Significant decreases in automobile traffic reported by FHWA

A recent U.S. Department of Transportation press release indicates that the number of vehicle-miles traveled is decreasing at record pace while transit ridership is increasing at near record pace.

Here are the data presented in the press release dated Oct. 24, 2008:

"In August 2008, Americans drove 15 billion fewer miles, or 5.6 percent less, than they did in August 2007 – the largest ever year-to-year decline recorded in a single month, Secretary Peters said. She added that over the past 10 months, Americans have driven 78 billion fewer miles than they did in the same 10 months the previous year. Texans alone drove 1.3 million fewer miles, the Secretary added.

"Transit ridership, meanwhile, saw an increase of 6.2 percent this summer compared to last, said Secretary Peters. In Texas, the DART rail system saw an increase of 15 percent this summer, one of the largest in its 12-year history, she noted. "


The August 2008 Traffic Volume Trends report from the Federal Highway Administration includes data by month in 2008 indicating a continuous decrease in vehicle miles traveled in tabular and graphical form. It is interesting to note that vehicle miles traveled have decreased 5.6 percent nationwide but that in the Southeastern states the decrease was 7.4 percent.

Clearly, it is time to consider where our transportation dollars will best be spent. Spending the many millions of dollars programmed for highway projects in light of rapidly decreasing vehicle use doesn't seem to be the best investment right now. Instead of spending most of our transportation dollars in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County on projects like the Route 250 Bypass Interchange at McIntire Road, the McIntire Road Extended, the Meadow Creek Parkway and other road projects, reprogramming much of that money to transit, bicycle and pedestrian projects seems like a better choice. Our region's transportation goal for many years has been to reduce reliance on automobiles in our urbanized area. Now that this is the trend we as a region need to provide that alternative infrastructure to provide needed mobility by means other than automobiles.

Encourage your transportation planners to meet our future transportation needs by other than more and bigger roads. People are shifting to transit and with better transit options I am sure this trend will continue.

Drop in automobile use and increase in transit ridership offers new opportunities

The US Dept. of Transportation put out a press release on the recent decline in vehicle miles traveled on US Highways that should make us all consider how we in Charlottesville should be investing our limited transportation dollars. I might question the Secretary of Transportation, Mary Peters, notion that we now need to finde new revenue sources for highways, but I would agree that we need to invest more in transit programs nationwide - and even moreso in Charlottesville area. Even at 14 miles per gallon, a reduction of 1.4 billion highway miles results in saving 100 million gallons of highway fuel saved compared in April 2008 compared to April 2007.

In Charlottesville, the millions of dollars available for transportation might be much better spent in expanding transit options compared to building projects such as the Meadow Creek Parkway, the McIntire Road Extended, or the Route 250 Bypass Interchange at McIntire Road. With reducing highway traffic demand, and rising transit usage, now is not too soon to refocus our investment strategy toward public transportation, and enhancing pedestrian and bicycle options.

Below is the press release from the US DOT. If a six-month decline is not a trend, then I am not sure what is. Join me in challenging our city and county decision makers to look at how much reprogramming can be achieved in the very near future. Virginia is not making sufficient funding available to build our way out of our transportation challenges through highway construction alone. I believe investments in transit and other not highway construction solutions is where we need to be moving.

DOT 84-08
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Contact: Doug Hecox
Tel.: (202) 366-0660

Americans Drove 1.4 Billion Fewer Highway Miles in April of 2008 than in April 2007 While Fuel Prices and Transit Ridership Are Both on the Rise
Sixth Month of Declining Vehicle Miles Traveled Signals Need to Find New Revenue Sources for Highway and Transit Programs, Transportation Secretary Mary E. Peters Says

WASHINGTON – At a time of record-high gas prices and a corresponding surge in transit ridership, Americans are driving less for the sixth month in a row, highlighting the need to find a more sustainable and effective way to fund highway construction and maintenance, said U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary E. Peters.

