Dear Long Range Metro Transit Planning Committee Members:
Thank you for your work on "The Plan." My
comments below are in reference to the latest
draft. Below that you will find my original
comment from way back in August of Aught Seven. I
include the latter because I reference it in my
latest comment.
In reading the Plan, it was clear that the
authors wanted to avoid the biggest issues facing
Metro, namely, process, place & politics. That
is, there seemed to be a reticence to address:
-modern management theory,
-transit-friendly land use (severely lacking in peripheral areas)
-anti-transit elected officials at the county,
state and federal levels (yes, including the
Madison delegations).
Below are the details.
Thank you for your work on this project, and
thank you for reading these comments.
Sincerely,
Michael D. Barrett
2137 Sommers Ave.
Madison, WI 53704
Cities rise & fall with Transit and Land Use Decisions
The plan should be clear that support for the
city's bus service must scale with the growth of
the city. This includes infill growth as well as
growth at the periphery. If downtown areas are
growing with more dense development, then its bus
service should increase in frequency. The city
should also acknowledge the fact that low-density
development at the periphery is not conducive to
transit. Thus, it should build at densities and
mixes of uses that promote transit. The bottom
line is, the city must support transit, and
transit-oriented development. Because without
good urban land use, transit will fail. Without
good transit, cities fail.
Unfortunately for long term planning, there is
almost no discussion of land use and its impacts
on transit. There is nothing about
'Transit-Oriented Development' or other aspects
of urban design vis-à-vis transit. Without
transit-supporting densities, there can be no
cost-effective transit! (See Colin Conn's
4/15/2008 TPC testimony about filling up a bus in
three stops in high density areas.)
Relatedly, there is no discussion of the issue of
suburbanization of basic services. Medical
providers are the most obvious of these. Many
basic health services are now out of reach of
transit because of their poor siting decisions
which seem to be based on an assumption of car
ownership.
Ultimately, transit-oriented land use is about
the rider experience before boarding the bus. If
the environment between destination and bus stop
is a pleasing one, then taking the bus will be an
attractive option. If that environment is scaled
to the automobile, it will be an unpleasant
experience, thus detracting from the bus riding
experience.
Quality Control and Organizational Improvement
My original comment addressed organizational
process improvement as a major point to be taken
up in long term planning for the system. I could
find nothing in the document that addressed it.
I'll re-iterate and expand on some of it here.
Hire senior managers who hold MPA's, MBAs or the
like, and who have extensive training and
experience in organizational process improvement.
This includes the ideas in the book From Good to
Great, or the systems processes of the renowned
Six Sigma program (inspired by "Quality Control,"
"Total Quality Management" and "Zero Defects"
methodologies). Specifically, Madison Metro needs
to look to an organizational outlook that
harnesses the entire organization in:
Measuring, analyzing, improving and controlling productivity
Succeeding in attaining sustained quality
improvement through aC commitment from the entire
organization, particularly from top-level
management, but also engaging all levels of
employees.
Madison Must Advocate for Equitable Treatment for Buses
That means lobby. The city needs to harness its
lobbying prowess (it's own hired lobbyist as well
as through the Alliance of Cities) to pressure
the state and federal legislators to begin to pay
its fair share toward transit. Right now our
county, state and US delegations are getting a
'by' on the issue of equitable treatment for
buses. They are boosting funding for more and
bigger highways while they cut funds for transit.
No one calls them on it.
Furthermore, there is no discussion of how fed,
state, county & city car-centric policies promote
sprawl, thus reducing the effectiveness of
transit. No one calls them on it.
That must change. Votes must be tracked. Names
must be named. Even if they are good liberals
from Madison.
Pricing and Ride Pass Programs (p. 9; section 2)
Free passes must be tied to employee agreeing not
to drive. That is, don't make the mistake that
the county made where they give away parking and
free bus passes. The result of the latter
situation? Bus passes end up on Craigslist and
people keep driving. The car drivers then get a
double benefit.
There is no discussion of peak pricing models. Or
of gradual fare increases tied to inflation
rather than out-of-the-blue double digit jolts.
