In California, Transit Expansion Meets Shared Mobility

 

By Barb Thoman, Executive Director

 

 

Last month, I got a sense of the profound transportation changes underway in California when I attended the Live Ride Share summit in Los Angeles. The focus of the day-long event was how the new "sharing economy" is beginning to reshape the way Californians live and get around. In this context, Live Ride Share brought together people from government, the private sector, nonprofit organizations, and others to discuss collaboratively accelerating the proliferation and use of transportation options in the LA region.

 

There are many reasons to advance transportation options. High on the list for California are ambitious goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  The expansion of transit—along with car sharing, bike sharing, and ride sharing—will help the state achieve those goals.

 

In 2006, California enacted the Global Warming Solutions Act, which set a target for an 80 percent reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2050. The law established a system of pollution fees and a cap-and-trade auction. The pollution fees are estimated to total over $1 billion in the 2015-2016 program year and an impressive 60 percent of the revenue will be spent on strategies to reduce driving! The following table shows how that funding will be targeted.

 

California Greenhouse Gas Reduction Funding Allocation	Percent of Total GHG Funds 2015-2016
High speed rail	25%
Transit and intercity rail capital program	10%
Low carbon transportation options program	5%
Affordable housing & sustainable communities	20%
Combined total	60%

Source: California Air Resources Board

 

 

The expansion of public transit was a priority in California’s major metropolitan regions long before the state made a commitment to address climate change. The Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system opened in 1972, at a time when the Minneapolis-Saint Paul metro region was beginning two decades of stop and go (mostly stop) planning for rail transit. In 1981, San Diego became the first US city to open a modern light rail line. The Los Angeles region, which had no rail in 1980, today has an impressive bus and rail system.

  

The weekend I was in LA, I rode nearly every mode of transit—all for purposeful trips to destinations I really needed to reach.

 

The LA region has 70 miles of light rail, one subway line, and 390 miles of regional/commuter rail, plus an extensive bus system. Local voters have approved funding referendums for transit over the past decade. Measure R, which passed in 2008 with a 2/3^rd vote in favor, generates about $850 million annually for transit through a half-cent increase in the regional sales tax for transit in LA County. Measure R revenues are paying for the five rail lines under construction in Los Angeles County today.

 

Live Ride Share attendees hope that combining use of this robust public transit system with the innovations that allow for sharing of rides, cars, and will enable the LA region and the state of California to reduce driving and car ownership.

 

“We need shared mobility for an economically viable region.”

Hasan Ikhrata, Executive Director, Southern California Council of Governments

 

In addition to expanded public transit, the Live Ride Share summit highlighted recent developments for shared mobility apps, services, and infrastructure. Of interest:

 

• Car2go is expanding slowly in the LA area and is adding bike racks to its fleet in Portland, OR.

• Lyft and Uber’s ride sharing services continue to expand in California, but controversies about safety training and employment practices continue.

• Flywheel, a new app, is being used by traditional taxis in San Francisco that are battling with Uber and Lyft for market share.

• Bike share won’t come to the City of Los Angeles until 2016. The program will be run by LA Metro, the transportation agency, with funding coming from highway express lane toll revenues.

• South Bay suburbs are piloting slow-speed electric vehicles for neighborhood trips.

• LA Metro has a strategic plan to improve “first and last mile” connections to rail and bus rapid transit stations in the County. See the guidebook for local communities as well as LA Metro.

• The Getaround app connects vehicle owners with people who want to rent their vehicle for an afternoon, week, or weekend. It is available currently in four West Coast cities.

 

It was exciting to hear from others at this event who are passionate about creating an integrated system of multimodal transportation options. Clearly, Los Angeles County is ambitiously moving ahead with transit and bike/walk investments. But they also don’t yet have the bike-sharing or car sharing systems we enjoy here in Minneapolis and Saint Paul. That tells me we need to keep taking advantage of the options we do have, while also pushing for more, if we want to keep pace with peer cities around the country.

 

How Nonprofit Employees Get Around

 

By Hilary Reeves, Communications & Strategic Advancement Director, and Erin Kindell, Minnesota GreenCorps Member (TLC)

 

Photo Credit: Metro Transit (Flickr)

Late last fall, in collaboration with the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits, Transit for Livable Communities sent a survey about transportation habits to nonprofit employees in the Twin Cities metro area. Our goal was to find out how respondents get to work, how they get around for other trips, and what amount of travel they have during the day. Survey results will inform our new program to certify and celebrate nonprofit transportation leaders in the Twin Cities. The survey generated 1,328 responses—and some interesting results!

 

Nonprofit workers live close to work

Over 50 percent of nonprofit employees responding to our survey live within 10 miles and 30 minutes of their jobs. Living near work can mean a wider range of options for getting there.  About 50 percent of respondents live within the I-494 beltway, ranging from southeast of Lake Harriet to Roseville and Falcon Heights, and from Columbia Park to West 7^th in Saint Paul. The three biggest zip code clusters (together about 17 percent of respondents) are from the areas around University Avenue in Saint Paul (incorporating Summit-University, Thomas-Dale/Frogtown, Hamline-Midway, and Union Park district councils) and the Powderhorn, Seward, Longfellow, and Howe neighborhoods of Minneapolis. 

