The MT Position

Posted by Mark Foss

Tell me, where does the money go?

This week Los Angeles commuter rail service, Metrolink, will increase fares an average of 6 percent. At the same time, Metrolink will cut four daily commuter train runs, however, voters did approve enough funding to keep student, disabled and senior fares from rising for the next three years. Meanwhile, New York City’s MTA cut service this week on subway and bus service to help make up for its $800 million budget shortfall.  The cuts actually only make up for about $100 million in the budget gap.

Despite operating budget problems, transit building projects continue. Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit Authority (Metro) broke ground for an extension of its light rail Gold Line.  MTA capital projects also continue in New York.

King County Metro (Seattle) continues to move forward plans for Rapid Ride. Rapid Ride will offer 10-minute headway service during peak hour and 15-minute headway service during off peak. Metro is installing fiber optic cable along the routes to provide signal control and real-time bus information signs at stops. A new CAD/AVL system using GPS tracking will enhance Metro’s capability to manage headway along the line. The first line (Line A) is projected to begin service in October 2010.

Anyone who drives in rush-hour traffic should understand the benefit of transit. Air quality also benefits from transit. However, the nationwide climate of “cut service” and “charge more” seems to run counter to spending on major projects.

Rail projects are more expensive to construct than bus rapid transit projects, like Metro’s Rapid Ride. But all transit capital projects implicitly carry long-term operational cash flow assumptions. Although Rapid Ride is on track, declining revenue has caused Metro to reconsider previous plans for other transit service additions.

When looking at various agencies, it is hard to tell where revenue comes from and where it is spent. The National Transit Database offers a glimpse into the finances of major transit agencies. However, the information is not always up to date and it isn’t presented as clearly as it could be. As a taxpayer I would like to understand better how the agencies are run. As a supporter of transit in its various forms, I think transparency would help agencies make the case for more support. Presently, I’m concerned that in a year or two, when stimulus funding dwindles, current transit investments won’t be funded well enough.

Mark Foss has more than 24 years experience working for King County Metro Transit. His experience includes work as a bus operator, special ridership coordinator in accessible services and 1st line transit supervisor. Currently, he works as a communications coordinator in the transit control center (TCC). Contact him via LinkedIn.

Posted by Fred Jandt
Mass Transit magazine editor

Rail is the buzzword in transit this summer regardless if you’re talking about funding, construction or safety. But as the one-year anniversary of the tragic Metro Rail crash in Washington, D.C., comes around this week, I realize how quickly we’ve moved forward.

I was going to write about the Metro Rail crash for last year in this week’s column. Maybe discuss some of the memorials in honor of those who died in the accident.

But then the story about a Spanish train slamming into a group of beach revelers crossed my desk this morning hitting home just how powerful a train is and the dangers inherent in them.

Now, don’t get me wrong, playing on train tracks is like playing on the freeway. You’re just asking for trouble. But as we move forward into a new era of rail in the United States, I think a whole new level of education needs to come along with it.

For most kids trains are either of the freight variety or the “Thomas” variety. They are things to be viewed with wonder and they don’t move very fast.

While I can agree with the former, trains aren’t the slow-moving vehicles of old. This is never clearer than when you read about an accident involving a train. Almost always it includes a comment about the operator seeing the car, truck, whatever, on the tracks and not being able to stop in time despite being a significant distance (i.e. mile) away.

As we start investing in high-speed rail in the United States and these trains move through towns, residents need to be made clear the proper safety measures surrounding them. And this is in part for protection and also to prevent fearmongering as is often the case when a rail line is put into an area.

Trains aren’t dangerous. No more than a car or plane is. But they need to be show the proper respect, which it seems can be lacking at times. You wouldn’t walk down the middle of an interstate hoping the cars would just pass you by, would you? Then why walk on the train tracks? You don’t run a red light just because you think you can get across before the car in the other direction comes along do you? Then why drive your car around a lowered crossing arm and try to get across the tracks before the train comes along?

The FRA is first and foremost a safety organization and it does a good job of getting its message out there. But as rail becomes more prevalent in the United States, those towns getting the new lines need to also take up the safety banner and educate residents the proper techniques for dealing with trains rather than pointing fingers when somebody does something stupid and loses their life.

