BIKE: Commuter Rail In General

[Patrick Goetz]

Phil Hallmark wrote:
> 
> I for one have not forgotten that you are AMP'd for monorail. But I 
> don't recall STEP #3 below being discussed before now. The 3 steps seem 
> like a great idea.... but how realistic is it to expect to get them done 
> by 2006, or even 2010, if ASG fails and the road warriors swoop in to 
> finish their sprawl jihad with Cap Metro money?
>

Despite an email from the idiot in chief, Mike Levy, which I'm attaching 
below, I simply don't see how they're going to be able to do this (steal 
the 1/4 cent for roads) without an election, given that it was an 
election which established this tax in the first place.  Certainly if 
ASG loses (and another non-monorail-enthusiast rail supporter just 
called me earlier today to announce that he had voted against ASG in 
early voting)  we need to strongly communicate to the Cap Metro board 
that it was just THIS rail plan which failed, not the idea of rail in 
general.  But a failure of ASG should be regarded as a vote of no 
confidence in the CM board, and all or most should resign save for the 
city council people.  If they try and give the money away before 
resigning, we need to have them put them in jail.  No, I'm not joking 
about this.

We're a nation in crisis, no doubt, and a road warrior power grab is 
just the local version of what's going on at the state and federal 
level.  The toll road plan is another part of this "grabbing for it all" 
before people catch on.  It's going to take a concerted grass roots 
effort to set things right, and we have to be resolute about kicking the 
asses of Aggies pretending to be progressives and ROAD warriors 
pretending to be LRT/commuter rail enthusiasts.


> Seems to me the question we need to answer today is which way to vote in 
> 2 weeks on ASG. If ASG passes, it may make your 3 steps easier to 
> accomplish. Or not. Who knows.
>

I don't know the answer, either.  However, so that there is no question 
about my willingness to be a team player (and for various other reasons 
I've mentioned previously), I'm going to vote for ASG.  Some of the 
monorail people think this means I'm selling out and abandoning my 
principles for political reasons.  I can see it both ways.  The only 
thing that's absolutely certain is that is SUCKS that Cap Metro has put 
us in this unfortunate position, namely that of having a choice between 
eating shit or dining on fertilizer.


> You know, it may just be a fact that the road warriors have won. Thanks 
> in large part to Mr. Krusee as clearly outlined in Mike D's blog. I hope 
> I'm wrong.
> 

OK, I'm going to defend Mike Krusee for a minute.  After seeing him 
present his vision, I'm now firmly convinced that his commuter rail plan 
was proposed with the best of intentions and can go a long way towards 
"saving" Austin's suburban communities in the very likely event that oil 
prices continue to rise from here on in.  It's a good plan.  It will be 
great for Leander, Taylor, and Cedar Park.  There are some finer points 
that have been glossed over (e.g. how to reconcile the fact that the US 
freight rail system is currently overwhelmed and needs to add capacity 
at the same time that he is proposing using the same tracks for 
passenger rail), but the basic idea is a good one.  So far Krusee is the 
only person other than myself who I've heard say that the measure of 
success of rail has a lot more to do with land use along the rail line 
than the number of passengers or whether the costs are covered through 
fares.  He's clearly thinking about the issues.

There's only one problem with Krusee's plan: it doesn't do anything for 
Austin.  Is this Krusee's problem?  Hell no, he represents suburban 
Williamson county.  Krusee is doing a good - scratch that - GREAT job. 
It's OUR responsibility to look after OUR needs, not Krusee's.  This is 
where the Capital Metro, and the Cap Metro board squarely dropped the 
ball.  Krusee's plan to meet the needs of his suburban constituents 
became OUR ENTIRE RAIL PLAN!  How completely f*cked is that?  This is 
why Dahmus and I have been yelling at CM ever since they proposed this 
piece of crap.  An agency which derives 94% of its revenue from the city 
of Austin went along with a plan that gives all the rail money to the 
suburbs while incrementally improving the bus service for the urban 
core.  Then just to make sure we all vomit, the long term rail activists 
in Austin (you know who you are) got so starry-eyed about the 
possibility of some kind of passenger rail that they fell all over 
themselves to endorse a plan which any sane person can see isn't doing 
squat for Austin and doesn't really make much sense.  The anti-rail ROAD 
warriors are having a field day.  They don't need to spend any money 
shooting down ASG, it's shooting itself down through shear idiocy of 
plan.  Don't take my word for it, get on on the street and ask the 
average reasonably informed, reasonably intelligent Austinite what they 
think about it.