      

A multimodal, innovative group

While 72 percent drive alone to work, many people indicated they choose other ways to get around for other trips or at least have tried them before. These nonprofit staffers might be more open to commuting by modes they generally use for other trips or recreation, (e.g., walking, transit, or bicycling).

About 30 percent have tried some form of car sharing, (e.g., HOURCAR, car2go, Lyft, Uber, or taxis). This shows a willingness to try new things, perhaps capturing the nonprofit propensity for innovation! These employees may be the most willing to integrate a different mode for a day or two a week.

 

 

Common commute window

Most survey respondents work Monday to Friday during “typical” work hours (8-9 a.m. to 4-6 p.m.). Since transit service is at its highest levels during the peak commute times, these people should have more options for using different modes. In addition to the bus or train, common commute patterns present a big opportunity to carpool, walk, or bicycle with others.

Appointments during the day, stops before or after work 

About one-third (34 percent) said they often have work-related meetings, appointments, or events away from their main work site. And a little under half (46 percent) said that several times a week they have other places they need stop on the way to or from work (e.g., child care, school, activities, appointments). About 75 percent do not have children under the age of 16—a common reason for not using other modes.

These stats leave a significant group who are mainly just responsible for getting to and from work every day. While our survey showed the majority of nonprofit respondents have a car, there is an opportunity to save money by leaving the car at home, especially on days they do not have multiple meetings or errands. Employees also could have an opportunity to get in the habit of walking, busing, or bicycling to scheduled or reoccurring meetings when it is easy to do so.

  How do these stats compare?

There are similar questions on the Metropolitan Council Travel Behavior Inventory (TBI), which also is based on a survey of metro-area residents. While about the same percentage drive alone to work (72 percent of nonprofit respondents, 75 percent in the TBI), we found that nonprofit respondents take transit more (10 percent versus 6 percent in the TBI) and bicycle or walk nearly twice as much (3 percent walk and 3 percent bike in the TBI versus 6 percent bike and 5 percent walk in the nonprofit survey).

This suggests that nonprofit workers already are above average when it comes to choosing sustainable, green transportation options. But, the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits salary survey indicates that benefits are not keeping up with commute patterns. While 30 percent of nonprofits pay the cost of parking or share it with employees, only 4.6 percent have a transit benefit and 1 percent or less financially reward those who arrive by carpool, walking, or bicycling.

 

Recognizing nonprofit transportation leaders

This year, nonprofits along the Green Line—those already ahead of the curve and those who want to be—can enroll to be certified as transportation leaders. These nonprofits can show they care about equal benefits for employees and the community benefits of diversifying transportation choices. These benefits range from reduced pollution (each mile we drive puts a pound of CO2 into the air) to workplaces that reflect and attract a more diverse workforce. And that’s not to mention the reduced stress and extra exercise that come from getting out from behind the wheel from time to time. Certified organizations will be recognized at the 2015 Minnesota Council of Nonprofits Annual Conference. To enroll or find out more, click here.

 

 

 

Transportation Options Call for Volunteers

By Allison Osberg, MN Greencorps Member (TLC)

 

 

Transit for Livable Communities is embarking on a new, expanded Transportation Options program that addresses equity and empowerment in the realm of transportation—and you can be a part of this innovative program.

For the past year, we’ve been leading workshops for social service organizations interested in empowering the families they serve to address the high cost of getting around. The cost of transportation can be one of the highest expenses for working families, sometimes even more than housing.

 

This year, the Transportation Options program will be adding a new element of direct assistance to individuals. Volunteers within the Transportation Options program will become consultants who work one-on-one with the participants and clients at participating social service organizations.

 

We are looking to recruit transportation-savvy individuals interested in sharing their knowledge and experience in getting around without depending solely on a car. TLC will match each volunteer Transportation Options Consultant to a family or individual interested in trying multimodal transportation options in order to achieve greater economic self-sufficiency.

 

Consultants are essential in welcoming those families and individuals into the world of Transportation Options. They will serve as a key resource for navigating transit, bicycling, car sharing, and bike sharing systems and for developing a personalized route and routine. This is a great way to help other community members embrace greener, healthier, and more economical modes of transportation—and to benefit from mutual sharing and learning.

 

Transit for Livable Communities will provide training on program specifics and get volunteers up to speed on all transportation modes. We’ll also discuss healthy relationships and boundaries, cultural awareness, and proper safety. A needs-based stipend is available to eligible volunteers.

 

We are looking for volunteer consultants who:

 

• Understand the importance of transportation on an individual level
• Are confident and knowledgeable in their transportation options
• Understand the Twin Cities Metro Transit system
• Understand bicycles, their basic maintenance, how to ride them in traffic and in all seasons
• Understand how to use car sharing and bike sharing systems
• Are, or want to be, connected to their community and transportation resources
• Have a desire to learn from a neighbor and fellow commuter
• Can empathize with transportation as a difficulty and challenge (financially, physically, mentally)
• Are culturally competent and respectful to individuals of all backgrounds
• Will be in the Twin Cities for the next 6-9 months
• Show enthusiasm and excitement for the program

 

In addition, being a League Certified Instructor (LCI) of bicycle safety, multi-lingual, or having experience with low-income individuals is a big plus.

