Informed but opinionated commentary and analysis on urban transportation topics from the Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal. Names have been omitted to protect the guilty.

Our Mission: Monkeywrench the Anti-Transit Forces

 
ESPRIT D' TRANSIT

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity: and I'm not so sure about the universe. Einstein


From the Cabalmaster:

The Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal recognizes Pierce Transit (www.ptbus.pierce.wa.us), serving Tacoma, WA and surrounding communities, for management esprit.

An FOC tipped us off to the following: with the June 8, 2003 schedule change, PT relaunched its two busiest routes, 25 6th Avenue and 46 Pacific Avenue, as new route 1 6th Avenue – Pacific Avenue. The high-visibility marketing effort helps call attention to the through-routing and the more-frequent service (every 15 minutes throughout most of the day). Way to go, Pierce Transit.

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 12/02/2003 03:54:00 PM

 
"FREEDOM FRIES" AND OTHER FRIVOLITY

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

TIME TO CHANGE THE APHORISM!

Great spirits have often encountered opposition from weak minds. Einstein.


From the Cabalmaster:

Now that all of you websurfers are still recovering from your meal of stuffed turkey or whatever, The Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal is pleased to bring you a transit-related aspect of the France-bashing tomfoolery that erupted in January 2003.

Back then, as intrepid websurfers may recall, French President Jacques Chirac said, in effect, that he would not support America's planned adventure in Iraq because the French public was against the idea.

(We TransitCabalists were no fans of "Dat guy wit da mustache (RIP?)" but we're willing to accept the unabashed right of another democratic nation to disagree with the United States-- and nobody ever accused the Fifth Republic of being "undemocratic.")

For rest of this post, click here.


posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 11/28/2003 02:51:00 PM

 
WIN AN ANNUAL TRANSIT PASS FOR THE URBAN TRANSIT SYSTEM OF YOUR CHOICE!

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

The Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal is pleased to announce the reopening of our first contest! NOW A STANDING OFFER UNTIL THERE'S A WINNER!

The prize: an annual transit pass, or its equivalent (e.g. twelve monthly passes), to any urban transit system in the WORLD! (Or, for commuter rail, up to two monthly passes for, say, the Metro-North Commuter Railroad or the Long Island Rail Road; we’ll consider similar operations on an ad-hoc basis.)

The challenge: Provide bona fide evidence that documents the source(s) of Wendell Cox’s ongoing funding!

Besides his own firm, "Wendell Cox Consultancy" and his personal websites, www.publicpurpose.com and www.demographia.com, Wendell is or has been listed in the recent past as "Associate" or "Senior Fellow" at the Heritage Foundation, the Texas Public Policy Institute, the Independence Institute, Heartland Institute, and many others. (These titles probably indicate that he’s been hired by each organization to write an anti-New Urbanism or anti-transit paper or two, and little else.)

Many of Wendell’s critics and opponents believes that he receive much loot from pro-highway, anti-urban, anti-smart-growth, right-wing and Libertarian interests.

(We’re shocked – utterly SCANDALIZED – we thought he did it just for fun!!!)

Wendell himself has refused to disclose who his clients are, other than to cop a plea of “customary professional practice.” Legitimate transportation consulting the equivalent of political hack jobs? Wendell, oh, pulleeze...


posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 11/24/2003 05:57:00 PM

 
SONGS FROM THE WOOD(S): MORE VAPID VERBIAGE FROM RANDAL O’TOOLE

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

“You could put everyone in this country in California and there would be plenty of land left over.”

(Randal O’Toole, at www.sdearthtimes.com/cut_to_chase/ctc_74.html.)

Well, yes, as anyone who knows anything about Japan knows well.

Japan is roughly the same size as California, has half the population of the U.S. . . . but, paradoxically, most of the country’s land area is sparsely-populated or uninhabited.

However, moving everyone in the U.S. to California could not be accomplished without drastic government intervention to compel people to accept much higher residential population densities that exist today (outside of San Francisco, parts of Los Angeles, and adjoining very dense “suburbs”). Much more drastic than the planning and land-use policies that draw so much ire from O’Toole.

Of course, if everyone in the country moved to California, within 10 years a significant portion of their housing would go up in smoke from the inevitable wildfires, as shown in (seemingly) half of Southern California burning down recently.

Is there a contradiction here, Randal?





posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 11/24/2003 05:53:00 PM

 
Light Rail Vote in Irvine (Orange County, CA), Addendum Four

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

The Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal concludes its coverage of the Orange County Grand Jury light-rail investigations.

Click here for article.


posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 11/11/2003 07:42:00 PM

 
LIGHT RAIL VOTE IN IRVINE, CA., Addendum Three

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

The Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal continues its erudite, in-depth analysis of the Orange County Grand Jury light-rail investigations.

For article, click here.

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 11/08/2003 02:11:00 PM

 
LIGHT RAIL VOTE IN IRVINE (ORANGE COUNTY) CA – Addendum, part 2

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

The Secret Worldwide Continues its hard-hitting, award-winning analysis of the light-rail investigations conducted by the Orange County Grand Jury.

(We thought we’d try matching the good . . . well, Mr. Fudge . . . when it comes to shameless self-promotion, but somehow, we think we’ve fallen short.)

Whoever the 1999 Orange County Grand Jurors might have interviewed, it’s obvious that the only published material they consulted (other than OCTA documents excluded, and the others separated above) were authored by:

Peter Gordon, Professor, School of Policy, Planning, and Development and Department of Economics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, see here www-rcf.usc.edu/~pgordon.

Most Memorable Recent Quote: “In any case, the world would be better off without the Blue Line.”

Charles A. Lave, Professor Emeritus, Department of Economics, University of California, Irvine, aris.ss.uci.edu/econ/personnel/lave/lave.html. Lave is a long-established reputation as a rail transit critic.

James E. Moore II, Professor, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Public Policy and Management, Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, www.usc.edu/dept/ise/faculty/Moore.html.

Most . . . Singular . . . Recent Quote (see here www.lplac.org/jamese.htm):

“[Political commentator] Jill Stewart is trapped, forced to remain a lifelong Democrat ‘by the Republicans' incredible idiocy on such major issues as protecting the environment.’ . . .

“Why suffer? There is an alternative, Jill. We know you, and you know us. We are the Libertarians. We love pissing people off, and so do you. You know you want to do it. You know you will do it eventually. You know you're ready. Why wait? Don't fight nature. Don't be afraid. It's time. It will be so good.”

David Mootchnik, “a retired systems engineer with an interest in transportation,” a resident of the Orange County coastal community of Huntington Beach, and a transit critic, see here mywebpages.comcast.net/mallinc/cbicritique.pdf.

Most Rip-Roarin’ Opening Sentence: “Once again the Surface Transportation Policy Project’s (STPP) statisticians have conspired to dupe the public regarding the issue of transit versus roads.”

Robert W. Poole, Jr., Director of Transportation Studies and Founder, Reason Foundation, a Libertarian ”think tank” based in Los Angeles. Poole holds a bachelor’s and master’s degree in engineering from MIT; see www.rppi.org/robert.html.

Jonathan E. D. Richmond, a “former fellow” at the A. Alfred Taubman Center for State and Local Government, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. A long-established rail critic, he styles himself as The Very Model of a Modern Major Transit Expert [sic].

Truth be told, we are not certain about his current employment or activities; his home page (see here the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond) does not say. Question we’d like him to answer: “With reference to the header on your home page (Jonathan Richmond!), do you think it’s possible that punctuation marks also represent . . . er . . . phallic symbols?”)

Thomas A. Rubin, CPA, CMA, CMC, CIA (. . . think you can squeeze "NKVD" or "KGB" in there, Tom?), CGFM, CFM, a former Controller of the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission and now an independent transportation consultant, is the only person on this list who has actual transit management experience (as far as is known to we TransitCabalists). A longtime rail transit critic, he has collaborated with James Moore (above) on several Reason Foundation publications.

Florida Public Policy Institute, a Libertarian “think tank” based in Tallahassee, FL and affiliated (evidently) with the Florida Libertarian Party. In addition to its “analysis” of the Orland light-rail proposal, FPPI has reprinted a Reason Public Policy Institute document, "Myths of Light Rail Transit" (Policy Study 244).

(. . . and, of course, Wendell, who needs no introduction.)

Um, have we made our point yet?

Collectively, the “authorities” above bear far more resemblance to a panel of SAPs™ than a panel of “experts.” Their “findings” and “conclusions” all tend to boil down to the following:

STOP BUILDING RAIL SYSTEMS, DAMMIT!

It is important to remember that Grand Jury proceedings are confidential. However, we feel safe in speculating that CenterLine opponents “pulled out the stops” attempting to influence the outcome.

What did they get for their efforts?

Not nearly as much as they’d like you to think.

Whatever a Grand Jury chooses to publish in the body of a report is there to support its “findings” and “recommendations.” The agency in question is required to respond to “findings” and “recommendations” – but not to anything else. Quotations from the body of the report may be trumpeted far and wide by “the opposition,” but have little if any real significance for the agency investigated.