The Secretary said that Americans drove 1.4 billion fewer highway miles in April 2008 than at the same time a year earlier and 400 million miles less than in March of this year. She added that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) on all public roads for April 2008 fell 1.8 percent as compared with April 2007 travel. This marks a decline of nearly 20 billion miles traveled this year, and nearly 30 billion miles traveled since November.

“We’re burning less fuel as energy costs change driving patterns, steer people toward more fuel efficient vehicles and encourage more to use transit. Which is exactly why we need a more effective funding source than the gas tax,” Secretary Peters said.

The Secretary said as Americans drive less, the federal Highway Trust Fund receives less revenue from gasoline and diesel sales – 18.4 cents per gallon and 24.4 cents per gallon, respectively.

The Secretary noted that data show midsize SUV sales were down last month 38 percent over May of last year; car sales, which had accounted for less than half of the industry volume in 2007, rose to 57 percent in May. She said past trends have shown Americans will continue to drive despite high gas prices, but will drive more fuel efficient vehicles consuming less fuel. “History shows that we’re going to continue to see congested roads while gas tax revenues decline even further,” she said.

“As positive as any move toward greater fuel efficiency is, we need to make sure we have the kind of sustainable funding measures in place to support needed highway and transit improvements well into the future,” said Acting Federal Highway Administrator Jim Ray.

To review the FHWA’s “Traffic Volume Trends” reports, including that of April 2008, visit http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/tvtw/tvtpage.htm.

###

The Sunday article in the Daily Progress by Seth Rosen - Interchange design plans tied in knots (April 27, 2008) again demonstrates the disconnect among the goals of our community and how the components of the trio of transportation projects (Route 250 Bypass Interchange at McIntire Road, McIntire Road Extended, and Meadow Creek Parkway) are being developed and brought before our decision making bodies. City council declined to approve either of the two interchange designs developed by the council appointed interchange steering committee. The steering committee appeared to be more of an interchange lobbying committee at the most recent council meeting where several committee members were pushing the council to make a choice among two not very appealing alternative designs after they themselves were pushed by the interchange design consultants at the most recent steering committee meeting to make a choice. I applaud our council members for resisting the push.

Council members will schedule a work session and expressed an interest in developing some new ideas that will lead to new candidate solutions - be they alternative interchange designs or choices using modes of travel other than automobiles whizzing around massive roundabouts and ramps in McIntire Park. Where will these ideas come from? VDOT? Neighborhood Development Services? The design consultants? I don't think so. I believe that the only way to develop new ideas is to reframe the transportation problem being addressed. My recommendation is that the three 'independent' projects that are clearly interdependent in their design and construction be combined into one project. This project should address the broad range of alternatives for meeting the growing transportation demands among areas north and east of Charlottesville. Maintaining the three projects as independent studies - linked by an ever expanding set of conditions, design linkages, precedents, and other directives that overdetermine the set of choices and eliminate even the possibility of identifying new creative and more environment and neighborhood friendly solutions. One alternative suggested by several members of the public at the city council meeting included expanded transit development along with improvement of the Route 250 Bypass/McIntire Road intersection (without building a road through McIntire Park) to meet future transportation, park access, and pedestrian, bicycle and automobile safety concerns. Under the current three-project scheme, this alternative can not even be considered!

The interchange consultants, staff, and steering committee failed to identify any interchange design alternatives that meet the pedestrian and bicycle access and safety concerns often claimed to be the prime objectives in this planning effort. The consideration of of impacts on historic properties and most recently on city owned land in Albemarle County that are athletic and recreational recources at Charlottesville High School were hardly even considered in any timely way so as to influence the design process. Effects of the interchange on historic resources is still to be determined, yet these concerns have be relegated to mitigation issues rather than preliminary design issues. Student safety at the Melbourne Road, Meadow Creek Parkway, McIntire Road intersection was a topic of significant discussion at the most recent Charlottesville School Board meeting and no clear resolution of this concern was achieved at that meeting even with a host of VDOT, Charlottesville, and Albemarle planning staff on hand to address school board concerns. Coordination of these independently designed - but not really independent projects where three different design teams are operate under three different project development administrators is simply not working and may not even be workable. It is difficult enough to develop one project without having to coordinate three overlapping projects under development simultaneously.