If you are interested, have questions, or want to apply to volunteer, contact Allison Osberg at [email protected] or 651-789-1403.

 

 

Living Car-Free & Car-Lite

By Allison Osberg, MN GreenCorps Member (TLC)

 

The first Transportation on Tap of 2014!

 

Can you imagine all your transportation costs for an entire year amounting to less than $100?

 

Ifrah Mansour, a panelist from our recent Transportation on Tap event, says she couldn’t see herself paying anything more.

 

For the commuter that relies heavily on a car, the $100 figure might be unthinkable, but for the panelists and much of the crowd at TLC’s discussion on car-free and car-lite living this month, it wasn’t a far-fetched reality. On the contrary, it was a reality some were already embracing.

 

Ifrah Mansour lives car-free in South Minneapolis.

 

Ifrah lives in South Minneapolis and has been car-free her whole life. “It’s very unheard of in my car-loving Somali community,” she explains. To get to work, school, and play, she makes her trips walking, biking, and occasionally busing.

 

Our second panelist, Jordan Olsen, a Saint Paul native, does own and use a car but has been bike commuting in Minneapolis year-round for the past five years. He pays more on transportation than Ifrah but only a small fraction of the AAA estimate ($9,122) to own and operate his vehicle each year. He estimates he spends about $1,500 annually—mostly on insurance.

 

Economics aren’t the only reason Ifrah and Jordan avoid relying solely on a car.

 

Traffic, parking, safety, and health all contribute to why Ifrah and Jordan stick with other transportation options—even in the coldest months. While they admit that it’s not always easy to live car-free or car-lite, motor vehicles have not necessarily proven convenient and neither can imagine themselves relying heavily on a car for the foreseeable future.

 

Ifrah cites the social benefits that come with walking and biking: being able to stop and talk to passersby, pull over for a spontaneous pit stop, and be more a part of one’s community.

 

“I think also we are slowly becoming aware of our impact as individuals on the health of our planet,” Jordan says.

 

Saint Paul-native Jordan Olsen lives car-lite, relying more on his bike than his car to get around.

 

Despite the many reasons for driving less, the alternatives are not always self-evident. As the Transportation on Tap conversation got rolling, it evolved into almost a live advice-column scenario—one with outright enthusiasm, encouragement, and comradery.

 

I’m going to start bicycling to Plymouth every day from Minneapolis. I’ve never been out that way. How do I even begin to find a route?

I never thought that I’d be into apps, but I love them. Has anyone tried OMG Transit?

I rely on my bike to get everywhere. I’m thinking about selling my car, but then what would I do if I was injured?

 

These are just a few of the many questions asked that night. Folks were quick to jump up from their seats, join us by the stage, and contribute their questions, anecdotes, and advice.

 

Do a test run in Plymouth when you don’t have the stress of being somewhere on time or with all your business gear. Ask locals; they’re almost always happy to help.

A developer of OMG Transit actually was just here, but I can say that I think the app works great—and I’m not even affiliated with the company.

First of all, make sure you have insurance for any injury. Then, if you can’t bike, consider your transit and car sharing options. Check into Metro Mobility.

 

When it was noted that the panel skewed young and healthy, a man in his fifties approached the microphone and explained how he avoided going long distances by bike because he worried about his knees. When he finally decided to just give it a try, he was pleasantly surprised by how good he felt afterward.

 

Judging by the crowd, it seems that if the possibility is there to get around without a car—or use a car less—the pros outweigh the cons for many individuals of all backgrounds, ages, gender, family size, and physical condition.

 

Many audience members jumped up to share questions and suggestions during the lively conversation moderated by TLC's Allison Osberg (far right).

 

“The multi-decade trend of declining zero-vehicle households appears to have played itself out,” concludes the AASHTO report Commuting in America 2013. “The count of zero-vehicle households is now increasing.”

 

Here in the Twin Cities, bicycling, walking, and transit ridership are all on the rise, car sharing and bike sharing are growing, and the number of zero-vehicle households is nearing 90,000. Still, many jobs in our region are inaccessible by bus or train. Many streets still are not bike or pedestrian friendly.

 

Transit for Livable Communities is working to make car-free and car-lite living more feasible options by securing dedicated transportation funding for transit, bicycling, and walking via the Move MN campaign. Through our Transportation Options program, TLC also is addressing transportation as a basic need and increasing knowledge about the asset-building potential of options like biking, walking, transit, car sharing, and bike sharing for families and individuals working toward greater economic self-sufficiency.

 

I find that even as we work toward better transportation infrastructure, education, and funding, it’s affirming to know that people who want to decrease car use and expand other options are part of a growing movement. Thanks to Ifrah, Jordan, and all­ who joined us at Transportation on Tap this month for leading by example and for contributing to an informed, encouraging discussion!

 

Save the date for TLC's next Transportation on Tap event: Tuesday, June 3, 5-7 PM, Republic (Seven Corners), Minneapolis. RSVP.