We’ll continue this story in our next post.

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 11/05/2003 04:50:00 PM

 
SOME THINGS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES -- II

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

According to several FOCs, Randal O’Toole explains that light rail trains are much more dangerous than buses because . . .

. . . when you get hit by a light rail train, you die, but when you get hit by a bus, you just bounce off!

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 11/05/2003 04:47:00 PM

 
TINGZHI DUSHI TIELU DEJIANZHU, DOU__TA!

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

No, your eyes aren’t deceiving you!

The above is the equivalent of “STOP BUILDING RAIL SYSTEMS, DAMMIT!” in Chinese, with one key syllable omitted (this is, after all, a family-oriented blog). We thought that would an appropriate lead-in to this report.

Two 1996 studies recommended a busway for Beijing, rather than "LRT" or "Skytrain" (elevated heavy rail using linear-induction motor cars, as in Vancouver, Canada).

We Opinionated Ones are not surprised that these were utter failures as policy documents – and we don’t think you’ll be, either.

Both papers considered a corridor extending from northeast from Xizhimen subway station to Haidan (Zhongguancun) and the Summer Palace, major tourist attraction and popular destination for Beijing residents.

The Beijing Busway Study (Andrew H. Spencer, Jin Guo, Andong Wang and Weichang Weng, "Traffic Engineering + Control," vol 37, no 3, March 1996) proposed a busway built in existing roads, separated from other traffic but shared with bicycles.

"Only the busway shows a positive NPV ["net present value," i.e. benefits minus cost]; those for LRT and skytrain are negative in the extreme. The reason is simply that for the rail options the high construction costs outweigh the (heavily-discounted) benefits which do not rise in proportion; time-saving benefits also suffer from low assumed values of time, themselves the consequence of low incomes. The principal benefit is the saving in operating costs; for the busway this outweighs the value of time savings by three to one.

["Heavily-discounted" is an understatement. This paper used a discount rate of 12 percent, which is very high. The high value of the discount rate used by Spencer et al. "reflects the restrictions on capital spending introduced in 1993 in an attempt to restrain overheating in the economy."]

"Our study concludes that not only can the busway carry the passengers forecast for 2000, it is also the only means of doing so that justifies its costs."

"Light rail or busway? A comparative evaluation for a corridor in Beijing" (Andrew H. Spencer and Andong Wang, Journal of Transport Geography, vol 4, no 4, 1996) contains more details, but uses the same methodology and reaches the same conclusion. It adds, "It must be noted that these findings apply only to Beijing or to other cities which have sufficiently wide roads. Busways are unlikely to be a solution in the inner parts of Shanghai or Guangzhou, or instance."

Some of the commentary in the second paper has a familiar ring:

"Publications by the municipal and subway authorities show proposals for an extensive network with three lines intersecting the central area in both north-south and east-west directions, but capital for such ambitious schemes will inevitably be in short supply. Beijing is, in any event, not a city that is conducive to efficient subway systems. The population density for the eight most built-up administrative istricts, at 4380 persons per square km [= 11,000 per sq mi], is surprisingly low; the density for the entire territory of Singapore, with its extensive unbuilt areas, is 5200 [= 14,000 per sq mi]. There has been rapid peripheral expansion of both housing and business developments over the last 15 years (MVA Consultancy 1993; "Beijing Transport Study Draft Final Report;" prepared for the British Overseas Development Administration and the Beijing Academy of City Planning and Design). Many of the city’s streets are wide, even monumental, in scale, and Beijing’s planners have traditionally seen roads as the primary form of transport infrastructure. The low density of development makes it questionable whether rail could ever be accessible enough to be generally attractive to a population already accustomed to personal transport [in the form of bicycles]. Nor would it be likely to be profitable. Allport [RJ] and Thompson [JM]’s study (1990, Study of mass rapid transit in developing countries, Contractor Report 188, Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, Table 7.4) is illuminating. Examining heavy and light rail systems operating in 15 developing cities, they found that only those in the higher income countries – Seoul, Hong Kong and possibly Singapore – appeared to come anywhere near to covering total costs (not including construction costs) from the farebox. Most did not even cover operating costs. Beijing’s own subway currently operates at a considerable deficit and officials have made it clear to the authors that the case for improvements will have to rest on some form of cost-benefit appraisal in which the relief of congestion and the facilitating of urban development will be prime considerations."

Does any of the above sound familiar?

The Chinese government eventually rejected the recommendations of Spencer et al. We were not able to find details (perhaps similar to the Singapore story, which we brought to you in a previous post), but the evidence is unmistakable.

Beijing started construction of a 27-mile, 16-station light rail line, shaped like an inverted "U," at the end of 1999. This line, number 13 on the master plan, will extend from Xizhimen subway station north to Huilongguan, then south to Dongzhimen. The line has two miles underground, five miles on viaduct and the remainder at grade (www.metropla.net/as/beij/beijing.htm). The initial 18-mile section between Xizhimen and Huilongguan was scheduled for opening in September 2000, with the remainder to follow in January 2003 ("Full operation of Beijing's light rail system postponed," China Daily, July 30, 2002.)

A second light rail line or “elevated light metro” was started at the end of 2000. This will extend 12 miles from Bawangfen (Sihuidong subway station, Line 1) eastward to Tongzhou (Tuqiao station).

("Construction of Beijing Elevated Light Rail Begins," People’s Daily, December 19, 2000, see: fpeng.peopledaily.com.cn/200012/19/eng20001219_58169.html). Completion was scheduled for 2003 (www.china.org.cn/english/31281.htm).

However, this project evolved subsequently into an eastward extension of subway Line 1 on viaduct, planned for completion by the end of 2003.

The master plan outlines a subway, Line 9, to serve the Haidan corridor. This will extend from Fengtai Guogongzhuang in the south to Zhongguancun and the Summer Palace in the north, 16 miles, with 20 stations. The line will have 12 miles underground and the remainder on viaduct. Construction is planned to start in 2004 for compl

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 10/29/2003 04:57:00 PM

 
HUFF, HUFF, PUFF, PUFF, IS RANDAL O'TOOLE A STEAM RAIL BUFF?

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

An October 2002 article published by the Tri-City Herald (Kennewick – Pasco – Richland, WA, see www.tri-cityherald.com/news/2002/1023/Story1.html) describes an excursion train pulled by restored Spokane, Portland & Seattle steam locomotive 700. The article quotes a “locomotive crew member” named Randal O’Toole.

The locomotive is based in Portland, OR, not far from the Bandon, OR, home base of the well-known (if slightly acerbic) author and transit critic of the same name.

Are they one and the same?

Is Randal O’Toole, author of The Vanishing Automobile and Other Urban Myths, founder of the “Thoreau Institute” and “American Dream Coalition” websites, also (gasp) a . . . a . . . RAILFAN?

Say it ain’t so, Randal!

(Otherwise, we may actually laugh loud enough to reveal the location of Line’s End™, the (very) secret (very) hidden retreat of the Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal. Think of it . . . a blowhard like O’Toole a STEAM BUFF!)

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 10/29/2003 04:48:00 PM

 
Japanese Maglev Project Links and Lowdown

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

The Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal is pleased to bring to you the following “links and lowdown” related to one of the world’s more interesting transit projects, the “Linimo” magnetic-levitation line nearing completion near Nagoya, Japan. Known for planning purposes as the “Tobu-kyuryo Line, this was built as a suburban connector and also to provide transportation to an exposition planned for 2005. The Linimo home page is here www.linimo.jp but it’s in Japanese only. The transportation agency of Aichi Prefecture has a page on Linimo here but in Japanese only. The prefesture’s “Nagoya Tobu Kyuryo Construction Office” has a page here but again in Japanese only. Japanese-compatible software and a Japanese-language browser may be required for proper viewing.

The official English homepage of Expo 2005 Aichi Japan is www.expo2005.or.jp/en.

Japan has had two independent maglev development efforts underway for the past four decade, and the intended applications were very different. JNR (Japanese National Railways) worked on high-speed intercity transport. JAL (Japan Air Lines) worked on technology for relatively low-speed city-to-airport links. The JAL system, which has little in common with the JNR/JR high speed system aside from magnetic levitation, was dubbed "HSST," for High Speed Surface Transport.

Japan Air Lines? Maglev?

[Farms? In Berkeley? The correct answer to this one is “Yes, long ago; farmers joined forces with the state university to incorporate a separate city to prevent annexation into Oakland.]

This was actually a remarkably far-sighted move. Japan has a sparse internal air network because many good-sized cities do not have airports. This in turn reflects the availability of flat land on which to build them. Somebody figured out that "new" airports would have to be built far from the cities they served, and that the chances of securing government funds for this would be improved if the problem of ground transport were solved. JAL apparently envisioned construction of new regional airports with HSST links to major urban centers. However, the impact of the 1974 and 1979 oil price increases on the Japanese economy eventually led JAL to realize that the government wasn't going to pick up the tab for this grand scheme.