Bus Rapid Transit and Routing (p. 28; section 34)
BRT is completely dismissed in the report! BRT
does not necessarily require dedicated lanes as
claimed in this report. A starter system could do
without. In any case, look to a modified Route 6,
for starters, that goes the most direct route
between, for example the Townes (East & West). No
windy detours. No stops at transfer points. No
waiting for connections at the square. Just fast,
frequent (10 mins. or less) & direct service.
Eventually, as the line gets more & more well
known for its fast, frequent & direct service,
and as ridership subsequently swells, E.
Washington could eventually convert an existing
car lane to dedicated bus lane. (During the
reconstruction of E. Wash, traffic moved
perfectly smoothly with only two lanes in each
direction.)
Park & Ride Militates Against Cities
The Plan's P&R section directly argues against my
points about the negatives of Park & Rides. It
doesn't address the air quality issue, nor the
land use issue. The ugliness of P & R militate
against everything transit needs: a pleasing
urban environment.
On Language and Symbolism
Sharpen the language. Say what you mean, mean
what you say. There is too much obfuscation in
the report. Even the transit geeks who have pored
over the report have a difficult time divining
out the ultimate goal of some of the Plan's
language.
For instance, one of my major suggestions was to
make the routes direct, not wandering. It came
out "simple is better." That is fine as far as it
goes, but there needs to be language in here that
is clear as to what that means. Direct lines is
one component of simplification. Please clarify.
Delete all references to subsidy. All
transportation is subsidized. Yes, even
Interstate highways. The street in front of my
house is entirely paid for by property taxes.
That is a massive subsidy. Yet we don't refer to
street spending as a subsidy. Indeed, all city
services are subsidized. Using this term only in
reference to bus service is a rhetorical tactic
of Bush's Neo-Con Right. It has no place in
Madison's discourse.
Madison Metro: A Charity Case? The notion of a
501(c) (3) charitable organization to fund Metro
is almost as insulting as calling city funding
for metro a "subsidy." When HRH Larry Nelson is
forced to send out fundraising letters to build
his over-sized sprawlways, then we can
re-consider this matter. Until then, we expect
the city to fully support buses.
Appoint and support known transit advocates to
all relevant commissions. This includes Plan
Commission, Urban Design Commission,
Ped/Bike/Motor Vehicle Commission as well as the
Transit & Parking Commission. The current purges
of transit advocates sends a strong symbolic
message that advocacy of sustainable
transportation is not supported in this city. The
symbolism gets even uglier when transit advocates
are replaced with known car advocates (as has
been occuring over the past year).
The Report's conclusion is rather limited. For a
mode of transportation with so many possibilities
for so many people, Madison Metro should not just
be "workforce transportation." Buses should be
the transportation mode of choice for everyone in
Madison to get to work, play and social life
twenty four hours a day, seven days a week.
****************************************
[My original comment sent 08/2007 follows]
Building a Better Bus System
By Michael Barrett
2137 Sommers Ave.
Madison, WI 53704
Recent events, namely spiraling fuel costs,
energy wars, and global warming have made it
clear that a complete re-thinking of our
transportation priorities is in order. It is time
to push the discussion out of that belching, old,
rusty, four-wheeled box. With that in mind I
re-present these ideas to the Ad Hoc Long Range
Transit Committee.
Rethinking Management and operations from top to bottom
We will never be able to think of everything
there is to make a better bus system in one fell
swoop. But, we can apply modern management theory
to empower everyone from the Manager to the
driver to help build a better bus system. Here
are some ideas to create an organizational
structure that fosters a process of constant
innovation and improvement.
Incentives to do the right thing. Modern
management theory uses the metaphor "get the
right people on the bus, get the wrong ones off
the bus." The idea being, we need to make sure
that the people running the show and making our
transit system work are motivated and empowered
to make it even better. Here are some ideas for
incentives to help make that so:
Align the incentives of everyone on the Metro
management, all the way down to the front line
drivers toward quality service and efficiency.
For example,
Reward drivers who drive judiciously and don't
drive with fast braking & accelerating.
Railroads, for example, have discovered that fuel
efficiency can vary as much as 30% from engineer
to engineer merely because of operator habits.