 

 

So many buses, so much transit: Rail~Volution in Seattle

By Barb Thoman, Executive Director

 

King County electric buses in downtown Seattle.

Recently, I was in Seattle to give a presentation on advocacy at Rail~Volution, the national transit conference coming to Minneapolis next September. With over 1,400 attendees and sessions on everything from streetcars to parking reform to bicycle network planning, it was certainly worth the trip.  

The conference hotel was right downtown near the streetcar and monorail, but what was most eye opening to me was the tremendous number of buses pulling up to the curb—electric buses, articulated buses, hybrid buses, long-distance coach buses. At one point I checked my watch wondering if I was confused by the time difference between Central and Pacific Time. But, no, it was only 1 PM, not rush hour.

With a regional fleet of 2,100 buses, King County Metro and Sound Transit, the major transit providers in the Seattle metro region, provide a huge amount of bus service—even at mid-day. For comparison, the regional bus fleet in the Twin Cities area numbers 1,200.

Local buses meet the ferry from Fauntleroy.

Seattle’s dominance in bus transit is not explained by population. It is a metro area only slightly larger than our own.

The difference is funding.

The Seattle region’s combined regional sales tax for transit is 1.8 cents, while our transit sales tax is 0.25 cents. Seattle’s robust funding level is enabling a $15 billion expansion of transit. Voters in the region have twice approved referenda to make this level of investment possible and some are seeking an additional rate increase next year. The tax increases in 1996 and 2008 pay for the impressive bus system I saw and used, for ferry service, and also for a growing rail network.

South Union Streetcar.

The Seattle region’s rail system is still relatively small with just one light rail transit (LRT) line, a 2.6-mile streetcar, and one commuter rail. A second LRT line and a second streetcar line are under construction. More routes are funded and in some stage of planning. The region also has a newly renovated train station that serves state-supported intercity trains running from Eugene, Oregon, to Vancouver, BC.

Seattle’s growing transit system is paying big dividends with regard to ridership. Transit riders there hit 143 million in 2012! That is nearly 50 percent more transit trips than in the Twin Cities metro area that same year.

Expanded transit also is integral to the success of Seattle’s regional growth strategy, which targets 20 designated centers for housing and employment growth, as well as for regional funding. The growth strategy identifies eight manufacturing/industrial growth centers as well. Transit for Livable Communities has been pushing hard for many years for our own metro region to target growth in this way.

Sound Transit Commuter Rail at Union Station.

Anecdotally at least, Seattle’s system of transportation options—which also includes expanding bicycle, car sharing, and pedestrian systems—contributes to the appeal of the region to Minnesotans. During my brief stay, I had breakfast with a young man who grew up in Winona and now works in IT for an Amazon subsidiary in Seattle; I met a woman from Hopkins who now sells state-of-the-art electric bicycles in Seattle; I stayed with a woman used to live in Apple Valley and now works for the Environmental Protection Agency in Seattle. They’re not alone. In April 2013, Seattle was named one of the Top Ten Cities for New Grads. I hope this point isn’t lost on decision-makers in our own region. If so, we are likely to miss out on a talented generation of young people to peer regions and cities like Seattle who aren’t afraid to make real investments in transit, bicycling and walking.

 

Key Takeaways from MnDOT’s Draft State Highway Investment Plan

Public comment period ends July 31. Public hearing July 29 at 4 PM.

By Barb Thoman, Executive Director

What highway investments will contribute to a prosperous future for Minnesota? How much should be spent to maintain existing pavements and bridges, retrofit streets to improve safety for everyone, and add transit infrastructure to highway corridors? What is the additional transportation funding Minnesota needs and how can it be raised without unduly burdening low-income Minnesotans?

MnDOT recently released its draft State Highway Investment Plan (MnSHIP), which seeks to address questions like these. With current projected revenues, MnDOT will have approximately $8 billion to invest over the first ten years of the plan and $10 billion for the second decade. These revenues are generated primarily from the state gas tax, vehicle registration fees, motor vehicle sales tax and federal funds. They are separate from allocations to counties, cities, and townships.

 

Image credit: MnDOT

The investment percentages shown below are for the first ten years of the twenty-year plan. Overall, TLC applauds the focus on maintenance, safety, and bicycle and pedestrian travel, and the reduction in emphasis on highway expansion. This allocation reflects recent trends in travel behavior (i.e. less driving) and growing demand for alternatives to driving (see pg. ES-10 of the draft plan). The draft plan also features much clearer investment categories—nine in all—and greater specificity in all areas of the plan.

 

 Image credit: Metropolitan Council

1 and 2. Pavements and bridges (59% of investment). Minnesota must maintain a large and aging system of pavements and bridges. Our state has the nation’s fifth-largest roadway system (141,000 miles in total with 12,000 miles owned by MnDOT). The Twin Cities metro area has the eighth-largest regional highway system (in lane miles per person). Projected investment levels are not adequate to keep up with maintenance needs, especially on the secondary system of state-owned corridors. MnDOT identifies an unmet need for maintenance of $4 billion over 20 years. TLC supports greater investment in maintenance to meet the agency’s repair targets.