Thanks for reading the MT Position, updated every Friday. For those interested in instant updates, you can now get your latest Mass Transit fix via Twitter.

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com
Check out our LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter pages!

Posted by Mark Foss

Whenever high-speed rail is discussed, sooner or later, intermodal connections are mentioned. The “Vision for High-Speed Rail in America” presents the U.S. government’s goals for high-speed rail. One of these goals is to support “interconnected livable communities” — smart growth. An example of an intermodal connection already supporting this goal is Amtrak’s Acela. This line slows down to connect with public transit in downtown Boston then reaches speeds between 130 and 150 mph outside the city (p. 3).

Of course connecting different modes of transportation isn’t new. Capital District Transportation Authority, Albany, N.Y., owns and operates two rail stations where its buses serve customers transferring to and from the trains. King County Metro and Sound Transit operate a Downtown Transit Tunnel serving both hybrid buses and light rail vehicles. The transit tunnel’s International District Station is a short walk from King Street Station, serving Sound Transit’s Sounder Commuter Rail. The Sounder Commuter Rail corridor is about 74 miles long north to south. Along the way, the Sounder connects with transit bus lines at various stations.

In April, 2010, the U.S. House of Representatives’ Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure published a summary of a hearing on “Intermodal High-Speed Rail Connections.” The summary discusses the “2025 Florida Transportation Plan.” South Florida has a 72-mile-long commuter rail corridor and central Florida is expected to begin construction on a 61-mile-long system by the end of this year. However, Florida’s Plan states that there is “inadequate intermodal connectivity” in the state’s transportation system; and that “weakest links are often connections between modes, including rail corridors, airports and seaports.” (p. 9).

When high-speed rail comes to the Pacific Northwest, will it have adequate intermodal connectivity? What other modes of transportation should feed the rail lines? As the Pacific Northwest, and other regions, travel toward developing high-speed rail, it might be interesting to ponder what other countries are doing. Let me offer an interesting example of how a rail company offers connections to different modes of transportation.

Consider Deutsche Bahn (German Rail) and its subsidiary DB Rent GmbH. Of course various modes of public transit connect (e.g. Berlin) with the trains. Deutsche Bahn also offers parking (Park-and-rail and Park-and-ride) for rail travelers. DB Rent offers a carsharing service. DB Rent also offers an interesting service — Call a Bike.  Call a bike is a short-term bike rental service that allows a rider to rent a bike by calling a number on the lock where ever the bike is left. If the bike is available, the caller enters its number and a credit card. After using the bike, it is locked to a post on a corner for the next person to use. Deutsche Bahn makes the service available in Munich, Berlin, Cologne and Frankfurt.

From car to intercity heavy rail to bus to streetcar to underground rapid transit (U-Bahn) to bicycle — now that’s what I call intermodal!

Mark Foss has more than 24 years experience working for King County Metro Transit. His experience includes work as a bus operator, special ridership coordinator in accessible services and 1st line transit supervisor. Currently, he works as a communications coordinator in the transit control center (TCC). Contact him via LinkedIn.

Posted by Fred Jandt
Mass Transit magazine editor

This week is the 5th Annual National Dump the Pump Day. It’s a great effort to get people out of their cars and onto public transit. Unfortunately, as it is currently it’s doomed to failure.

Don’t get me wrong. I think Dump the Pump Day is an awesome idea and one that the transit industry needs to fully embrace. The problem is that as it seems to me, we’re not reaching the right people or we’re not reaching enough of them.

President Obama spoke last night on (among other things) our addiction to foreign oil, “For decades, we have known the days of cheap and easily accessible oil were numbered. For decades, we’ve talked and talked about the need to end America’s century-long addiction to fossil fuels. And for decades, we have failed to act with the sense of urgency that this challenge requires.”

A sense of urgency is the least of our problems. It’s the sense of disdain transit gets in comparison to highways that I feel we need to overcome. Somewhere along the line cars have been partnered up with guns in the “you can have it when you pry it from my cold dead hands” category.