Car fuel efficiencies vary by up to 20% depending
on driving habits. Buses probably fall somewhere
between. Savings on fuel and reduced maintenance
through more efficient driving can be split
between drivers, the system (for service
improvement), and the taxpayers. That way,
everyone is bought into an improved system!
Reward city management from all departments for
mode shifts to transit, biking & walking. Make
this across the board such that the Plan Dept,
Traffic and Engineering are all rewarded for
getting more people out of cars. This means,
planning staff and engineering staff will have a
strong incentive to re-think their planning in a
way that promotes safety and convenience for
those who bus, bike and, most importantly, walk.
(Currently they are rewarded for moving more
cars, faster.)
Hire senior managers who hold MPA's, MBAs or the
like, and who have extensive training and
experience in organizational process improvement.
This includes the ideas in the book From Good to
Great, or the systems processes of the renowned
Six Sigma program (inspired by "Quality Control,"
"Total Quality Management" and "Zero Defects"
methodologies). Specifically, Madison Metro needs
to look to an organizational outlook that
harnesses the entire organization in:
Measuring, analyzing, improving and controlling productivity
Succeeding in attaining sustained quality
improvement through aC commitment from the entire
organization, particularly from top-level
management, but also engaging all levels of
employees.
Consider hedging against future fuel increases.
Ladder the hedges such that the risk & volatility
is decreased. Fuel will not be getting cheaper.
Savings from this should be realized by Metro in
the form of even better, expanded service.
Routes & Land Use
Directness: Begin to design routes as a big city would-direct, not wandering.
Bus Rapid Transit-Start with a modified, direct
version of Route 6. This should be an add-on, not
a replacement of existing service. This has been
detailed by the Madison Area Bus Advocates here:
http://busadvocates.org/busadvocates/articles/BRT/.
Frequency, Frequency, Frequency! There is a large
body of research that has proven beyond a shadow
of a doubt that bus route frequency will do more
than any other single factor to boost ridership.
It is time to boost ridership, not cut it. Thus,
we need more frequent service as promised by our
elected leadership.
Design of cities closely correlates with transit
usage. Note that the Madison Comprehensive Plan
calls for Transit-Oriented development, walkable,
bikeable, etc. Yet most development in new areas
is single-use only. This means more cars.
Single-use neighborhoods are places that cannot
be served well by transit.
Suburbanization of Services: The private sector
must be made to understand how difficult it is
when they locate critical services (especially
medical care) out in the transit-deficient
suburbs. And yes, the car-oriented suburbs will
always be transit-deficient simply because of
their layout (see the point above).
The 10 & 11: It was a severe blow to
transit-oriented neighborhoods like ours when
these lines were axed. The 10 & 11 connected the
"workforce housing" on the near east side to the
"workplaces"-the UW & VA hospitals and the UW
campus. And they worked. The 11 was the 2nd most
productive route in the system. The 10 was the
4th most productive. They were slashed in a very
underhanded way. They must be brought back. Here
are the advantages the 10 & 11 provided to
commuters:
Direct
Frequent
Not flocked with other buses
No transfers required
Connected several transit-oriented neighborhoods
No hang ups on the square/transfer point
Time competitive with the automobile
Bonus Buses-Paratransit: To provide an
affordability option, permit para-transit buses
to go onto the mainline as an adjunct service.
This would only be at the option of the
para-transit rider, but the incentive would be a
significant discount (1/2 or less) for that rider
if the ride can go along a mainline route for a
significant distance and pick up standard fares
along the way. This would not only provide a
cheaper ride for para-transit riders, but would
also increase the frequency of the service for
standard-fare paying riders. Again, to boost
overall ridership, frequency, frequency,
frequency is the key.
Advance Signal of bus arrival: Make it easier to
know when the bus is coming. The "MAX" bus rapid
transit system in Kansas City has sheltered bus
stops that flash when the bus is on the way. This
would be ideal especially in the core area of the
city where bus stops are often near coffee
shops-i.e., convenient waiting areas for the bus.
And this would be particularly helpful in heavy
snowfall events when the buses often go off
schedule.