3. Project Support (11% of investment). This category includes right-of-way purchases, consultant fees, and contractor incentives. Project support (program delivery) is slated to receive a significant percentage of investments. Including these costs, to the extent possible, with corresponding projects (such as pavements, mobility, safety, etc.) would provide greater transparency and accountability.

4. Roadside infrastructure (9% of investment). This category includes culverts, traffic signals, noise walls, signage, drainage systems, pavement markings, and even rest areas. These investments maintain safety and system integrity, reduce impacts on the environment, and improve quality of life.

5. Twin Cities mobility (7% of investment). The draft plan projects $520 million in highway expansion projects and high-occupancy toll lanes over ten years. This investment category is greatly reduced—as we think it should be—over what it has been for the last four decades. An aging population, less growth at the metro region’s edges, young people driving less, and the need to address climate change and equity, all signal the need to reduce spending on highway expansion.

The draft plan budgets for completion of the widening project/MnPass lanes on I-35E north of downtown Saint Paul; the completion of TH-610 west to I-94; the construction of MnPass lanes on I-94 between downtown Minneapolis and Saint Paul; and the construction of MnPass lanes on I-35W North from Minneapolis to Highway 10.

6. Regional and Community Improvement Priorities (7 % of investment). This category addresses regional or community priorities in Greater Minnesota, including conversion of two-lane state highways to four-lane divided highways, intersection changes, drainage projects, main street projects and other projects that address local safety, economic development, or quality of life.

TLC believes that complete street retrofits—especially in communities where a rural or suburban main street is a trunk highway—should receive additional attention and investment.

7. Traveler Safety (4% of investment). While safety is a part of all construction projects, this category includes independent installation of rumble strips, lighting, cable median barriers to prevent head on crashes, and other spending on what MnDOT calls “lower cost, high benefit” projects.

8 and 9. Access by walking and bicycling (3 % of investment). For the first time, MnDOT’s draft plan makes improved access by bicycling and walking a clear priority. TLC strongly supports this! Bicycling and walking are healthy, low cost, and environmentally friendly modes of transportation. Many people cannot drive— due to age, ability, or because they simply can’t afford to own a car—and they deserve a full quality of life. TLC would like to see faster progress than what the draft plan proposes on the expansion of safe, accessible facilities for walking and bicycling.

We remind the few people who still erroneously argue that bicyclists and pedestrians don’t pay transportation taxes that most people who walk and bicycle also own a car. And those who do not are likely paying more than their fair share for local roads through local property taxes  

The funding gap. The draft plan states that the funding gap over the next 20 years is $12 billion, or $600 million annually (equivalent to a 20-cent gas tax increase). If additional revenue is raised, TLC would like to see greater investment in pavements and bridges, safety, and community priorities, especially complete streets and flood prevention projects. Given the recent decade-long plateau in car travel, and the competitive advantage of regions with expanded transportation options, we seriously question the use of new funding for the additional highway expansion projects proposed on page 58 of the draft plan.  

What the draft plan is missing:

• Targets for reducing car travel (i.e. VMT) on the state highway system.
• Ambitious mode share goals for trips by transit, bicycling, and walking as required by state law.
• Discussion of the health impacts of proximity to high traffic corridors, which have high levels of harmful emissions and noise.
• Discussion of the impacts that road construction and runoff from roads have on land and water quality.
• A better description of traffic congestion in the Twin Cities. (Referencing the 2012 Texas Transportation Institution Urban Mobility Report, page 44 of the draft plan leads the reader to believe that the Twin Cities metro region has above average levels of traffic congestion, stating, “The Twin Cities area was ranked the seventh most congested of 32 metropolitan areas of similar size in 2010.” As we have written in a previous blog, a closer reading of the Urban Mobility Report finds that the Twin Cities is the 16^th largest metropolitan area in the U.S. but has only the 25^th worst traffic congestion. In fact, we are the largest of the 32 “large” metropolitan areas referenced and thus are not “similar in size.”)

Comment on the plan. A public hearing on the draft plan is scheduled for July 29 at 4 PM (MnDOT Central Office, 395 John Ireland Blvd., Room G15, Saint Paul) and public comment will be accepted until Wednesday, July 31. TLC encourages its members to review and comment on the plan. Recommended talking points:

1. Applaud MnDOT for prioritizing, and directing funds, to improved bicycle and pedestrian access.
2. Encourage MnDOT to explicitly convey to the public the recent dramatic changes in travel trends (VMT flat for a decade after a century of growth) that have critical implications for the allocation of transportation funds into the foreseeable future.
3. Encourage Mn/DOT to explicitly direct federal highway funds to key transit expansion projects in highway corridors.

 

Taking Transit to Home, Work, and . . . the Park?

By Linden Weiswerda, The Trust for Public Land (guest blogger)

Editor’s Note: Our Twin Cities metro region is well known as a place where cityscape meets green space. Millions visit our robust regional park system each year. But did you know that most arrive by car? Some efforts are already underway to connect more residents and visitors to Twin Cities parks in other ways. For example, the Sierra Club North Star Chapter regularly leads outings to parks and natural areas via transit. Nice Ride MN bike sharing will begin serving expand service to Mississippi River Park and Recreation Area this summer. And next year, new bus service on Lexington Parkway will improve access to Saint Paul’s Como Park–one of our most visited regional parks. As our region’s population grows and the regional park system expands, will current transportation options ensure the parks are accessible to all? Here, guest blogger Linden Weiswerda with The Trust for Public Land makes the case for continuing to improve transit service to our regional parks.  