Will ASG pass?  I don't know.  The fact that many of the progressive 
pro-rail people I know who voted for LRT in 2000 are now voting against 
ASG is a bad sign, I think, but maybe CM has done it's homework, has 
worked the polls, and knows that they can fool enough people into 
thinking this is a real plan to make this pass.  There certainly is a 
great deal of confusion out there.  We'll find out on Nov 3.

I won't try to debunk all of Levy's ludicrous suppositions and outright 
bullshit, but apparently he is not aware that Austin has already 
invested millions of dollars in a modern traffic signalization system. 
But hey, the idea of a gigantic central parking garage is brilliant: 
let's waste a ton of valuable downtown space (and money) to prove that 
people can sit in traffic even longer than they do already trying to get 
into a central parking garage!

Mike Levy's crap below:
---------------------------------------
Michael R. Levy
Post Office Box 146
Austin Texas 78767


October 15, 2004

This letter is being written not in my capacity as founder and publisher
of TEXAS MONTHLY, but as a very concerned citizen of Austin who has 
lived in this great community since 1969.

I am writing to urge you to vote in the November 2 general election, and
to let you know I believe it is very important that you vote against
CapMetro's proposition to allow it to build and operate a so-called
Commuter Rail transportation system.

Here's why:

If we defeat this proposal, the CapMetro board will have no choice but to
invest part (representing only one fourth of the penny sales tax it
collects from you) of its large accumulation of cash on improving our road
system infrastructure, thus reducing the need for toll roads, and
certainly the most contentious parts of the current toll road plan such as
the MoPac bridge over William Cannon. (CapMetro might even give the City 
of Austin some money for a modern traffic signalization system and for a 
large downtown public parking garage similar to the one that has been so 
important to the revitalization of downtown Ft. Worth.) And the CapMetro 
board would also finally understand that the voters really do not want 
to see any more proposals sent their way for other silly ideas such as 
the proposed 19th-century style trolley car system that would only 
increase traffic congestion at enormous cost.

Take a look at the enclosed document from former Tracor CEO Jim Skaggs, 
an engineer by training. Jim presents in detail a very compelling case 
that CapMetro's proposal is quite simply an extremely stupid idea that 
just does not make any economic or practical sense. In essence it's 
basically a single rail line that goes from nowhere to nowhere that will 
probably wind up costing well in excess of $100,000,000 and affect less 
than one half of one percent of all travel trips made Monday through 
Friday. In addition, the train will surely slow down other commuters 
because, as Ben Wear noted in his September 27 American-Statesman 
article, as the rail line "*turns north through East Austin and then 
gradually tracks northwest to Cedar Park and Leander, the line passes 
over 53 public roads and 20 private drives into businesses and 
residential and agricultural type
properties."

According to the 2000 census, there are over 400,000 work commuters each 
day, representing more than 800,000 travel trips each day. CapMetro is 
estimating that their train may have a total of 1,000 to 1,500 daily
riders, or at most 3,000 travel trips each day. Do the math! We're talking
about our community spending $100,000,000 on providing travel for less
than one half of one per cent of our commuters! And given the maxim
among transportation planners that a community should not go to a rail
system until its bus system is close to maximum utilization, when was the
last time you saw a big (and very expensive) CapMetro bus with more than 
a few riders on it?

In addition, the CapMetro board has refused to adopt any form of
reasonable performance measures over a five year period if the system is
built, or to make a commitment to shut down the system if the measures 
are not met.

It is interesting to note that members of the CapMetro board and its staff
are now acknowledging privately that "*.it's good that the voters defeated
their Light Rail proposal because, in retrospect, it was not such a good
idea." As opposed to the Light Rail idea which the voters nixed, the
Commuter Rail proposal was developed in a relatively short period of time,
and must be put in the perspective of serious questions all of us who have
watched CapMetro since its inception have about both the CapMetro 
board's due diligence (the chair spends a significant amount of time at 
his second home in Italy), level of sophistication, oversight 
capability, and the
basic competence of the CapMetro staff to design and operate a complex
transportation system of any kind.