Park & Rides are abysmal relics of the 1970s. We
need Transit-Oriented Development, not more
asphalt. Goerke's Corners P & R on the outskirts
of Milwaukee is the most abysmal place on the
planet. Dutch Mill P & R in Madison also figures
lowly in Dante's land use inferno. P & Rs do
nothing to help our air quality. The first 30
seconds after the ignition switch is turned is
the most polluting, emitting 90% of the
pollutants a car will emit that day. This means
we need places that are designed around transit,
so you don't even have to start a car.
Furthermore, P & Rs do little to relieve
congestion where it is worst. If P & Rs are
adopted, they should be limited in scope and
coordinated with already paved, but underutilized
lots. Sherman Plaza comes to mind. Movie theatre
lots are another prime spot. And P & Rs should be
scattered along the line, not concentrated at one
location so as to not be disruptive of normal
business and good, healthy urban development.
Politics-state, local, federal
Valiant efforts at the city level have staved off
complete disaster for Metro. But our city cannot
go on bearing the brunt of regional traffic
problems foisted upon us by county, state and
federal reps-yes, including our own saintly
representatives at those levels.
County: Make it publicly known that our county
officials-from the county executive to our county
supervisors-have not shared in their
transportation responsibilities for urban
residents. Furthermore, they continue to allow
rural subdivision sprawl which makes our local
traffic problems even worse.
State: Make it known that our state level
representatives have failed and continue to fail
us by funding highway sprawl while choking off
transit funding. Yes, that includes our
representatives who represent the East Side News
distribution area. During this year's budget
process for example, our very own senator, Mark
Miller, despite being well-positioned to do
something about it while on the Joint Finance
Committee, did nothing to halt cuts in state
support for transit. When I questioned him about
this, he stated that he will do nothing about it.
The result: Madison's 75,000 transit riders will
see more cuts in their bus service; DeForest's
7,000 car-dependent residents will get a
$40,000,000 expressway. Yup, you read it right,
forty million for a village, cuts for us. Guess
who gets to breathe their fumes as they speed to
work downtown? Yup. Us.
Federal: Broadcast the fact that federal highway
policy promotes sprawl while degrading transit.
That's right, all three of them, Tammy, Russ and
Herb all continue to support lopsided
transportation funding priorities that squeeze
transit while paving our countryside for more
cars.
As you can see, the lack of support for transit is worse than bi-partisan.
Fair Fare Pricing
Pricing: The entire subject of pricing to demand
needs to be discussed further. For example, why
not price fares according to peak pricing models
used by the private sector, from cell phones to
airlines? Further information about transit
pricing can be found at the Victoria
Transportation Policy Institute
(http://www.vtpi.org).
Tax Bennies of Transit: There needs to be a
better marketing of existing tax benefits of
transit. Federal tax rules provide for a tax-free
way to buy transit passes. Both employers and
employees benefit from this federal tax break.
Let's keep our hard earned money local rather
than sending it off to the federal government to
fund more energy wars!
The Need for a Free Market in Transportation
Options: Here are some random musings about
current regulatory mechanisms that drive car use
while inhibiting other modes:
Overcapacity of highways that generally sit
more than 3/4 empty for all but 2 hours of the
day.
Undercapacity of bus network, particularly on a frequency of service basis
Overpriced bus service
Underpriced parking citywide
Transportation benefit for car drivers (free parking)
Lack of transportation benefit for human
powered transportation, carpooling or transit
Overcapacity of parking citywide
Undercapacity of pedestrian amenities citywide
(lack of density, building behind a sea of
asphalt, etc.)
No wheel tax for cars
Exorbitant wheel tax for bicycles
(registration, that when summed up for a family
of 4, two bikes each, adds up to more than that
of the cost of state car registration!)
Exorbitant tax on pedestrians (through sidewalk
charges that amount to thousands of dollars)
Add it up, and you've got a city in which the
single largest single item in the budget is the
automobile. Not people. Automobiles.
Michael is a SASY neighborhood resident. He
serves on the board of the Madison Area Bus
Advocates and the Bicycle Transportation Alliance
of Dane County. The views expressed here are his
own and do not represent those of any
organization.
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