JAL spun off HSST technology to the "HSST Corporation" in 1985. Short test lines were built for word's fairs at Tsukuba (1985), Vancouver (1986) and possibly elsewhere, but paying customers did not appear.

HSST Corporation opened a small (0.9-mile) test line along a Nagoya Railroad branch in 1991. This has a minimum curve radius of 100 meters and a maximum grade of 7 per cent. This was built as a joint public-private venture: of the construction cost (450 million yen), the Nagoya Railroad paid 56 percent, the HSST Corporation paid 22 percent, and Aichi Prefecture paid 22 percent. Investors anticipated that a HSST line would be built between central Nagoya and a planned new airport south of the city (built on a man-made island). The prefectural government had an interest in the airport project, but also had an apparent interest in turning Nagoya into a center of maglev technology.

HSST technology, promoted by the HSST Development Corporation from 1993, scored an apparent sale in 1995, when Hiroshima announced plans for an airport-access line. This would extend 5 miles from the airport to the nearest JR-West station, and would eventually be extended to central Hiroshima.

Then, in mid-1996, the eastern Kyushu city of Miyazaki opened a short (0.9-mile) rail branch to serve its airport. The airport line is elevated and single-track; the project also included electrification of 1.6 miles of connecting line. Miyazaki, which has little more than 300,000 people, thus joined the select group of cities with an airport railway.

This project is not widely known outside of Japan -- after all, Miyazaki is not exactly a major tourist destination. We'll bet the gadget salesmen would like to keep it that way, for the Miyazaki airport access project had far-reaching impacts within Japan. Sendai decided to build a five-mile single-track airport railway branch instead of a metro extension. Hiroshima decided to build conventional rail instead of HSST (which would permit through service to the city center from the start). Nagoya decided to serve its new regional airport by extending a Nagoya Railroad branch. And so forth.

Nagoya proper has half the population density of Tokyo and Osaka. Since half the density also means half the population within the same area, Nagoya has not been able to finance metro expansion at the rate that Osaka and Tokyo have. Rail lines, where they exist, carry heavy traffic but large parts of the region have no rail service.

The "original" subway line was pushed to the eastern city limit (Fujigaoka), with a significant mileage on viaduct. An "onward" extension to Nagakute has been on the drawing board for some years.

A 1992 report by the Transport Policy Council recommended 25 miles of new rail lines in the region by 2008. One of these was the "Tobu-kyuryo" (Eastern Hills) line, to extend 5.5 miles between Fujigaoka and Yakusa (on the Aichi Peripheral Railway). This was outlined using some form of intermediate-capacity technology. Obviously, construction of a full-scale metro extension through this area could not be justified. Since the metro line uses standard gauge and third rail, and the Aichi Peripheral uses 1067mm gauge and 1500V dc overhead, there is no possibility of through working.

Somebody apparently decided that this route would make a good "working prototype" for HSST. Makes sense: not too long, Aichi Exposition coming up in 2005, and would provide a useful regional connection thereafter. Another factor: "Hills" in Japan do not imply nice gentle slopes, but rather abrupt rises. Sounds like a good place to put that alleged hill-climbing ability to the test. About 0.8 mile will be underground, and the remainder on viaduct. The line will have 8 intermediate stations.

The company is the Aichi Rapid Railway. This is a public-private ("third-sector") joint venture including Aichi Prefecture and on-line local governments, several banks, the Nagoya Railroad, the Chubu Electric Power Co [now that's "supplier financing!"], and automaker Toyota. The designed maximum service frequency is 6 minutes, and the designed maximum speed is 100 km/h (62 mph). The planned running time is 15 minutes, implying a commercial speed of about 20 mph. The estimated construction cost (this probably dates to the the start of construction) was 40.5 billion yen, about $320 million, or $60 million per mile.

So, despite all the hype and claims one might hear (and we expect to hear a lot from the maglev boosters), this is another Japanese "special-purpose" line serving a small niche market. If there was any potential for significantly higher traffic volumes than are now forecast, the line would be built for through service by subway trains.

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 10/16/2003 04:55:00 PM

 
WILL CINCINNATI RAIL HATERS GO "UP THE RIVER?"

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

The Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal is obliged to admonish rail critics as follows:

IT’S OK TO SHOUT,
IT’S OK TO POUT, (but)
YOU’D BETTER NOT LIE,
WE’RE TELLING YOU WHY . . .

‘cause if you do . . . and you get caught . . .

. . . UP THE RIVER,
OH, UP THE RIVER,
OH UP THE RIVER YOU’LL GO, OH, OH!

UP THE RIVER,
OH, UP THE RIVER,
OH, UP THE O-HI-O!

Now that we’ve finished our obligatory (and weak) attempt at comedy (it did “bring down the house” at Line’s End™, the (very) secret (very) hidden retreat of The Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal) . . . we feel obliged to insert a disclaimer. We are, after all, a TRANSIT cabal . . . NOT a RAIL cabal . . . contrary to the pernicious propaganda purveyed in perpetuity by certain SAP™s.

We tend to support rail transit because it can provide high-quality transit alternatives to private autos. However, whatever the benefits of rail might be, it costs big bucks to build. Therefore, it’s perfectly legitimate to ask whether costs are justified by benefits. Honest inquiry . . . honest research . . . honest debate. The key word here is “honest.” However, there are individuals who 1.) don’t like the idea of rail transit, for reasons of self-interest or ideology, and 2.) are willing to resort to all sorts of distortion and deception.

A bit of background: Voters in Cincinnati, OH, and Hamilton County considered a light-rail financing proposal, “Issue 7,” on November 5, 2002. This was to provide the local share of a $2.6 billion transit program. It attracted a “yes” vote of only 31 percent.

As the campaign wound up, LRT supporters filed a complaint with the Ohio Elections Commission (OEC) against the opposition group Alternatives to Light Rail Transit (ALRT), in the person of its leader, Stephan Louis, see www.enquirer.com/editions/2003/02/10/loc_bronson10.html.

The point of contention: a cable-TV ad, paid for opponents, stating that "The Federal Transit Administration rates it one of the worst plans in the country.''

''. . . one of the worst plans in the country . . . ''

Oops.

The point we’re gonna develop below may seem arcane, but it’s not. Many if not most states have laws against making false statements during an election campaign. In practice, “false statements” includes situations where words, spoken or printed, are substantially altered.

FTA rates transit projects on a scale of “Highly recommended, Recommended, and Not Recommended.” This is not at all the same thing as “Good, Bad, and Worst.” For one thing, FTA evaluation criteria include the local funding share, and the availability of funding to pay this. In theory, a city could appropriate 100 percent of the estimated cost of a transit project, deposit the money in trust, then apply for federal funding as a way of boosting the project’s FTA rating.

So, even though the Cincinnati project was one of four rated “Not Recommended,” it’s also true that the cable-TV ad deviated substantially from the wording of the FTA report.

Hence the finding of probable cause by the OEC that light-rail opponents made false statements in the commercial.

WE READ THE NEWS THAT DAY, OH BOY! (With apologies to John, Paul, George and Ringo).

. . . and, to paraphrase actor George C. Scott in the flick Patton (Amazon DVD store, in character: WE LOVE IT; HOW WE LOVE IT SO!

OK, now that we’re finished with the tomfoolery: Despite pre-election polls indicating that “Issue 7” would win, and the huge gap between campaign budgets (supporters raised $750,000; opponents raised just $10,000), the measure lost by a whopping 69 percent. That, to us, suggests that misleading commercials by opponents had little to do with the outcome. Resistance to new taxes, and what might be called the “first-time” effect, probably played a much larger role.

(The “first time” effect refers to a statement, by one consultant during the early 1990s, that rail-financing proposals always get rejected the “first time” around. We Opinionated Ones were skeptical – the record up to that time suggested that if you DIDN’T win the first time around, the project was dead for years, if not decades, thereafter. Since then, events have proven that the consultant was correct: If at first, you won’t succeed, so try, try again . . . and you eventually will. We’ll bet that drives Wendell, Randal, “Railroading America” and so forth up the proverbial tree.)

We’re not sure how this story ended, or if it has in fact ended. The OEC website is located at www.state.oh.us/elc, but we could find nothing related to this matter. The maximum possible penalty would be criminal prosecution and a $10,000 fine, but reprimands are more common, according to the newspaper article cited above.

Rather than leaving you hanging, we thought we’d offer a bit of advice to the opposition::

--Suppose you’re an anti-rail die-hard, and you can’t stand the thought of voters approving light rail for your town. So, during the election campaign, you buy TV ads and declare:

“THIS IDEA IS yadda, yadda, yadda.”

(Say whatever you want; just make sure it’s not provably false.)

--But you realize that your word alone probably won’t sway many voters. So you try this on for size:

“WENDELL COX SAYS THIS IDEA IS yadda, yadda, yadda.”

(He probably did say it . . . after all, he’s Wendell . . . but you’d better make sure that you quoted him directly.)

