Utah Residents Want Rail

79% is not too shabby.

A survey by the University of Utah's Center for Public Policy & Administration finds overwhelming public support for continued investment in rail transit projects. Among 1,002 residents polled statewide, 79 percent said continued funding for rail projects either is very important or somewhat important.

It's interesting how different the conservative strain is there. It's a collective thing, not a social thing. Why's it so hard to get others on board in other places?

Maddow "Geeks Out" on HSR

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

I believe this map was released in 2005. So not new, but cool its getting props on the cable.

Phoenix Ridership to a Good Start

It's a little early to claim victory here because of all the special events that have been going on since this line opened as well as the "new" factor, but it looks promising. Current weekday ridership numbers are at 30,000 while the projections for opening day were at 26,000. Long term 2030 numbers are expected to be around 50,000. And hey, look! A low-medium cost-effectiveness rating! Again, today it takes a medium because of a 2005 Bush administration edict. This could turn into yet another ridership projection FAIL if the ridership stays at it's current level during a severe downturn.

Ridership projection FAIL = Cost Effectiveness Index FAIL.

Just One More Thing From Charlotte...

David Hartgen is just looking for a backdoor way to bring down Charlotte's transit expansion. Even after getting beat down by 70% in the last election, the other side just won't give up trying to kill rapid transit expansion in Charlotte.

Hartgen said he thinks ridership will drop further because uptown layoffs are only starting, and that the drop in ridership should spur CATS to consider halting its ambitious plans to build more rapid transit. “We should be saving for our operating budget,” Hartgen said.

If anything, we should be building more transit to create jobs and shape the next housing boom. If we wait till the next housing upswing to build these types of lines around the country, we'll miss a huge opportunity to shape development. We can't afford it.

Not Dense Enough

Even in the downturn the Charlotte light rail line beat its projections. Currently ridership is down from its highs, but it makes me think that there needs to be a working over of the transportation models at the FTA. Under the current process that requires a medium rating for cost effectiveness, Charlotte would not have made the cut with its ridership projection as it was. It had a low medium rating in 2003, yet was recommended because of its land use planning. Which brings me to a second point.

An excuse for Kansas City not going back after light rail is the usual complaint. We're not dense enough. Via the Urbanophile from the KC Star:

The city is set up for cars. As a result, most of the metropolitan area is not densely populated...Generally, an average of 6,600 to 10,000 people per square mile is needed to score federal funds. But Kansas City isn’t close to that number along the 14-mile route that voters rejected in November.

So now, since they aren't dense enough currently(even in AC's weighted density) and use that as an excuse to not move forward, there will be no change and they'll continue to drift in autodom. But the problem here is not just the lack of imagination and foresight, but also that the current FTA gives no hope of change. People will continue as long as we let them to refer to the cost-effectiveness index as god's law. It's all about the now when in reality we should be planning for the future.

The point of building a rail line today, whether it's light rail, a subway line, or a streetcar is the shape the future development of a corridor but this is something that isn't measured in the current process, at least with any meaning. This is something Congressman Oberstar is looking to fix, but we need to help.

At this point, however, the Federal Transit Administration has declared the cost effectiveness index number and not transit oriented development as the critical factor in giving a thumbs up or down to a project. It's time for the CEI not just to be amended, but eliminated, says Rep. Jim Oberstar, chair of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee says.

"As soon as there is a Federal Transit Administrator I will encourage that person to, by executive order, erase it from the books. And if they don't we'll do that in legislation."The cost effectiveness index became the deciding factor for transit projects in April, 2005. That's when the FTA received a letter from the Bush administration's Office of Management and Budget proclaiming the CEI's primacy.

So Charlotte gives us some clues as to what we can look forward to in terms of changing neighborhood dynamics and creating a demand for future density in transit corridors. It also shows that the cost effectiveness index does not determine the success of a project, no matter how much weight seem to put on a single metric based in auto engineering. That doesn't mean we shouldn't look at the costs and weight it against the benefits. It just means the way we're doing it now is weighted towards killing meaningful projects. Places that need subways are forced by cost shock and the CEI to look at light rail and places that should have light rail are forced to BRT and so on down the heirarchy. I hope this changes, and that the "not dense enough" canard can't be used against a city looking to change its ways ever again.

Charlotte South Corridor:

"Virgin" Rail's No Kissing Zones

Virgin rail is urging people to move along after they are dropped off at the train station. This has prompted a no kissing zone. I can understand if its crowded but don't stick too close to the name...

Virgin Rail says that if passengers want to share an embrace before they part company, they should pay to park their cars nearby where they can kiss all they want.

Photo via Independent UK

In Case You Missed Them...

Two articles were bouncing around more than others today. Politico has an article about how HSR got into the stimulus bill and David Brooks talks about a really poorly defined pew poll on urban preferences for living. What if I don't want to live next to a McDonald's or Starbucks?

Practice What You Preach

Does anyone know if one of these transportation officials that doesn't take transit is Nat Ford? (CBK notes he takes the bus) It kind of makes me angry when people don't practice what they preach, especially in transit. If I didn't believe in what I was talking about, I wouldn't be living it, and I think that if you're going to be working for a transportation agency and saying people should be living a certain way there's really no excuse for living the opposite.

There's An Idea

Take away the banker's money and build streetcars.

Would Have Gotten Away With It...

If it weren't for those locals. These are the types of things I like to see. More local control over local decisions. Federal and State funding is good and should be available, but it's the local folks that know what they need.

The local-state show of support was far different from the 2007 lawmaking session. Some lawmakers then gave only grudging lip-service to the rail plan; others were hostile or resentful that local officials had pushed them to support the ambitious project.

Obviously there is still a vote needed, but this is a good step for local option transportation funding, hopefully more transit funding than roads.