Perhaps the parkway project promoters believed that a 'divide and conquer' strategy would bring the over forty years of debate to an end. But, I think it has done just the opposite. I urge our city councilors and our school board members to demand that a unified project encompassing the current three projects be started with the goal of meeting our future transportation needs. It is time we stop limiting our planning to putting roads through our parkland and historic resources - simply because we haven't been willing to rethink decisions promoted to solve the transportation problems of the 1960s.

Photo: from www.250interchange.org - traffic on Route 250 Bypass, Charlottesville VA

Route 250 Bypass Interchange at Route 250 designs sent back to the drawing board

Charlottesville City Council heard about three hours of public comment concerning current proposed designs for an interchange at the intersection of Route 250 Bypass and McIntire Road. The vast majority of commenters opposed approval of the designs recommended by a city council appointed project steering committee. Several of the steering committee members commented and asked council to approve their recommendation.

Opponents pointed out their assessments that the designs were too large, had too much impact on McIntire Park itself and on other nearby properties eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, didn't solve traffic needs, did not adequately provide pedestrian access to the park, and a host of other concerns. Charlottesville Tomorrow posted a comprehensive summary of the interchange discussion in a blog entitled "Council defers decision on Meadowcreek Parkway Interchange" that is well worth reading. I also expect that the video of the council meeting will be broadcast on the city cable TV-10 channel over the next few weeks where you can see all the comments and discussion.

This deferral of action is another twist in the ever twisting events surrounding what is often called the Meadowcreek Parkway. As this project changed over time it evolved into three independent projects: Meadow Creek Parkway (from Melbourne Road to Rio Road in Albemarle County - a state funded secondary road system project); McIntire Road Extended (from Route 250 Bypass to Melbourne Road - a state funded urban system road project) ; and Route 250 Bypass Interchange at McIntire Road (a federally funded interchange project being administered by the City of Charlottesville). I believe these three projects are so interdependent that it makes no logical sense to develop and design each one separately. They should be one project. Of course, as one project that would use federal funding for construction the entire project would have to undergo environmental review where several federal statutes would need to be followed. I think this would be the best possible path for considering if a parkway with or without an interchange should be built. One project on one time schedule with one study team should break the ever confusing boundary and funding issues that have plagued the project development over the years.

I applaud all of our city councilors for deciding to investigate this interchange further. I urge council (as I did in my comment at the public hearing on Monday night) to combine the interchange and the McIntire Road Extended projects so that better and more environmentally sensitive solutions to our transportation needs can be considered. Only then can some truly new ideas enter the conversation. Too much money has been spent for too little value on these inappropriately segmented project studies.

One citizen suggested solution is to combine improvement of the McIntire Road/ Route 250 Bypass intersection and expand transit options in our community. This forward thinking and promising solution can't even be considered in the current multi-project environment of convoluted project assumptions. It is clearly time for a refocussing of these independent efforts. Little is to be lost and so much to be gained. I believe that city council, the city school board, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, VDOT and the Federal Highway Administration all need to put their minds and efforts toward a unified goal. Only then can this project get analysed and finalized - whether to build or not build should become a clear and defensible decision when addressed as a unit.

Photo is from Charlottesville Tomorrow weblog.

Public Transit in the US Virgin Islands

I had a great time spending a week in the United States Virgin Islands and haven't posted any of my photos - until now. In line with the transportation theme of my recent postings, I thought you would be interested to see how most people get around on St. Thomas where I was staying. The island has a population of just over 50,000 and is about 31 square miles in area (Charlottesville is about 40,000 population and 10 square miles). Public transportation was primarily by Safari Bus - converted pickup trucks that seated up to 27 passengers. It appears that most of the Safaris were independently owned and highly customized. I don't remember seeing any two alike.