--The response was still not what you wanted, so you try something along these lines:

“WENDELL COX, A NOTED PHYSICIAN AND SURGEON, SAYS THIS IDEA IS yadda, yadda, yadda.”

(Now you’re on thin ice -- perilously thin. Whatever else Wendell may be, he’s not a “physician and surgeon.” IF the “physician and surgeon” statement is in any way related to the “yadda, yadda, yadda,” get ready for a run-in with your state’s version of OEC.)

In case we haven’t made the point yet . . . let’s use another example, at the expense of that hapless SAP™ laureate, Dennis “Ozone” Polhill:

“THERE’S A GUY OUT IN COLORADO WHO SAYS THAT LIGHT RAIL MOTORS EMIT OZONE!” (Is RTD Passing Gas? May 29, 2002).

(If you try this during an election campaign, you’re in big trouble, bub! As we’ve explained before, light rail motors do NOT emit ozone because they CAN’T – they have no brushes (they run off of a.c., not d.c.) and are sealed airtight.)

In other words, Dennis “Ozone” Polhill’s ozone fantasy is an example of an argument that has been rendered useless – except to the most reckless of anti-rail fanatics – during an election campaign. We here at The Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal, whose mission is to “monkeywrench” the “anti-transit forces,” would like to assure you that other anti-rail arguments have been rendered worthless, and the list is growing!

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 10/13/2003 04:35:00 PM

 
NOT EVERYTHING OF INTEREST TO TRANSITGEEKS CAN BE FOUND ON-LINE

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

We'd like to take this opportunity to remind intrepid websurfers expecially those who also happen to be transit geeks -- that not everything of interest can be found online.

Two interesting articles appeared in the March 2003 issue of the British magazine, Tramways & Urban Transit (we are, after all, a WORLDWIDE cabal . . .) .

"Overhead line: We still haven't found the perfect product" by David Rummey explains "overhead contact system" (OCS) design basics, and explains why I-beams (which draw criticism for their appearance) are preferable for support columns. For a given strength, against tension or "pull" from the overhead wires, an I-beam will be stronger than a round pole. That means that I-beam columns can be smaller and lighter -- and lower in cost -- than round poles.

"Strasbourg: Interurban tram stragety strenghens city system," by C. J. Wansbeek. We'd wind up reproducing half the article if we excerpted everything of interest. The following should suffice:

"The tram has brought a 75% increase in [Compagnie des Transports Strasbourgeois] ridership in its first six years."

Tramways & Urban Transit is published jointly by the Light Rail Transit Association (www.lrta.org) and Ian Allan Publishing Ltd (www.ianallan.com/publishing).

A subscription to Tramways & Urban Transit would be very educational for those who think they do, but actually know very little, about light rail transit such as Wendell Cox, Vic Vreeland, and Randal O'Toole.

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 9/27/2003 04:57:00 PM

 
VIC VREELAND’S A SOREHEAD, HA! HA!

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

We here at the Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal have it on good authority that the inimitable Vic Vreeland, webmaster of the flashy but forgettable “Railroading America” website, see www.railroadingamerica.com is a sorehead. An FOC tells us that whenever anyone puts unfavorable commentary on the “Railroading America” guestbook, it soon disappears . . . as if by magic.

Hmmm.

Was it something we said, Vic? (We’d heard he’s a hothead; sounds like he’s a sorehead, too.)

If we could stop snickering long enough . . . we’d admit that we LIKE “Railroading America” – just as it is!

(. . . we can just hear the mumbling out there in cyberland . . .”those characters have really gone off the deep end this time!”)

If we could stop snickering long enough . . . we’d explain why we LIKE “Railroading America” – just as it is!

Because . . . if The Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal set out to create a wicked parody of an anti-rail website . . . that no thinking person would take seriously after catching on . . . we’d have a tough time matching what Vic Vreeland has already accomplished with “Railroading America!”

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 9/27/2003 04:55:00 PM

 
MONORAIL SAFETY IN JAPAN: MONO-MANIACS GET IT WRONG!

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

We Opinionated Ones would like to add our two cents worth to a debate that flares up every now and then regarding transit safety. Certain monorail enthusiasts have claimed that no monorail passenger fatalities have ever occurred in Japan. This (in common with a lot of other claims by monorail-philes) has inspired a great deal of skepticism.

Your Favorite Transit Pundits have concluded that, absent any documentation to the contrary, the monorail enthusiasts have it right – this time, at least.

Although transport accidents do occur in Japan, together with fatalities, the safety record achieved by the various operators is exceptional. In other words, they log an extremely high number of passenger-miles between accidents.

We estimate that the six "full-scale" Japanese monorails have carried roughly 9 billion passenger-miles over the past four decades – with 75 percent of this carried by one line, the Tokyo Monorail. Daily passenger-mile figures for these six operators, for fiscal year 2000, are as follows:

Chiba, 115,000.
Kitakyushu, 99,000.
Osaka, 325,000.
Shonan, 60,000.
Tokyo, 1,017,000.
Tama, 278,000.

Total, 1,894,000.

Nine billion passenger-miles since 1964 is such a teeny, tiny number -- in the Japanese context -- that it almost defies description.

Tokyo's 12 subway lines carry about 26 million pass-mi per day. The figure for all rail lines within the Kanto metro area (i.e. within a 31-mile radius of Tokyo station) is about 100 million pass-mi per day. Add 60 million per day for the Keihanshin metro area (31-mile radius of Osaka station) and 30 million per day for the Chukyo metro area (25-mile radius of Nagoya station) to get about 200 million rail pass-mi per day in Japan's three largest metro areas. Shinkansen services carry about 120 million pass-mi per day.

We think that monorail enthusiasts would be well advised to avoid overselling the (apparent) Japanese monorail safety record, because they leave themselves wide open for retaliatory “sound bites” like the following:

“Yeah, but conventional rail in major Japanese metro areas carries more traffic every six weeks than monorails ever have!”

Or, since the aggregate passenger-mile total for all rail services nationwide works out to about 660 million per day:

“Yeah, but conventional rail in Japan carries more traffic every two weeks than monorails ever have!”

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 9/16/2003 07:59:00 PM

 
RANDAL O'TOOLE IS DENSE, TOO

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

We here at the Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal have advised you previously that Wendell Cox is not mediocre, but sometimes, he’s dense.

Randal O’Toole is sometimes a little dense, too.

Actually, more than just “a little.”

The Sierra Club began its “Challenge to Sprawl” campaign a couple years back www.sierraclub.org/sprawl, but the kickoff was marred by a careless oversight. The page contained an “environmental impacts calculator” that allegedly defined “efficient urban density” as 500 households per acre.

Now “500 households per acre” does not literally mean 500 households on a patch of land measuring 209 x 209 feet.

It also refers to 250 households on a 148 x 148 foot lot.

[C’mon, Randal . . . C’MON . . . we’re just waiting for you to challenge us on the fact that a square, half-acre lot measures 148 x 148 feet, rounded to the nearest foot.]

Or 125 households on a 104 x 104 foot lot.

Or 50 households on a 66 x 66 foot lot. We’d probably change the lot configuration for more efficient building design, but this could be accommodated in a 13-story tower, four units per floor, 1,100 square feet per unit. 1,200 square feet per unit would require a slightly larger lot (69 x 69 feet).

Granted, such developments are scarce in the U.S. but not in Europe, where multi-story housing developments may be seen alongside large tracts of farmland and other open space – even in small towns.

Granted in addition that not all Americans would want to live in such developments. However, it’s a safe bet that most Americans have no idea of what such developments look like . . . compact urban “enclaves” in the midst of farms, fields and woods . . . nor the ambiance that such development provides. We have it on good authority that some European parents speak highly of such towns that provide a “close to the farm / close to nature” environment in which to raise their children.

But, rather than clarify the meaning of a yardstick such as “500 households per acre,“ Randal and his minions raised a loud – and totally absurd – counter-argument. The following, dated September 11, 2001, was written by Brian Camell and posted on the “Overpopulation.com” website; see here www.overpopulation.com/articles/2001/000088.html

“Initially, when the page went live, the Sierra Club defined efficient urban density as 500 households per acre. Given the average number of people per household in the United Stats [sic], that works out to more than 750,000 people per square mile. Folks ridiculed people for suggesting that the entire world population could fit in Texas, but at the density level the Sierra Club was advocating, all 6 billion people in the world today would be able to fit in an area just 2 percent as large as Texas. The state could hold upwards of 300 billion people at that level of density.”

“Responding to criticism, the Sierra Club quickly took the page down and retooled it, defining efficient urban density as only 100 households per acre. But that's still a population density of 153,600 people per square mile, or a density high enough to put every single man, woman and child in Texas almost 7 times. Forget Texas, the entire world population could fit in Virginia!

“It is almost beyond belief to see a mainstream environmental organization actually advocating population densities that exceed those proposed by the Texas thought experiment. At least the critics of overpopulation claims never actually advocated such an absurdity.”

