add bus service to
  relieve the most overcrowded buses of any major
  U.S. city, and add new routes. Ridership rose
  quickly and substantially, despite MTA efforts to
  fight the implementation of what it had agreed to
  do all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and
  losing in every one of the seven decisions along
  the way.

62
(No Transcript)
63
(No Transcript)
64
The Efficient Frontier

• Before beginning a search for new solutions,
  first see how your are doing now.
• The following graph shows subsidy per passenger
  and subsidy per passenger-mile for the 24 largest
  bus operators in the U.S.
• The next one shows the cost per new boarding (not
  rider) for the main MTA guideway transit lines
  and for bus.

65
(No Transcript)
66
(No Transcript)
67
If Light Rail and Other Expensive Guideway
Transit Projects Produce Such Negative Results,
Than Why Are So Many Areas So Interested In Them?

• Answer A failed syllogism.

68
The Failed Syllogism

• If we do nothing, things will get worse.
• Building rail is doing something.
• Therefore, we must build rail.

69
Really, Really, Really Bad Romantic Poetry

• If I had forever, my darling, I could convince
  you of my love.
• But, my darling, I must be off to battle in the
  morning, so we do not have forever.
• Since we may never have tomorrow, let us reap the
  glory of our love tonight.

70
Edited Version

• If I had enough time, I could convince you to do
  it.

71
Edited Version (continued)

• If I had enough time, I could convince you to do
  it.
• I dont have enough time.

72
Edited Version (concluded)

• If I had enough time, I could convince you to do
  it.
• I dont have enough time.
• Therefore, lets do it.

73
Cost and Related Considerations

• Will it Work?
• Is it the Best Option?
• Can we Afford to Build it?
• Can we Afford to Operate it?
• Will it Negatively Impact Other Transportation
  System Components?
• Schedule How Long to Get It Going?
• Risk Financial, Political, Technical,
  Management?

74
How Much Should Light Rail Cost?

• In most cases, Light Rail should not cost more
  than 20 million per mile.
• Weyrich/Lind, page 42

75
(No Transcript)
76
(No Transcript)
77
How About Operating Costs?

• The Critics also claim that buses cost less than
  rail. This is true of capital costs, but not of
  operating costs
• Weyrich/Lind, page 18
• If one examines national statistics, or those for
  bus and rail for most transit operators, one will
  generally find that the average bus cost and
  subsidy per passenger and per passenger-mile are
  slightly higher than those for rail.
• However, the main reason for this is that the
  capital costs for rail are so large that no one
  but a fool would ever build a new rail transit
  line anywhere but on a heavily utilized transit
  corridor.

78
How About Operating Costs (continued)?

• If one compares comparable types of transit
  service in comparable transit corridors for
  example, if light rail is presented as a
  grade-separated guideway with one station per
  mile, consider the same type of bus service one
  generally finds that bus is, at worst, extremely
  competitive and, very often, will have a huge
  operating cost/subsidy advantage.
• And this is only on the operating side it is
  almost impossible to come up with any type of bus
  transit guideway that costs even half the cost of
  a rail line with comparable service
  characteristics.
• And there is the mean is the median factoid.

79
How About Operating Costs (concluded)?

• The following slide shows the cost per passenger
  for every bus line the Los Angeles MTA operated.
  As might be expected, it costs more to carry
  passengers on some lines than others.
• Note that the mean, the overall average, is 1.76
  per passenger but this is the 69th percentile
  cost, which means that over two-thirds of the
  rides cost less.
• The median the ride in the middle cost 1.62,
  far less.
• Move important, the 30th percentile ride cost
  1.41, the 20th percentile ride cost 1.22, and
  the 10th percentile ride cost 1.10 and this is
  not as low as bus can go.
• When you properly compare rail to highly
  productive bus lines, rail is rarely less
  expensive to operate.

80
(No Transcript)
81
How Bad Are Commutes Really?

• We all hear about how overcrowded our roads are
  getting and how trips are taking longer.
• The following slide shows the home-to-work trip
  lengths for greater LA, the poster child for
  traffic congestion, from 1967 to 2003 over this
  36 year period, the average increased 5.1 minutes
  21, from 24.0 to 29.1 minutes.
• Human beings are outstanding at adjusting to
  changes. As their travel situation changes, they
  change new routes, move closer to work, new job
  closer to home, employer moves to where there are
  more workers, etc.
• There is, most certainly, a road capacity problem
  in this nation but home-to-work commute times
  are not increasing significantly.

82
(No Transcript)