 

 
Minnehaha Regional Park, Minneapolis

 

Have you ever ridden a bus or light rail train to your nearest regional park? Chances are high that your answer is no. According to the last Regional Parks and Trails Survey (2008), less than 1 percent of people arrive at Twin Cities regional parks and trails via public transit. While the Minneapolis-Saint Paul region is filled with a diverse array of popular regional amenities that can be reached by multiple modes of transportation, our regional parks largely remain an untapped destination for the regional transit system.

The Twin Cities regional park system—which includes sites from the Chain of Lakes Park in Minneapolis to Big Marine Park Reserve in Washington County, and 49 other parks and park reserves—is an invaluable asset that helps keep our region thriving and acts as “the state parks of the metro area” (Metropolitan Council). As the largest and most natural public lands in our metro area, the regional parks provide a unique experience for visitors. In addition to protecting the most important and sensitive natural areas in the Twin Cities for current and future generations, they are central to creating healthy and enjoyable communities. And enjoy them we do, with over 44 million visits annually to the regional park system. Time after time, surveys cite that parks are one of the top reasons people find the Twin Cities region attractive and want to move here.

 

Crosby Farm Regional Park, Saint Paul

 

However, the 2008 Regional Parks Survey also found that almost 60 percent of visitors to the parks arrive by “auto, truck, RV, or van.” Meanwhile, as Transportation for America reports, 40 percent of Minnesotans are without a driver’s license, exceeding the national average of 32 percent. If large numbers of residents in the region cannot get to the regional parks and trails to enjoy them except by car, how can this significant segment of our population benefit from the regional parks? Combine this with decreasing rates of car ownership, particularly among younger and older demographic groups, and the regional park system could actually become less accessible over time—unless our region does more to improve transit service to these destinations.

The current Twin Cities transit system provides limited means for travelling to regional parks, in part because peak service times are tied to the typical work commute. Transit services run most frequently during rush hours on weekdays. However, park use generally peaks for special events, in the evenings, and mostly on weekends.

 

 

Baker Park Reserve, Three Rivers Park District

 

Livable communities are active seven days a week and throughout the day as well. For comparison, think about a movie theater and office building that share a parking lot. During the week office employees fill the lot, and in the evenings and on weekends moviegoers take the same spaces. As a result of this shared use, the parking area needed to meet demand has a reduced development footprint, smaller amounts of pavement and stormwater runoff, and generally has created a more efficient community that is utilized more of the time. Increasing connections among the regional transit and regional parks and trails systems could similarly benefit both systems, picking up more transit riders in off-peak times and making regional parks more accessible to more people at more times.

In building an efficient transit system, one with more housing options and other development near stops and stations and with higher rider capacity, we should also be sure that our transit system connects as many regional attractions as possible, perhaps by both siting new parks near transit lines and by extending bus service to parks in current off-peak travel times. Our regional park system is also growing: current plans are to add more than 15,000 park acres and 700 miles of trails by 2030. By taking advantage of that growth, we can ensure that people can ride the bus or train, bike, or drive to their choice of regional parks.

If you’d like to explore a fun tool for seeing which regional parks (or other regional amenities) you can reach via transit in a certain amount of time, check out Mapnificent. Mapnificent is an online tool (still in an early phase of development) that shows you the area you can reach via public transportation from any point in a given amount of time. (A sample map for regional park destinations is pictured below).

 

 
Mapnificent generated this map of regional parks (red) that can be reached by transit from downtown Saint Paul (orange) in 30 minutes or less. (Note: Mapnificent does not work in Internet Explorer, but will work with other major web browsers.)

 

For a map to all the regional parks and a list of the activities available, visit the Regional Parks page of the Metropolitan Council, which links to the local park agencies who manage the regional parks and trails as well as their local park systems.

 

All featured images provided courtesy of The Trust for Public Land.

 

How bad is traffic congestion in the Twin Cities—and how do we know?

By Barb Thoman, Executive Director 

With the release of the recommendations by the Governor’s Transportation Finance Advisory Committee and MnDOT’s annual report on Performance Measurement, there is growing discussion about traffic congestion. Is our congestion among the worst or average for our size? And how do we know? 

The Texas Transportation Institute (TTI)’s Urban Mobility Report is the most often referenced national report comparing rates of traffic congestion among metro regions. The most recent report ranked Twin Cities highway congestion 16^th in the nation, based on an indicator they call the Travel Time Index, which measures the difference in the time it takes to make a trip during peak times (i.e., rush hour) versus the average of all the non-peak times (i.e., the rest of the day).

Our congestion ranking is exactly our ranking in terms of population—16th. As you might expect, larger metro regions have more traffic congestion than smaller regions, unless your economy is weak, as in Detroit, and then your congestion ranking is lower than your population ranking.