(Cited source: “Sierra Club exposes 'smart growth' madness,” Randal O'Toole, The Heartland Institute, September 1, 2001.)

(Similar “thinking” along these lines: “The Sierra Club's 'huddled masses' vision,” by Wendell Cox, see here www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=928)

We tend to support their goals, but we have no sympathy for the Sierra Club. It failed to articulate its point clearly, posted a poorly-designed gimmick – the “calculator” – then “wimped out” in response to the guffaws – or braying – from certain quarters.

We Opinionated Ones also think – to paraphrase statistician Daryl Huff (How to Lie with Statistics, WW Norton & Company, 1954,) – that Randal and Wendell tend to use numbers as an inebriate uses a lamppost – more for support than for illumination. An excellent example is provided by none other than . . . Wendell!

We smart-aleck TransitCabalists sometimes don’t know when to quit (but that’s why you like our blog . . . c’mon . . . ‘fess up!). . . but, at times, neither does Wendell. Take a look at the following “Demographia” page and you’ll see what we’re getting at www.demographia.com/db-sierradensctxt.htm. Wendell added (in yellow) several outputs from the Sierra Club calculator.

Note that the units are “population per square mile” and “population per square kilometer.”

Now recall that the Sierra Club calculator used “households per acre.”

Are these units equivalent?

The answer to that question is unequivocal: NO.

The reason: Because they are used to measure two different things, and the issue is more than just one of scale (i.e. that a square mile is larger than an acre).

“Population per square mile” (or square km) means literally that: how many people live on ALL land within a given perimeter. That’s ALL land, used for ALL purposes, not just housing. There are cases where adjusting for open space makes sense (the “textbook” example is the Santa Monica Mountains in Los Angeles, which divide the San Fernando Valley from “the rest of the city”), but this is not the usual practice. And so, land used for streets, freeways, parking lots and so forth . . . together with businesses, industries, schools, parks, playgrounds, churches and so forth . . . generally gets included in “population per square mile” calculations.

“Households per acre” means something quite different: how many dwelling units are built on each acre (or subunit thereof) of RESIDENTIAL land. That’s RESIDENTIAL land, in other words, residential LOTS.

(We wonder if Randal or Wendell have any idea of the percentage of land within the boundaries of any U.S. city that made up of residential lots.)

And so, once again, the one and only . . . well, Mr. Fudge . . . is comparing apples and oranges. But this time, he may have gone a bit too far. We’ve received the following e-mail message here in the Cabalbunker:

“If [Wendell] Cox were a licensed architect or urban planner [he’s not] in my state, he’d get hauled before the board and disciplined for signing his name to that crap.”

Um, yeah.

As Mark Twain observed in Life on the Mississippi

“In the space of one hundred and seventy six years the Lower Mississippi has shortened itself two hundred and forty-two miles. That is an average of a trifle over a mile and a third per year. Therefore, any calm person, who is not blind or idiotic, can see . . . that seven hundred and forty-two years from now the Lower Mississippi will be only a mile and three-quarters long, and Cairo and New Orleans will have joined their streets together and be plodding comfortably along under a single mayor and a mutual board of aldermen” (full quote is here http://www.math.smith.edu/Local/cicchap1/node12.html ).

While we’re on the subject of “that” demographia page:

Kowloon Walled City was an enclave within Hong Kong that remained under Chinese sovereignty after the rest of Kowloon was ceded to Great Britain. We’ll skip the other details in order to better illustrate another example of Wendell’s sophistry. Wendell states that the population density was nearly 5 million – yes, 5,000,000 people – per square mile.

Is there something wrong with this picture?

Uh, yeah, we’d say so.

First, although crowded to the extreme, Kowloon Walled City wasn’t very big – a bit less than 0.01 square mile. Yep, that’s 1/100 of a square mile. About the same area as a square, 530 feet on each side, or a circle, 600 feet in diameter. Prior to evacuation and demolition, an estimated 50,000 people lived in about 300 structures.

“5,000,000 people per square mile” . . . derived from a population of 50,000 people?

If that makes sense to you, then you might want to apply for a job at Wendell’s new amusement park . . . we hear it’s gonna be called WEASEL WORLD.

As for Randal . . . we hear he’s got something planned for Portland . . . sort of an “out in the woods experience.”

(Of course, one of the reasons that Portland’s land-use policies attract broad public support is that people need not go to a theme park for a real “out in the woods” experience.)

And when those theme parks do get built, we have no doubt that the following Mark Twain quote will adorn the entrances:

“There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.”



posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 9/15/2003 11:40:00 AM

 
Wendell Cox Blows a Fuse

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

As just about everyone in cyberland knows by now, a large-scale power outage struck the northeastern U.S. and southern Ontario, Canada, starting on the afternoon of August 14, 2003. The cause has been attributed to overloading of the interconnected networks of transmission lines – “the grid” – serving the region. Deregulation of electric power generation during the early 1990s has imposed loads much greater than grid components, some of them a century old, were designed to carry.

The blackout also led to the following pronouncement by our favorite target for ridicule and satire, self-styled Sage of St. Louis, the one, the only, the . . . well, Mr. Fudge.

“. . . The blackout demonstrated the vulnerability of downtown areas that rely on electric urban rail. But it goes further. Toronto's extensive GO Transit commuter rail system, though dieselized, had to suspend service because of computer failures.”

“. . . And then there is land use. People who live in suburban one and two story houses ("ticky-tack" or not) do not have to depend on elevators, which of course don't operate during blackouts. Nor are they forced to abandon their lofty living quarters out of fear that there would be no way to warn or rescue them in the event of fire.

“. . . The land use lesson is simply this. Higher density urban areas are more vulnerable to all manner of malady. This is most recently illustrated by the SARS epidemic, which got its start in the high-income world's most dense urban area, Hong Kong, took the highest toll in densely populated Beijing and reached its North American peak in densely populated Toronto.

“The blackout is just one more reason to reject the current fashion in planning dogma that would force us out of cars and force us, on the flimsiest of fabrications, to live closer together.”

The full article, posted on the “PLANetizen” website, is here www.planetizen.com/oped/item.php?id=103.

We’ll give Wendell credit for one thing – he did not, as various “Coxwatch” sites reported, call for the abolition of electric transport owing to Blackout 2003. However, his PLANetizen piece inspired the following ditty by an FOC, which we couldn’t resist sharing:

Dah, dah, dah,
a wacky tabacky,
a wacky tabacky,
Has Wendell been smoking,
that wacky tabac?

Or has he lost (ha!)
lost (ha!)
lost his marbles?
Well, I just don’t know what to say!

(We don’t, either.)

We doubt that Wendell Cox has taken up the “Wisdom Weed” (as it’s known among Rastafarians), but his “PLANetizen” post reached a new apex of asininity (. . . but, whatd’ya expect . . . he’s Wendell . . .).

Wendell also inspired a rich variety of commentary on “PLANetizen.” Choice excerpts:

“Is there a cartoonist out there who can take on....(‘da...da...’)...
The adventures of...(more trumpets)...
‘Captain Paveman!!!
...Today, our hero has just learned of a meeting of evil light rail advocates tonight in Metropolis
...can he get there in time to save us? He peels out of the 'sprawl-cave' (disguised as a quick-lube joint on the arterial) and onto the freeway
...but wait! Traffic is backed up! Can he make it? Tune in next time...

[“Captain Paveman!” WE LOVE IT!! How we wish it was one of US who thought of that . . . but maybe it WAS one of us . . . we are, after all, a SECRET cabal . . .]

“So you can get home, then what? I can walk home (single family townhouse), and walk to the store. Those in the suburbs, once home without electricity are stuck there without a chance of getting anywhere else.”

“Has Wendell been so busy formulating his clever essay that he is unable to receive any news of the situation in Arizona and the failure of their hi-tech fossil fuel delivery system? I think that this commuter utopia in AZ has been a great example of the "real" benefits of Mr. Cox's ideas and assertions. I do find it more reasonable to expect more interruptions in petroleum delivery as opposed to more failures with the power grid. Yes these cars are great when you can put some gas in them, but short of continued supply they have about a 300 mile life span, and if we design our world in such way that we cannot get basic needs without the motor car we really are short-sighted fools.

“The commuters of Toronto and New York seemed to fair pretty good in this unusual circumstance, considering the unexpected nature of the event. I haven’t heard of any of them rushing out to buy cars and move to the Midwest as of yet, but I’ll keep looking!

“I have to go, I need to walk to my house so I can drive my truck to the filling station, in case there’s a black out later today and the sidewalks get closed (chance of thunderstorms in the afternoon here, you know!).”

“Where was Mr. Cox last winter when the east coast was being hit by snow storm after snow storm, during each of which, the metroplitan areas commuter rail systems brought people home much quicker than the ‘flexible’ automobiles. . . . Seach mode has its role. ‘Consutancies’ funded by interest groups contribute little to a healthy discussion regarding transportation policy.”