APTA released a press release today showcasing the ways switching to transit can save you money. Within it there was a “Top Twenty Cities — Transit Savings Report” list. What interested me about the list wasn’t how much you could save from switching to transit (we all know transit is fiscally sound), but the cities on the list.

Of the 20 cities listed, seven of them aren’t in the top 25 when it comes to population. That’s good news for the mid-size cities out there — you don’t need to be a megalopolis to justify a good transit system. Of course, four of the top ten most populous cities (Houston, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Jose) didn’t make the list despite healthy and growing transit systems.

So what does this all add up to? It means that Dump the Pump Day while a great idea is fighting a pitched battle against the “cold dead hands” people that may not be working. Sure transit ridership at its highest level in decades, but that’s just not good enough.

Think about it for a second. If you want to expand a highway from two lanes to four, there is hardly any argument from the general populace — even if that means lengthy construction delays and major reworking of the landscape. But suggest putting in a rail line and it becomes a holy crusade against the evils of transit — even if the feds are paying for it.

When did transit become evil?

In this week’s Transit Talk, the esteemed Al Engel says, “High-speed rail is not just a good, environmentally friendly, economically advantageous idea. It is also a patriotic imperative.”

He’s right … almost. He shouldn’t have stopped at high-speed rail.

A great transit network shouldn’t be an initiative of the current administration. Hell, it shouldn’t even be a matter for political debate. It should be a manifest destiny for our nation.

The United States prides itself (to amazing levels of ego at times) on being the best country in the world. So why are we willing to take it on the chin when it comes to transit?

Dump the Pump Day works, but it will fail unless we make it not just a holiday for transit agencies, but a sober reminder of what we need to do to keep our world a better place for everyone today and tomorrow.

Thanks for reading the MT Position, updated every Friday. For those interested in instant updates, you can now get your latest Mass Transit fix via Twitter.

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com
Check out our LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter pages!

Posted by Al Engel, AECOM

Civil War veteran and political leader Robert G. Ingersoll said, “He loves his country best who strives to make it best.” And one important way we can respect that principle is by advancing high-speed rail (HSR).

We are way behind. By most estimates, Europe and parts of Asia are decades ahead of the United States when it comes to HSR and China is cleaning our clock. And I’m not the only one who thinks so.

“Imagine whisking through towns at speeds over 100 miles an hour, walking only a few steps to public transportation, and ending up just blocks from your destination,” explained President Barack Obama in an address last April on HSR. “It is happening right now; it’s been happening for decades. The problem is, it’s been happening elsewhere, not here.

“What we need, then, is a smart transportation system equal to the needs of the 21st century,” added President Obama, “A system that reduces travel times and increases mobility, a system that reduces congestion and boosts productivity, a system that reduces destructive emissions and creates jobs. There’s no reason why we can’t do this.”

President Obama has a point. HSR is one of the best ways to move people, whether the metric of interest is energy consumed, land used, or units of carbon emitted into the air. It is advantageous economically, environmentally, and practically. We can build HSR here. And we should — for a number of very good reasons.

HSR Reduces Dependency of Fossil Fuels
Relying on foreign oil and fossil fuels diminishes our control over our collective destiny. Uncertain supplies and unstable pricing make things worse. But with an electrified HSR system, multiple energy sources can be used to generate the requisite electricity, including nuclear, hydroelectric, or solar. Because of this flexibility, HSR is an environmentally friendly, sustainable technology.

HSR Reduces Congestion
In this country, most people drive. They drive because there are few practical alternatives. A comprehensive HSR system could change that, reducing the number of cars on our highways. But congestion is in no way limited to roads.

A recent study by the Brookings Institute revealed that half of U.S. air traffic is regional. They define that to mean that half the flying public goes less than 500 miles on each flight. With a regional HSR system, those flights could be largely eliminated, creating much more efficient and effective downtown-to-downtown travel. In addition, airport gates could be freed for international travel. Current airports could be more judiciously used and new airports — huge capital investments unto themselves — might not even need to be built.

HSR and U.S. Olympic Pursuits
In the fierce competition to host Olympic events, Chicago lost to Rio de Janeiro and New York lost to London. All else being equal, one striking difference between the two winning and losing cities is HSR. Rio does not yet have HSR; but the country is seeking bids to build HSR between Rio and Sao Paolo (Brazil’s largest city), with service to be available in time for the games.