So why does MnDOT’s recent Transportation Performance Report say our region has the 7^th worst congestion? This is not 7^th worst in the nation; it’s 7^th of 32 “large” cities. We are in fact the most populous region of the 32 regions classified as Large. And, we don’t typically compare ourselves with Columbus, Memphis, Las Vegas, or the majority of the places in the Large region grouping. Not surprisingly, these smaller regions have a lower level of economic activity and less traffic congestion—making our rate in the group look high.   

So, remember:  16th in size, 16th in terms of our congestion ranking and average.

MnDOT defines congestion as speeds below 45 mph. That seems like a pretty high threshold to me (40-45 mph isn't much of an inconvenience). Nevertheless, for 2011, MnDOT reported that only 21 percent of the 379-mile regional highway system is congested during peak periods.

Nearly 80 percent of our highway system averages speeds above 45 mph at peak periods.  Twenty-one percent congested in the peak is a slight drop from 2010, when the rate was 21.5 percent congested.  The current rate is about the same as 2003 (20.8 percent) and 2007 (20.9 percent). 

So remember:  nearly 80 percent of traffic during rush hour is going 45 mph or more

So what is not in these national and local reports that might be helpful to know when you want to draw conclusions about traffic congestion? 

Our region has a very large regional highway system—8^th largest in terms of lane miles per person, according to the Federal Highway Administration. The size of a region’s highway system does not always correlate with its congestion rate. The transit-rich region of Portland, Ore., is a case in point. That region has only 2/3 of the highway lanes miles that we do, and a congestion rate that TTI reports to be only slightly higher than what we experience.  So Portland’s much smaller highway system has not translated into terrible traffic congestion, largely because people have a lot of transit (and bike) options for avoiding it.

It’s also important to know how far people are commuting and slowed by congestion. A region might have terrible traffic congestion, but if the region is compact and commutes are shorter, the impact of congestion on individual drivers is less. If we compare our region to Seattle, we see that Seattle’s congestion rate is higher than in the Twin Cities but peak-period commute trips there are much shorter (13 miles roundtrip vs. 21 miles in our region). In addition Seattle offers many more transit options so people have more options for avoiding congestion.

So remember: congestion is as much a factor of how many options you have and how close things are.

As we look to the future of our region and making mobility possible for everyone, including the additional 900,000 people we expect to live here by 2030, let’s remember that we already have a very large highway system that should be kept in good repair.  To remain competitive as a region and to offer people options for avoiding congestion, we should finally build out a 21^st century transit system—and safe connections by bicycling and walking.  Finally, I hope we can begin to refocus our development patterns in a way that reduces the need to drive so far so even if you can’t avoid congestion, you’re not in it for very long.  

Resources:

See TLC’s policy brief that summarizes FHWA data on highway size at  http://www.tlcminnesota.org/pdf/Final%20Highway%20lane%20miles%20brief%202008%20data.pdf

See page 68 of CEOs for Cities' "Measuring Urban Transportation Performance" report for estimates of commute length at http://documents.scribd.com.s3.amazonaws.com/docs/8mi393oq0w1huf4e.pdf?t=1333050452

Rail~Volution 2012: Taking the Long View in Los Angeles

By Dave Van Hattum, Senior Policy Advocate

In the transportation and land use realm, Los Angeles has earned an infamous reputation as a car-dependent metropolitan region with major air quality problems. Today, however, a historic shift is underway and politicians, planners, and citizens are rallying around a long-term vision of greatly expanded transportation options and reinvigorated communities.

In mid-October I attended Rail~Volution 2012 in Hollywood and saw firsthand the Los Angeles area’s extensive subway, surface rail, and bus system that, thanks to Los Angeles County voters, will grow tremendously in the decades ahead, transcending L.A.’s image as a land of ubiquitous freeways. As Christopher Leinberger, a developer turned researcher/advocate, noted during the conference, “the drivable suburban fringe collapsed over the past half-decade” and it would be wise to plan for new forms of land use and development going forward. It seems we can increasingly look to the Los Angeles metropolitan area for this type of thinking put to action.

Growing options for getting around the Los Angeles area.
(Photos courtesy of Barb Thoman)

 

Throughout my visit, I was struck both by the exciting transformation taking place in the region and by the long arc of transit advocacy. Rail~Volution began in 1995 in Portland and has since become a national, annual event where public transit advocates and implementers share their homegrown experience and evolving visions and philosophies. At a reception this year, I serendipitously chatted with a Sacramento transit planner and former Minneapolis resident who lobbied in the 1970s for creation of the Hiawatha LRT line that eventually opened in 2004.  It reinforced my sense that while good ideas often take time, they prevail through the committed efforts of visionary leaders and engaged citizens. Transportation is both access to opportunity and a major shaper of the places we call home. Consequently, we all have a stake and we should all be advocates for “building livable communities with transit,” the theme of Rail~Volution 2012. 

The latest news on long-term trends in the national transportation landscape informed many Rail-Volution sessions. As presenters emphasized, transit, biking, and walking rates continue to rise steadily and greater investment in transit is increasingly on the ballot and supported by local voters across the country. The market continues to grow for housing and offices near good transit and walkable streets. And new technology regularly opens up exciting new possibilities from tracking bike and pedestrian trips (and comfort level) to the potential for the 3D Express Coach, a radical new hybrid of transit and highways.