“I live in Brooklyn, my mother lives in suburban Detroit. I WALKED home from work after the blackout. I visited the store on the way, buying food and supplies. My greatest inconvenience was a couple of blisters on my feet and a sweaty night's sleep. My mother, who doesn't have a job, was stuck in her house with an electric garage door she couldn't open, no water from the faucet, a freezer full of rotting food, and her closest outpost of civilization (the strip mall) about 3 miles away. I was home partying on the roof, listening to the ‘sweet symphony’ of your precious cars all night as they moved 1/2 mile per hour to their suburban chateaus (an automobile isn't very ‘flexible’ when it's surrounded on all sides by friends) while my mother worried when she would next experience civilization, quietly contemplating starving in the land of plenty. All in all, my dense urban surroundings were considerably more convenient than the pre-industrial ghost town my mother had to face last Thursday.”

“Right there [on the post] are four anecdotal counter-examples to Mr. Cox's ever-so-thoroughly-researched-by-watching-the-evening-news assertion that Detroit was untouched, plus my own story of the convenience of urbanized, clustered development.”

“Google Search: transit stranded blackout: 1670 hits just days after the biggest [blackout] in history.
“Google Search: motorists stranded snow storm: 2590 hits in the middle of summer.”

“I hope that Mr. Cox tells the Parisians to decamp for the ‘burbs since their reliance of subways and regional rail is just asking for disaster as well inviting disease epidemics. Also, didn't you know a low-density city can survive a nuclear ‘exchange’ better than a high-density metropolis.

“We've probably got about 25 years to get ready for the next major black-out (since the last one was in 1977). Let's start unbuilding New York tomorrow!”

Blackout 2003 caused major disruption to ALL transportation – not just rail systems, which were the focus of mainstream media attention. The media ignored the impact on road transportation – perhaps because this could not be assessed from a few “central” locations.

In New York and other major cities, traffic quickly became gridlocked owing to lack of traffic signals. Lack of ventilation forced closure of tunnels, and gasoline could not be obtained because no electricity was available for pumps. After darkness fell, driving became hazardous owing to lack of street lighting.

Many New Yorkers and other big-city residents were able to get home – on foot – and stock up on food and supplies along the way. Foot traffic became so heavy in New York that it spilled over into streets – a graphic demonstration of how motorists benefit directly from the subway system.

These and other details are covered in an excellent commentary “August 2003 Electric Power Blackout: Massive Disruption of All Transportation”, see here www.lightrailnow.org/features/f_000020.htm,

Wendell stopped short of saying – but hinted rather strongly – that electric transport, in fact all rail transport, is a bad idea because of the posibility of service interruptions resulting from power outages.

An FOC had this to say: “Pardon mon impudence, but by the same ‘logic’ used by Wendell Cox, automobiles should be banned because, after all, girls get pregnant in them . . .”

Hmmm . . .

Another FOC weighed in as follows:

“Cox spent a number of years in L.A., where it is said that ‘there's no such thing as bad publicity.’ Maybe true, but there is such a thing as bad and ludicrous content. If he continues with the ever-more ludicrous pronouncements, he’ll eventually marginalize himself, just like [Ross] Perot did.”

(Which would mean, among certain other things, that we smart-aleck TransitCabalists would have to find someone else to serve as our prime target for ridicule and satire . . .)

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 9/10/2003 02:48:00 PM

 
WEAPONS OF MASS DISAPPEARANCE STASHED IN NON-EXISTENT TUNNEL NETWORK?

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

We here at The Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal tend to frown on “conspiracy” theories. They provide all-too-simple explanations for complex problems and situations.

But there is such a thing as “disinformation,” and we can’t help wondering if earlier reports of an extensive tunnel network beneath the streets of Baghdad fits into this category to some extent.

President Bush announced the start of the Iraq war on March 19, 2003. The Iraqi regime collapsed on April 9, and President Bush declared the end of “major combat operations” on May 2. The U.S. State Department lifted its ban on travel by U.S. citizens to Iraq on July 15. This had been in effect 12 years – since the beginning of Gulf War I in 1991. The Big Bad Baghdaddy, aka “Da Guy Wid Da Mustache,” was last seen and filmed in public on or about April 9, but is presumed to be alive, in hiding . . . somewhere.

Meanwhile, we Opinionated Ones note, with interest, that we could find no online items about this story dated after April 9.

The prime source for the CBS “60 Minutes” report in February 2003 was an Iraqi scientist, imprisoned during the 1991 Gulf War who later escaped. This source stated that “Da Guy Wid Da Mustache” got hold of plans drawn up for transit tunnels, then told the military to build them for weapons of mass destruction. This eventually became a “very complex network, multi-layered tunnels” extending more than 60 miles. But the scientist never saw the tunnels himself. An analyst for the military-affairs think tank GlobalSecurity.org (see here globalsecurity.org) stated that few people have, and added “There is tons of conjecture on this subject right now, but there's been no official confirmation or official imagery.” see here straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/iraqwar/story/0,4395,182204,00.html.

(An explosion on June 16 destroyed a car and injured several people in a “road tunnel” in central Baghdad (see here www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/special/iraq/1954550 ), but this “tunnel” is probably better described as a “long underpass.”)

A 60-mile network of large tunnels, beneath a densely-populated city of three million people, that no one has seen?

One possible explanation: Iraqi disinformation, intended to discourage the U.S. from invading. However, if this is true, then the previous regime may have received a rude surprise in December 2002. As U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld put it:

“They've got enormous miles and miles and miles of underground tunneling, I don't know how inspectors on the surface of the Earth can even know what's going on in the underground facilities.”

It is also possible, of course, that the tunnels do exist, to an extent long known by U.S. intelligence, but not yet described in detail to avoid compromising intelligence sources and methods.

An urban legend? We Opinionated Ones tend to shy away from simple explanations, and this is one. Baghdad is large enough and populous enough to justify a subway, and the previous regime wanted to build one. The previous regime also wanted to build all sorts of nasty weapons, and the facilities required for development and concealment.

In any case, we know we’re not the only ones waiting for the full story to emerge.

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 9/10/2003 02:34:00 PM

 
JUST BECAUSE I’M PARANOID DOESN’T MEAN THEY’RE NOT OUT TO GET ME!

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

Some things speak for themselves:

They can't refute me so they try to discredit me personally. There's a real campaign to destroy me. I recognize that.

Wendell Cox, Rail critic may sign on to SM battle, by Katherine Marks, Staff Writer, North County Times, June 1, 2003; see www.nctimes.net/news/2003/20030601/64211.html.

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 9/03/2003 06:12:00 PM

 
LIGHT RAIL VOTE IN IRVINE (ORANGE COUNTY) CA – Addendum, part 1

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

We here at the Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal have received a bit of feedback to our coverage of the June 2003 light-rail vote in Irvine, CA.

1.) What is a “Grand Jury,” and

2.) Why did the one in Orange County investigate the CenterLine light rail project?

In brief, each of California’s 58 counties is required by law (the “California Penal Code”) to establish a panel, including either 19 or 23 people (depending on population), charged with investigating alleged civil and criminal violations. Each Grand Jury sits for a term of one year. The Grand Jury has the power to investigate the administration and affairs of any local government, special district or other public agency within the county. Public agencies are required by law to respond to findings and recommendations.

All matters before a Grand Jury are confidential.

Investigations may begin at the discretion of Grand Jury members and, in some counties, in response to concerns or complaints from citizens.

The following are excerpts from the Orange County Superior Court website, see here www.occourts.org/grndjury.

“The California Penal Code is silent on the matter of providing public input to the Grand Jury. Thus, the Grand Jury is under no legal mandate to make any kind of response to correspondence received. However, the Orange County Grand Jury has chosen to receive such letters to give it the ability to identify areas of government that may merit investigation within Orange County. All correspondence is maintained as confidential and not subject to review by any agency.”

“All letters will be acknowledged. However, action by the Grand Jury may be limited by time, insufficient evidence to warrant a study, or matters not under the Grand Jury’s purview. All letters will also receive a close out letter. This letter may refer the individual to other agencies that may help resolve the issue. Due to the confidentiality of all matters before the Grand Jury, the response will not disclose the details of the investigation or its results.”

“The Grand Jury does not act as an ombudsman for county citizens. However, the Grand Jury will review all concerns and may produce a study on the issue, if the concern is deemed appropriate. Otherwise, no further action will be taken.”

“The Grand Jury cannot resolve any issues involving policy. Policy is set by elected officials. Resolution of policy issues may be addressed by contacting the respective public agency.

“The single method the Grand Jury communicates with the public is by issuance of the “Final Report” (see California Penal Code §933). These reports may be found in local libraries and on the Grand Jury web site.” [This is incorrect, annual Grand Jury “Final Report” documents for Orange County are not available online. Grand Juries typically release a number of reports each year; and those by the Orange County Grand Jury are available here www.occourts.org/grndjury/gjreports.asp ]

-----

Now that you know what a Grand Jury is . . . and certain particulars related to how it operates . . . you may be anticipating our answer to the second question:

Why did the [Grand Jury] in Orange County investigate the CenterLine light rail project?