The host of the 2012 games, London, is already connected to Europe by HSR through the Chunnel. Travelers can enter London’s center via a one-seat ride from either Paris or Brussels.  While Chicago and New York — both contenders for the Olympic games — have good urban and regional rail networks, they have no true HSR under the international definition available. It seems fairly clear that, HSR was a factor in the decision-making process.

HSR and the Rest of the World
Japan started its famous Shinkansen or “bullet train” in 1964. Now they have 1,500 HSR route miles. Europe began its HSR system in 1981 with the Paris-to-Lyon route. Today, HSR service crisscrosses Europe in a comprehensive network. Taking that example to heart, China on July 1, 2010 is opening its fourth HSR line since 2008 and expects to have more than 10,000 HSR route miles in operation by 2030, with the Beijing-Shanghai line already opening in 2012. Vietnam, Turkey, Russia — the global HSR list is long. But until recently, with the exception of Amtrak’s Acela Express service in the Northeast Corridor, a U.S. list didn’t even exist.

HSR Is an Investment
All infrastructure costs money, and HSR is no exception. But it is an investment.  And the cost for building capacity in alternative modes could be much higher and at greater environmental cost.  Imagine how different our country would be if the builders of our 19th-century railroad system balked because of the cost of the Transcontinental Railway. Would we have developed the Western half of the United States? Or would it be part of Spain now? Or Mexico? Investments cost money, but they pay dividends. Like the Transcontinental Railway, the New York City subway system, and the ARC Mass Transit Tunnel, an HSR system is an infrastructure investment that will pay great dividends well into the next century.

One of the best ways to minimize the investment cost is to take the HSR process out of the political arena. Establish a legislative program that has long-term stability, so that we can develop efficient designs, and program the system so that the effort is not awkwardly mobilizing and then demobilizing in very inefficient ways. Build a national system in a systematic way to gain efficiencies and economies of scale, build our own domestic industry, much like the Eisenhower Highway System program did. The key is long-term vision and stability.

We are way behind in HSR. But in many areas, the United States leads the world. We are inventive, effective, and determined. When it comes to freight rail, for example, we are the envy of the world. Why can’t we do the same thing with high-speed rail? We can and we should. High-speed rail is not just a good, environmentally friendly, economically advantageous idea. It is also a patriotic imperative.

Al Engel is the Philadelphia-based vice president and high-speed rail director for AECOM, a global provider of professional services.

Posted by Mark Foss

This week I’ll reflect on a few news items.

By now transit budget challenges are old news. Periodically, despite the budget, the reasons transit agencies spend money defy logic. The San Francisco Chronicle online reported that the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) is spending $800,000 essentially to define the phrase “major service change.” The headline is somewhat misleading, but the article has a point. The Federal Transit Administration denied BART $70 million in stimulus funds stating that the agency hadn’t considered the impact of higher fares and “major service changes” on low-income, minority and limited-English-speaking riders. BART appears to have gone over the top. They hired consultants, translators and held community meetings to define what people thought “major service change” meant. The expenditures included day care for people attending the community meetings. BART also hired two full-time staffers at a cost of about $200,000 per year.

Doesn’t this seem a bit sideways? The Fed gives then regulates it away. Were BART’s actions a management overreaction? Or was this justified fear of the federal big stick? You decide. It seems to me that there are more efficient ways to make sure the public is served.

While I was thinking about the BART article, I decided to read Mass Transit magazine’s cover story “Grand Vision”. In the article, Joe Szabo talks about a vision for high-speed rail. He talks about the issue of “self-sufficiency.” He points out that although no passenger rail system has operational self-sufficiency from farebox revenue, Amtrak recovers 75 percent. That is a better rate than the bus farebox recovery rate in King County Washington, which is about 20 percent (Regional Transit Task Force Meeting Summary, April 2010, p. 9).