Ample pedestrian lanes encourage foot traffic through a shopping area in Pasadena.
(Photo courtesy of Kathie Doty)

Appropriately, most of the Rail~Volution sessions also included a multi-dimensional approach—i.e. transit and housing, and community development, and school access—that simply wasn’t taught to or practiced by transportation planners and engineers who designed most of the roads, parking structures, and transit systems in place today. This new, integrated approach is leading to significant institutional changes. L.A. Metro, for example, has a new definition for the "highest and best use” of land it owns near transit stations. The new definition considers the long-term importance of affordable housing (which translates into more future transit customers), not just the highest short-term monetary return. And across the country, realtors, housing developers, and home buyers can easily assess the combined cost of housing and transportation at any precise location.

While an arc of successful transportation advocacy can already be seen in the inspiring Rail~Volution workshops, the L.A. tours of abundant LRT, BRT, heavy rail, and lots of new bike lanes, and the large contingent of attendees from the Twin Cities (over 80), the impetus for Rail~Volution is far from over. Success has brought new challenges including an anti-tax movement that is anti-transit, efforts to block local planning initiatives, and a lack of federal leadership evident in MAP 21 (the recent federal transportation law) that could negatively affect funding for transportation options in Minnesota. .

Since 1996, Transit for Livable Communities has strived to bring long-range and holistic perspectives (and action) to the design of the Twin Cities transportation system.  Designing a fair and effective transportation system has always been, and will continue to be, a challenging endeavor. Getting it right depends on clear values, innovative policy, and thoughtful definition of obstacles, as well as smart technology and educated community members. Most importantly, it depends on involving all stakeholders in a meaningful manner. We will continue to build a strong coalition of partners advocating for the world-class transit/bike/walk systems our region deserves. We will learn from other forward-thinking metro areas like Los Angeles along the way, and expand this dynamic conversation about livable communities when Rail~Volution comes to the Twin Cities in 2014.

Ninety from the Twin Cities region learn from Denver

By Barb Thoman, Executive Director

When the Saint Paul and Minneapolis Chambers of Commerce organized an Intercity Leadership Visit to Denver in early October, they had more interest than could be accommodated. Ninety participants from business, government, and the nonprofit sector in the Twin Cities region took advantage of the opportunity to learn from their peers in the Denver region. The goal of the trip: to learn what makes the Denver region such a desirable place to live and work.

I recently asked Will Schroeer, an employee of the Chambers, to talk briefly about his observations after the trip to Denver.  I was in Denver for a week in July of this year and I can attest to how impressed I was by many of the things Will talks about.

Photos of multi-modal transportaton options in Denver, courtesy of Barb Thoman.

 Barb Thoman: If you could describe the trip in one word, what would it be?

Will Schroeer: Infrastructure. After the Denver region’s economy tanked as a result of falling energy prices in the 1980s, Denver saw investments in infrastructure as a way to free itself from the boom and bust cycles that had plagued the region for decades.  Today the region boasts a new international airport, Coors Field, the Pepsi Center, a new light rail system, a strengthening of the region’s park systems, and a major investment in the new Fitzsimons Life Science District.  

BT: Is the strategy working?

WS: Denver believes it is, and the stats bear them out. The region now boasts the nation’s third most diversified regional economy.

BT: When I was in Denver this past summer, I saw that two new rail lines are currently under construction. I also saw how much redevelopment was taking place around Union Depot, which will become a multi-modal hub like we are building in Minneapolis and Saint Paul. What did you learn about transit in Denver?

WS: Just about everyone we talked to in Denver–private sector and public–told us that transit expansion has helped advance nearly all the region’s goals: economic prosperity (attracting the work force of the future), housing affordability, air quality improvement, and tourism. Denver is the #1 destination for 25-34 year olds—Millenials—and they come in large part for the life that transit makes possible. We also heard a lot about how proud Denver is to have landed the new US Patent Office, which will bring $40 million in economic benefits over the next five years. What did Patent Office officials say was the #1 reason Denver was selected? Transit.  Denver is paying for all this new investment—and reaping its rewards—through a penny of a regional sales tax dedicated to transit.

BT: You said that you toured the redevelopment at the old Stapleton Airport and I did the same this summer. How would you describe it?

WS: Stapleton is a new mixed-use community on the east side of Denver. It is walkable, will be served by a new rail line, and has the kind of density you rarely see in new communities here. The success of Stapleton made me think of the potential of the Ford Site in Saint Paul.  

Barb Thoman:  Is there anything else you would like to highlight about the trip?

WS: I was particularly impressed by the Fitzsimons Life Science District in Aurora and the adjoining University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus. The 600 acre site will include bioscience laboratories, research facilities, medical treatment and education, and in a few years a new VA Hospital. We were told by the medical community that medical innovation happens over lunch often through social interaction made easier by proximity and density.  Again that spoke to the importance of compact development, walking and public transit. 

For more on this topic, don’t miss TLC’s new two-page summary of public transit in Denver (PDF).