This proposal is also symptomatic of far greater problems among all of our
elected officials. The Travis County Commissioners Court is a joke*the
Keystone Kops of Texas politics that actually makes the Legislature seem
like a rational decision-making body by comparison*and appears to be
pathologically incapable of doing anything right. Our City and County
elected officials have almost a Pavlovian responsiveness to a noisy few,
as opposed to the needs of the many, and thus are not focused on 
spending our tax dollars wisely and prudently on high-quality basic 
services (public safety, parks, libraries, a good road system, a 
synchronized traffic signalization system that works, etc.) that touch 
the lives of everyone who lives in our community, regardless of their 
zip code or demographic. As an example, look at the $5,000,000 of other 
people's money that the Council wasted on the Austin Music Channel 
debacle for amateur hour of the air programming that nobody in their 
right mind would waste their time watching. Defeating Commuter Rail 
would send a clear and convincing signal that the citizens of our 
community believe that now is the time for our elected officials to 
re-focus our resources on basic
local government services of the highest order.

But if this boondoggle passes, the only winners will be a few people who
live in Leander, land speculators, and the usual beneficiaries of our
area's infamous pork barrel politics. The leadership and funding sources
of the Commuter Rail election campaign should give you sufficient reason
to suspect that the proposal is really not about transportation or
improved mobility. As a reminder, take a look at the infamous skeleton of
the unfinished Intel building on West 5th Street in downtown Austin.

Your vote against CapMetro's Commuter Rail proposal is important, a start
on turning our community around so that perhaps some day we will 
actually enjoy the benefits of good and rational local government.

Sincerely,

Michael R. Levy

(If you receive multiple copies of this message via either e-mail or the
U.S. Postal Service because I am sending it to several lists, I apologize
in advance. And please feel free to forward this e-mail to your friends.)

From:
Jim Skaggs
jskaggs131
Austin, TX

Commuter Rail Considerations

This message is not and has never been about roads versus rails or
transit. It is about:
· Effectively using transportation dollars to provide mobility which
improves our standard of living, promotes social equity, and induces
economic vitality.
· Addressing our growing mobility crises in an integrated, cost
beneficial manner by optimizing the planned road structure to enhance
private and public transit.
· Demanding performance accountability from those spending tax
dollars made more precious by mounting tax and fee burdens on all
citizens.

Voters should reject CapMetro's proposed commuter rail.
· CapMetro studied light rail for some 10 years, spending more than
$10 million in tax funds and rejected it in favor of the proposed commuter
which they studied only a few months.
· This proposed commuter is the same one CapMetro rejected in 1999
based on extensive analysis showing it was not a cost beneficial rail line
*light rail was selected in 1999.
· Accountability is the only way to assure taxpayer funds are spent
responsibly because commuter rail has a very high probability of failure.
CapMetro has refused to accept accountability by not establishing
reasonable performance goals to measure performance and a plan to adjust 
the system and restrict future rail lines until performance is acceptable.
· CapMetro's operating costs are growing much faster than wages,
inflation and riders. This is not sustainable and the commuter rail's
high cost will make it worse.
· CapMetro has again asked for a blank check to spend tax dollars on
a superficial plan which is flawed, incomplete and misleading in many
ways. It will not be a cost effective element of Austin's integrated
transportation system. The tax money would be much more effective in
completing a comprehensive road structure to serve public and private
transportation and reduce the need for as many toll roads.

The commuter rail makes no economic or mobility sense.
· No cities similar to the Austin of today or the Austin projected
fifty years from now have successful commuter rail. CapMetro has offered
no model cities or comparisons.
· The train's low ridership will have no measurable impact on
congestion and may increase it by stopping traffic at 60-70 crossings and
limiting freight rail which replaces trucks.
· Street crossings (225,000/year) and track through an Austin park
create major safety hazards.
· CapMetro does not present one shred of evidence to support their
very weak assertions of commuter benefits. They claim no benefits to
congestion, pollution or travel time.
· Commuter rail will likely increase pollution per passenger mile
due to low ridership and the extensive passenger bus system needed to
support it which will also have low ridership.
· It will likely cost taxpayers $10,000 or more per year for every
commuter rider.
· Express buses and car pools on planned roadways and toll roads
will be far more cost effective and preferred by many due to flexibility,
cost and speed.
· It will likely degrade social equity by shifting funding that
serves transit dependent populations to systems and locations aimed
primarily at attracting auto users.
· We have already seen the future because most trains, trolleys and
rails were removed from cities in the early to mid 1900s because they were
not competitive with cars and still aren't.