Operationally self-sufficient or not, a maximum return on public investment should be the goal of transit agencies — rail or bus. A 2009 Federal Transit Administration case study “A Methodology Using Six Sigma for Heavy Rail Maintenance Programs” focuses on using a “proven methodology for increasing productivity (p. 1). The stated motivation is that transit projects should yield good returns. Demand for Six Sigma skills also appears in a procurement announcement for Capital District Transportation Authority (CDTA) in New York. The agency was looking for consultants able to use Lean Enterprise and Six Sigma tools. It will be interesting to see what effect the introduction of advanced management techniques has in the transit industry.

It is open to question, however, whether old management habits can be changed. If the FTA wants greater productivity and then regulates down to the town hall meeting level, it’s doubtful. The FTA spent a long time studying advanced management techniques to improve productivity in rail. The agency also sent BART into a frenzy causing $800,000 in spending over a customer service issue. On the surface the issues are quite different. Rail maintenance is a steady kind of operation. Customer relationship management is dynamic and changes rapidly. However, customer service can be managed more systematically than the BART story suggests it was.

Whatever is done about the transit budget crisis at the national level, management with better tools and methods should come first — and should continue after the crisis abates.

Mark Foss has more than 24 years experience working for King County Metro Transit. His experience includes work as a bus operator, special ridership coordinator in accessible services and 1st line transit supervisor. Currently, he works as a communications coordinator in the transit control center (TCC). Contact him via LinkedIn.

Posted by Fred Jandt
Mass Transit magazine editor

I’m still getting my feet back under me after spending the better part of this week in Vancouver at the APTA Rail Conference. And for as much as these shows are great for networking and making connections, it illustrated to me how many connections we can miss.

Connection is a funny word. It has such a simple definition (the act of connecting, i.e. to join), and yet the myriad of ways in which we use it is seemingly endless. Think about how many uses it has when it comes to transit alone?

Transit is all about making connections; connecting people with their destinations, places of work, families, friends and so many others. But you really don’t see that until you miss a few.

With the APTA Rail Conference in Canada, the MT staff struggled with a lack of connections. As anyone who has traveled internationally will tell you, it’s a jungle out there. We all get used to our rut — don’t complain about getting in a rut, for most it’s a comfortable place to be. Traveling to another country means dealing with passports, customs, different phone carriers and a myriad of other potential dropped connections.

I recently purchased an iPad — the 3G version. It’s really as good as advertised. And with the version I have, I basically have Internet access anywhere I can get a cell phone signal. That became an issue when I crossed the border, which effectively shut down my cell service. Back to Wi-Fi for me.

Let’s not talk about air travel connections. We’ve all had to deal with those way too often. But as far as transit goes, Vancouver was a model for connectivity. I was able to traverse the city easily and switch between several modes without having to worry about what my next connection would be.

That is how transit should be. We shouldn’t fear connections as passengers. The idea of the “single-seat trip” becomes meaningless when connections are made quick and easy.

Unfortunately, as more and more agencies struggle with operating deficiencies, more lines are dropped and services reduced. This makes connections difficult or impossible, which goes against the very nature of transit.

Transit doesn’t just need good connections, it is a moral imperative to survive. Transit is the very definition of connections — look it up.

Thanks for reading the MT Position, updated every Friday. For those interested in instant updates, you can now get your latest Mass Transit fix via Twitter.

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com
Check out our LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter pages!

Posted by Mark Foss

On a rainy Memorial Day, I visited the Northwest Railway Museum in Snoqualmie, Wash. The short ride cost $12 round trip. The museum and train are run by a dedicated group of volunteers and a small cadre of paid staff. Constructed in 1890 in response to a short-lived gold rush and finally abandoned in 1975, the Snoqualmie Depot was restored in 1981 by the Northwest Railway Museum. The organization runs regular trains on weekends, Memorial Day, Labor Day and for special events. It serves as an interesting window into the past.

For a rainy day, there were a surprising number of families out to ride the train. The cars were old. It was evident that restoration was a work in progress, but the little children were in awe. I must admit, I was impressed enough to buy a membership to support continued work at the museum. My glimpse into the past got me to thinking about present day use of rail – commuter rail, light rail, streetcars. I like history. But what relevance might old rail lines – heavy rail, interurban lines, and streetcars – have for present day?