Several Safari routes existed to get residents and visitors to resorts, beaches on the Atlantic Ocean or Carribean, to Charlotte Amalie (the capital city of USVI), cruise ships, ...). I wasn't on St. Thomas long enough to become expert in the local transit system, but I thoroughly enjoyed the trips I took on the Sarafis. The large ones had five rows of seats only accessible from the driver's side of the vehicle (which is on the left, but the vehicles drive on the left side of the road so this is the curb side). Nobody seemed to mind that passengers had to climb over each other getting on and off the Safari. I found the whole experience positive and had interesting conversations with folks I climbed over.

The photos here were taken pretty much at random to show the similarities and differences among the Safaris. The fare was typically one or two dollars depending on distance traveled, and the time between Safaris was only about 10 minutes during most of the day. Headways were longer in the evening and Safaris stopped running at about 8:00 pm. I was on vacation so I have no idea how early they started from personal experience. The challenge for me was finding a Safari going where I wanted to go. Routes were not posted on the vehicles so I found I had to ask each driver if they were going where I wanted to go. I can't imagine how people who spoke languages alien to the drivers could use public transportation.

Yes, we need to bring transit (BRT or Light Rail) to our community

Seth Rosen asks in the Feb. 18, 2008 Daily Progress article the "$138 million question: Is high-tech bus system worth the price tag?" Rosen reports that many of our local elected officials "are skeptical that a bus rapid transit system would accomplish what its advocates predict. And the $138 million price tag would be a staggering sum for a community of this size". Benefits anticipated from the transit option expect reduced travel time between downtown, the university, U.S. Route 29, and to the airport. This would also be consistent with city council's goals of reducing the use of single-occupancy automobiles, reducing emission of air pollutants and greenhouse gases, and enhancing transportation options for residents of and visitors to our region. But, is $138 million too much to invest in our transportation future? Charlottesville and Albemarle County continue to pursue the idea of building the proposed Meadow Creek Parkway. The current cost estimate for the city portion (McIntire Road Extended through McIntire Park), the county portion (Meadow Creek Parkway from Melbourne Road to Rio Road), and the Route 250 Bypass Interchange at McIntire Road totals $69 million dollars. This is the sum of cost estimates our local Metropolitan Planning Organizations long range plan document being considered at tomorrow's MPO meeting. The $69 million - half of the cost of the high-tech bus system - buys us little if anything in the way of congestion relief, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, or enhanced transportation options. In fact, the parkway project appears to be counter to meeting council's stated goals. In addition, the parkway would have significant impacts on McIntire Park, Bailey Park, and several historic sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The actual cost for the parkway option will likely be higher than the $69 million given that emerging cost estimates for the interchange alone are typically above the current listed cost.

I prefer our region consider seriously investing in transit (considering both BRT and light-rail options) and reprogramming the funds allocated to the Meadow Creek Parkway project to support transit development to the extent possible. I believe a regional investment of $138 million for transit will be a much better investment than the $69+ million dollars currently programmed for a project with little to offer in solving our long-term regional transportation problems.

Note: Image from http://www.transalt.org/files/newsroom/magazine/042Spring/images/17bus.jpg

Dedicated Funding - Transit - YES; Affordable Housing - NO

Seth Rosen's Feb. 12, 2008 article "City, county agree to form transit authority" suggest that city councilors are ready to establish a dedicated source of revenue for transit management, planning, and operation through some new taxes or fees. I am curious if the former mayors of Charlottesville who opposed establishing a dedicated source of revenue for affordable housing at the February 4, 2008 public hearing on that issue at city council will show up in opposition to establishing dedicated revenue for transit. Former mayors Caravati and Vandever and current councilors Brown, Huja and Taliaferro opposed the concept of establishing dedicated revenue and promoted keeping funding decisions in the annual budget process. If this is truly their concern, I hope we will be hearing similar concerns expressed by these former mayors and current councilors at the February 18, 2008 council meeting. Both transit expansion and affordable housing are priority issues for Charlottesville. Shouldn't the options for generating funding be consistent?

If you are not familiar with the affordable housing discussion of February 4, check out Seth Rosen's February 5, 2008 article "More than 125 city residents back housing relief."