Economic development should not be a major consideration for commuter
rail.
· Rail, like other modes, should be considered primarily on its
transportation effectiveness.
· CapMetro should not be in the speculative land development
business with tax dollars.
· Development near commuter stations is not a net increase to the
region, but relocation from other parts of the region. This will not
increase the region's tax base.
· Rail systems are not a necessary ingredient for mixed use
development success and these developments will not make a rail system
successful without other market fundamentals.
· There is no evidence in cities like Austin that commuter trains
are a major attraction for development but highways are mandatory for
development.
· Transit oriented development (TOD) is limited to walking distance
from stations and real estate values along the track are generally
depressed. Roadways generally enhance the value of all areas to which
they provide greater access.

Comparison: Seattle is a city which many in Austin would like to emulate
in numerous ways:
· Seattle MSA has 3+ million people or more than 2 times the Austin
MSA.
· Seattle City has 6,500 people per square mile or 2.5 times
Austin's density.
· Seattle's central business district has 25,000 residents or 7
times Austin's.
· Seattle's year round weather is more moderate and transit
supportive.
· Seattle's North-South I-5 freeway is more congested than Austin's
I-35.

Seattle's characteristics promote a much higher commuter ridership than
Austin's. Austin will not likely achieve Seattle's or Dallas' major
demographic characteristics for at least 50 years.

Commuter Rail Line: Tacoma (300,000 pop.) to Seattle
Daily Riders: 1,550*
Taxpayer Subsidy Per/Rider/Year: 20,000
Years Open: 4

Commuter Rail Line: Everett (100,000 pop.) to Seattle
Daily Riders: 150*
Taxpayer Subsidy Per/Rider/Year: $100,000
Years Open: 9 months

Commuter Rail Line: Ft. Worth (535,000 pop.) to Dallas**
Daily Riders: 4,000
Taxpayer Subsidy Per/Rider/Year: $5,000
Years Open: 8 partial/3 full

Commuter Rail Line: Leander (17,000 pop.) to Austin
Daily Riders: 850 est.
Taxpayer Subsidy Per/Rider/Year: $7,000 + est.
Years Open: 0, 2008 plan

Note: 1. Austin riders and costs are very optimistic compared to any
experience.
2. Austin bus subsidies are some $1800 per rider per year
average, varying by route.

*In Seattle corridors, riders prefer express busses because they have
shorter trip schedules, stop in several key downtown locations, reducing
transfers and cost less.
** Commuter passes through population of more than 600,000 between 
Dallas and Ft. Worth.
Dallas city's population is almost double Austin's city.

Vote NO on rail to assure tax funds are used in the best way to improve
Austin's mobility.
1. Based on actual commuter rail performance, commuter rail will not even
be close to the most cost beneficial transit alternative and will fail to
serve Austin's mobility needs.
2. The region cannot afford to fund a system requiring tax subsidies many
times that of alternatives especially if it has no measurable congestion
or pollution impact.
3. Subsidizing economic development should not be a major consideration
for the commuter rail.
4. Commuter rail will not be the advanced technology to serve our
grandchildren. It will mortgage their future and limit their
opportunities. It will not be competitive to the car.
5. CapMetro should accept accountability by developing performance
criteria, monitoring performance and not proceeding until performance is
acceptable.
6. If the commuter rail is defeated or performance fails to be acceptable,
CapMetro should constructively participate in solving Austin's mobility
crises and enhance transit by allocating at least one-quarter of its one
penny sales tax to the Regional Mobility Authority to accelerate a
comprehensive road structure and/or reduce the need for as many toll
roads.

Vote NO to CapMetro's Commuter Rail
It still: COSTS TOO MUCH and DOES TOO LITTLE