A perspective from the past, offers an interesting vantage point on the debate over light rail today. When interurban (intercity) rail lines were put in during the first part of the 20th Century, the highway system had not yet been constructed. The system of roads was poor. The interurban lines moved people and sometimes freight better than other modes of transportation available at the time. Interurban lines spread across North America. However, by the end of World War II, the highway system and automobile had supplanted the interurban. Very few of the original lines survive today. Tracks were removed. Bus lines were established. The light rail of yesterday was pushed out.

Why is light rail again up for discussion? I normally commute very early in the morning – before the normal rush hour. Traffic at 4:00 AM is what we used to call “moderate.” My commute is better than most. The traffic in navigate would be a welcome change during rush hour. Have you ever tried to commute regularly on the freeway at rush hour? There are days when it feels like being stuck in a rut with a horse-drawn wagon. Out of the activities people do during the day, commuting to work by car can have the worst effect on their moods (Back to the City, Harvard Business Review, May 2010, p. 23). Add to commuting stress the need to pay for parking, air pollution and the expense of driving. It totals to the need for other solutions.

Buses are needed for a truly intermodal system to work. I like buses. But, once again, sitting in a bus on the freeway can feel like being in a big wagon with a big team of horses – moving very slowly or stuck in the mud. Dedicated right of ways, not disrupted by car traffic, are the only way to go. Consequently, I’m becoming a fan of light rail. By the way, remember the old interurban tracks that were torn out? They were on right of ways, often, chosen under very similar geographic circumstances confronting any new system to come – light rail, commuter rail or bus rapid transit. Back to the future!

So here are my thoughts on historic railroads – heavy, interurban or streetcar. First, study them. What drove the need for them? What were the considerations for their location? What caused them to fail? Second, encourage the children to ride them. Encourage them to understand them. Otherwise, in two or three generations someone will want to tear the tracks out, pave over the right of way and create another traffic jam. Finally, support historic railroads. Join a museum. Encourage current working rail organizations to lend expertise – and possibly a little cash – to preserve these windows into the past.

Posted by Fred Jandt
Mass Transit magazine editor

Last week I wrote about a few train engineers in California who had the stupid idea to try and hide from the cameras in their cabs. It seems stupidity isn’t stuck with the rail side of the transit industry as a couple of bus stories this week take it to an entirely new level.

Our first contestants in the Stupid Olympics hail from the Great White North in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. It seems these two yahoos decided stealing a transit bus when its driver stopped to go to the bathroom and take it for a joyride was a good idea. Yes, both men were drunk. Yes, both men were caught on camera. Yes, both men were caught and face charges for their stupid actions.

Our next contestant is the North County Transit District driver who decided to drive his bus while drunk. And this wasn’t just I really shouldn’t have had a beer before my shift drunk, this was having a blood alcohol level six times past the legal limit drunk! So drunk that the passengers on board noticed it and called the cops while on board. So drunk he pulled over to the side of the road, walked into some bushes and took a leak before continuing his route.

But this week’s trophy unfortunately needs to go to the transit agencies in both instances. Even I know not to leave my car running with the doors unlocked at a wayside. What made the driver in Calgary think this was a good idea? And isn’t there some protocol where the driver needs to check in with dispatch to let them know they’re leaving the vehicle and coming back onboard? In this age where we’re all operating at heightened levels of security at all times, letting some drunken idiots take a bus for a joyride is inexcusable.

And speaking of drunken idiots, who let the North County Transit District driver out of the yard in his condition? Unless he was doing shots on the bus, he was drunk before he took off for his route and somebody should have noticed this. What, nobody noticed he couldn’t walk a straight line when he was doing his vehicle check? And with all the CAD/AVL equipment at our disposal, no one noticed a random stop so he could take a whiz in the bushes?! We can tell when a bus is running a minute fast or slow on a route, but random stops get ignored?

Both of these instances show that clearly improved security is needed on our transit vehicles. And it’s not only for the protection of our drivers, but to protect the people on board — unfortunately, sometimes from the drivers.

Thanks for reading the MT Position, updated every Friday. For those interested in instant updates, you can now get your latest Mass Transit fix via Twitter.

Fred
fred.jandt@cygnusb2b.com
Check out our LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter pages!