We hate to let you down, but we don’t know, and the “whole truth” may never be known. Remember: all proceedings before a California Grand Jury are confidential, and all related correspondence is confidential, not subject to review by any agency.

“Holy potential for mischief, Batman!”

An FOC has this to say about the 1998-1999 Grand Jury’s light rail report:

The decision to build light rail, wise or unwise, was a public policy matter. But somebody convinced the Grand Jury that [Orange County Transportation Authority] violated the PENAL CODE.

“Only in California”? Well, what would YOU do if you wanted to kill CenterLine and were looking for a low-budget, low-effort, low-risk strategy?

. . . it’s obvious that anti-rail factions orchestrated a complaint, then fed a barrage of propaganda to Grand Jurors, who, wittingly or unwittingly, played along . . .

. . . and if you check this out, what you DON’T find will be more interesting than what you DO . . .

Your Favorite Transit Pundits took up the challenge above == and things unfolded as by script.

Although the 1999 report received much publicity, and was circulated far and wide by the usual cast of rail opponents, not one word about what triggered the investigation was printed. No surprise: the Grand Jury report was silent on this matter. It’s unlikely that this or other details would come to light given that Grand Jury proceedings are confidential.

As we’ve already noted, the “Final Report” for 1999 is not available online; this may, or may not, contain additional information about the light rail report.

We’d like to know the names of the 1998-1999 Orange County Grand Jurors. We assume this information is in the public record, but it is not available online. We suspect this would lay to rest a rather wild “conspiracy” rumor: that light-rail opponents got on the panel and instigate the investigation. We avoid unfounded rumors and mention this one only to discredit it. It doesn’t take much to qualify as a Grand Juror (see here www.occourts.org/grndjury/#qualif). The time commitment (3-4 days per week, possibility of evening and weekend meetings) and meager compensation ($50 per day, maximum $250 per week, plus mileage) suggests that the lineup of people waiting to serve as Grand Jurors is not very long. Grand jurors, as the saying goes, give up a year of their lives. We Opinionated Ones believe that few if any anti-rail agitators would be willing to do this, given the additional fact that Grand Juries are kept busy by matters other than rail-bashing.

Although you can find the 1999 report on Wendell’s website (here, www.publicpurpose.com/lib-orcorail.htm), you might want to download the “official” version from the Orange County Courts website, here www.occourts.org/grndjury/GJLtRail.pdf; 17 pages, PDF format. We’ve excepted, from Page 2 (“official”), the paragraph outlining how the investigation was conducted:

“METHOD

“The Grand Jury gathered data from many sources including: the federal government, cities and agencies that have developed light rail, OCTA, academia, and technical sources listed in the Bibliography. The Grand Jury analyzed transit performance data and past forecasts to derive the actual performance of the light rail segment of transit systems as compared to past projections of that performance. Past projections compared to actual performances establish what Orange County could expect from a similar light rail system. The Grand Jury conducted interviews with the OCTA, transportation and economics experts in academia, and Los Angeles “Blue Line” operators and planners.”

Our next excerpt was inspired by . . . Wendell Cox!

No, we’re not kidding!!

The Weasel King notes that the report is “presented without alteration” on his website.

Seeing this, Your Favorite Transit Pundits decided to make a couple of . . . well, alterations. We excerpted the “Bibliography” – deleting ONLY those items prepared by or for the Orange County Transportation Authority. We then separated, but did not delete, items prepared by public agencies or governments other than OCTA:

(Transit Profiles: Agencies in Urbanized Areas Exceeding 200,000 Population, 1996 National Transit Report Year, Federal Transit Administration, 1996 National Transit Database. Highway Statistics 1996, Office of Highway Information Management, Office of Policy Development, Federal Highway Administration.)

(Draft Technical Appendix for the 1998 RTP, Part II, Nov 1997, Southern California Association of Governments.)

(The Urban Rail Project, Scoping Report, August 18, 1998, presented by Katz & Associates/Spencer La Blac & Associates, La Jolla, CA 92037.)

(Urban Rail Study, Public Outreach Results Milestone January 3, 1999, prepared by Katz & Associates/Spencer La Mar & Associates.)


Wait’ll you see what was left . . .

Cars and Demographics, Lave, C., Fall 1992, Access No. 1, 4-11, University of California Transportation Center, Berkeley, California 94720.

Improving Transportation in the San Fernando Valley, Gordon, P., & Moore, J.E. II, & Poole, R.W. Jr., & Rubin, T.A., January 1999, Policy Study #249, Reason Public Policy Institute, Los Angeles, CA 90034.

Light Rail in Milwaukee, Cox, W., March 1998, Wisconsin Policy Research Institute Report, Volume 1 Number 3, Wisconsin Policy Research Institute, Inc., Thiensville, WI 53092.

New Rail Investments-a Review, Richmond, J.E.D. June 29, 1998, A. Albert Taubman Center for State and Local Government, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138.

The Proposed Central Florida Light Rail Transit System Described and Evaluated, 1998, Florida Public Policy Institute, P.O. Box 13295, Tallahassee, FL 32317-3295.

Bad Marriage: Consultants, Public Funds, Lave, C., June 30, 1998, The Los Angeles Times, Op, Ed Section.

Where’s the Debate in the Planning of Light Rail? Mootchnik, D., December 1998, The Los Angeles Times, Op-Ed Section.


Oh.

. . . it’s obvious that anti-rail factions orchestrated a complaint, then fed a barrage of propaganda to Grand Jurors, who, wittingly or unwittingly, played along . . .

(We never dreamed it would be quite so obvious.)

We’ll continue this story in our next post.

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 9/03/2003 05:59:00 PM

 
Moskovskiy Metropolitena imeni V. I. Lenina

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

An FOC turned us on to the following excerpt regarding plans for expansion of the Moscow Metro. Author is Yuri Popov; source is "Moscow Metro Projects for the Future" on the Moscow page of the metroPlanet website www.metropla.net/eu/mos/moskva.htm

"The most controversial project among the new rail modes is a "monorail" system, which in reality is just an automated guideway transit (AGT) system very similar to AGT systems found in many north-american airports. This project finds fierce resistance from both the public and transit planning organizations, but nevertheless is proceeding at huge pace. Some sources quote personal interest of current mayor [Yurii] Luzhkov, who intends to patent this technology in Russia (with all the resulting financial benefits). Most of the controversy arises from the fact that taxpayer money is being spent on a low-passenger-volume transportation system in a city with the busiest subway system in the world and clear need for high-passenger-volume transit. Moreover, a streetcar line exactly along the route of "monorail" system was planned for many decades, and this line would connect three of the busiest streetcar routes (11, 17, 27). A streetcar link would be of similar passenger-volume capacity, but would provide a connection between the two independent streetcar systems in Moscow, allowing greater flexibility in managing streetcars and possible routing destinations. In spite of all the above, the AGT system will most likely be completed by the end of 2003, the next mayor elections. The route will link two metro stations "Timiryazevskaya" (line 9) and "VDNH" (line 6) with four intermediate stops. Many agree that this will be one of the most wasteful transit projects in Moscow history."

The full article is at www.metropla.net/eu/mos/mos-projects.htm

(And no, Your Favorite Transit Pundits are not going to add our own monorail disclaimer, because the opinions above are those of the writer – not us!)

By the way, the full formal title of the Moscow Metro has apparently not been changed, and remains “Moskovskiy Metropolitena imeni V. I. Lenina,” literally “Moscow Metro named for V.I. Lenin.” However, the Revolution Man is not mentioned on tickets and passes, which are lettered simply, “Moskovskiy Metropoliten.”

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 8/27/2003 09:10:00 PM

 
"Big Tom" & His 90-mph Van

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

The Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal is pleased to bring to you the following commentary on speed, inspired by lugubrious lamentations overheard by an FOC about “all those cars over there [on a nearby highway] going faster than the train].

We’re opinionated ( . . . as you know by now . . . ), and we don’t think that public transit has to provide a minute-for minute match with auto travel times. In addition, we don’t think that transit agencies can afford to run at the fastest speed possible between stops just to entertain passengers.

Not convinced, eh? Well, consider the following:

When Bay Area Rapid Transit opened in 1972-1974, trains hit 80 between most stations away from downtown San Francisco and Oakland. This was true even between, for example, Ashby and downtown Berkeley, which are just a bit more than a mile apart.

However, as BART management gradually learned ( . . . the hard way . . . ) how to operate a real railroad in the real world, they gradually realized that 80 mph whenever possible was unnecessary and wasteful.

Unnecessary because such speed is not needed to keep the schedules. The Richmond -- Fremont run, for example, has never been advertised for anything faster than 1 hour (= 40 mph) -- and schedules are significantly more reliable today than they were back then.

Wasteful because unnecessary speed between stations hikes power. Acceleration to 50, rather than 80, slashes power consumption for that acceleration cycle by more than 60 percent. (An FOC tells us that BART and Philadelphia’s PATCO once conducted an informal "competition" to see who could achieve the lowest power consumption). Excess speed also hikes maintenance costs by imposing additional wear and tear on vehicles.

Today, BART trains no longer hit 80 in regular service. The maximum speed, through the Transbay Tube, is about 70. The marginal increase in travel time over most of the system is measured in tenths of a second; even through the Tube (about 5 miles between Embarcadero and West Oakland stations), the slower speed adds less than a minute. Yeah, OK, the ride may be less "exciting," but it's also quieter, and there's no practical reason to run at 80 even between these stations. (The speed-time curves in various textbook illustrate this formally.)

In Dallas, the DART light rail system achieves an overall average "passenger" or "commercial" speed of 20 mph. Timings between some station pairs are faster, but the systemwide average is 20.

Certain members of the opposition love to complain that passenger speeds in this range are "too slow."

We wonder what all the whining is about.

The average travel distance per passenger on the DART rail system is 5.3 miles. Therefore, the average travel time is about 16 minutes.

Hike the "average" passenger speed to 25 mph, and the average travel time becomes 13 minutes.

We think that a three-minute time saving saving per person -- which the "average" person might not even notice -- is simply not worth the investment required to achieve a commercial speed of 25 mph overall.

Another problem: higher speeds tend to generate longer average travel distances, and this can play havoc if you're not prepared. The most spectacular almost-example is the Blue Line in Los Angeles . . . we say "almost-example" because the line had many more cars available than were thought necessary during planning. (The initial order, you see, included cars for the then-unbuilt Green Line).

You may enjoy the following narratives by two FOCs that sum up the issue:

“The American public has some growing up to do when it comes to ‘speed for speed's sake.’ Years ago, my homeboy ‘Big Tom,’ an exceptionally skilled driver and anarchist, demonstrated his contempt for the California Highway Patrol as follows. He brazenly drove between Los Angeles and San Francisco as fast as his van would go – literally. That was 90 on flat sections, and 100 down hills. But the end-to-end tome was an underwhelming 5 1/2 hours [= 73 mph]. Back then, six hours [= 67 mph] was a reasonable estimate for this drive, assuming no traffic jams and no stops [and no encounters with ‘Ponch and Jon’]. The van used so much gas – you could see the gas needle move – that he had to stop four times for gas. OK, I admit, it was fun, but we didn’t get there much faster. Public transit should NOT cater to this impulse.”

The other FOC writes:

“It’s true that transit is slower than driving for many trips, but this shouldn’t be the only consideration. For example: If you’re 35-45 (non-rush-hour) minutes away from Manhattan, San Francisco, or Washington DC by car [roughly 30-40 miles], you may have high-quality transit or commuter-rail option that will take about an hour. So, why use transit (which, in New York and the Bay Area, ain’t cheap for such a distance)? Well, if you have to ask, you’ve probably never tried to find parking in Manhattan or downtown San Francisco. Also, ‘driving time’ is ‘wasted time,’ unlike ‘transit-riding time’ which I can use for reading or working on my laptop. And so, why not transit, even though it's 15-25 minutes ‘slower?’”




posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 8/26/2003 06:23:00 PM

 
Back to the Future

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

This quote appeared in the March 2003 issue of the British magazine, "Tramways & Urban Transit."

Recent road work in Nottingham unearthed a hundred-year-old section of tramway track. A spokesman for Nottingham Express Transit (the current light rail transit project www.itsnottingham.info/ttptnet2.htm) said:

"It's interesting to come face to face with this little piece of history. While it was the introduction of cars that originally killed off trams, it is now the burgeoning number of cars that has prompted their return."

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 8/26/2003 06:01:00 PM

 
THIRD TIME'S THE CHARM IN PHOENIX

Home of More Transit Links Than You can Possibly Check(tm), Unless you have no life other than websurfing

"Truth passes through three phases: 1) It is ridiculed. 2) It is violently opposed. 3) It is accepted as self-evident." Albert Schopenhouer. In the United States, rail is currently passing through Phase Two.


From the Cabalmaster:

The Secret Worldwide Transit Cabal is pleased to bring you the following details of light rail progress in Phoenix.

On March 14, 2000, Phoenix voters approved a 0.4-percent sales tax for public transit, including light rail. "Yeas" outnumbered "nays" by two to one. This was the third attempt to win voter approval for major new transit funding in Phoenix. According to the Federal Transit Administration, the plan attracted the third-highest "yes" vote aver recorded for a U.S. transit-funding ballot measure. Details of previous transit and highway funding measures are here www.azrail.org/transit/election_history.htm.

The plan includes Sunday bus service, expanded bus service, and 24 miles of light rail to be built over a 16-year period. The official Valley Metro Rail website is here www.valleyconnections.com. The advocacy group "Friends of Transit" also has a website, here www.friendsoftransit.org.

The 20.3-mile light rail starter segment will connect Phoenix Spectrum Mall (formerly known as Chris-Town Mall) and central Phoenix with Tempe and Mesa to the east. It will serve Sky harbor International Airport by a connection with the planned airport people mover. Construction is planned to start in spring 2004. The first segment, between Phoenix Central Station and Tempe Transit Center, is scheduled to open on December 16, 2006. The remainder will be completed by August 2007.

The estimated cost is $1.03 billion, with federal funds anticipated to pay $500 million. Owing to Bush Administration plans to limit federal funding to $80 million per year to any one project, Phoenix plans to issue $500 million in bonds to provide an adequate cash flow during the peak of the construction period (2004-2006). (This will cost an estimated $205 million in debt service -- way to go, W., stick it to local taxpayers! Of course, the Bushmen are probably not pleased that those . . . miscreants . . . voted for the project.)

The vehicle design, "Concept V," was unveiled in January 2002; details here www.valleyconnections.com/images/press/VehicleConceptFactsht.pdf and here www.valleyconnections.com/images/press/ConceptVUnveiling.pdf. Design prototypes for the 26 stations envision a series of towers with white louvers to create areas of shade for waiting passengers, a concept dubbed "cool screen." See here fore details www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0308lightrail08.html. Phoenix also plans a transit-oriented development "zoning overlay" diatrict to guide development around light rail stations phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2003/02/17/daily19.html.

FTA issued a Record of Decision on the Final Environmental Impact Statement in January 2003; see here phoenix.gov/NEWSREL/rodanno.html. This clears the way for the final design phase (expected to begin in summer 2003) and permits the cities to begin purchasing land. FTA reported in February that the Phoenix light rail project is one of the best "new starts" in the country, and was rated "highly recommended." Details are here www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df02242003.shtml#Phoenix. Phoenix mayor Skip Rimsza said that this rating "virtually assures" eventual federal funding; A Full Funding Grant Agreement is expected in early 2004.

Valley Metro Rail held a contest to select a name and logo for the new light rail service; details here www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0430ruelas0430Z7.html. Details of the nine "finalists," selected by a citizens' committee, are here www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0516lightrailname.html. The Valley Metro board will select the "winner" (phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2003/04/14/daily47.html), but the planned June 18 date was postponed to fall.

Projections of rapid growth -- the regional population is expected to double by 2030 -- have led to predictions of gridlock if Maricopa County voters do not renew a half-cent sales tax for transportation set to expire in 2005. The Maricopa Association of Governments (the metropolitan planning organization, or "MPO") is considering three draft proposals, emphasizing "freeways," "arterials" or "mass transit;" details here www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0515mag15.html.

Phoenix's transit director explains the case for light rail here URL is:
www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/business/articles/0518lightrail18.html. Not everybody is pleased. Support from the Arizona Congressional delegation has been, at best, lukewarm. Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl appear to have a visceral dislike for the project. Check this link www.phxnews.com/fullstory.php?article=188 to read a weak attempt at satire; "Light Rail Man," a rewrite of "Nowhere Man" by The Beatles, aimed at Phoenix Mayor Skip Rimsza (These guys are stealing our act!). On this page, you'll also see a link to a piece titled "On May Day Celebrate Capitalism," written by Edwin A. Locke of the Ayn Rand Institute.

Aside from lugubrious lamentations by Libertarian lamebrains, light rail has also generated the type of problems, and problem-solving, associated with any large public works project. The 13.4 miles of line within Phoenix would be built in medians and paved only at intersections. Early in February 2003, business owners along Central Avenue complained that rock-ballasted track would "permanently scar" Central. However, paving the track would add $3 to $4 million, depending on material: "pavers" or stamped concrete. A local improvement district is one of the options under consideration. Early in May, the Citizens Transit Commission approved combining two statiions into one to improve access to Gate Way Community College, and for Sky Harbor Airport employees. Final approval by the Valley Metro board is required; details here www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0509stations09.html.

The city council in the upscale suburb of Scottsdale voted to designate Scottsdale Road as a possible future transit corridor, but council members made clear that they don't want light rail. One called light rail a "heinous" option, and others stated that light rail would "devastate" the "tourist-town atmosphere" of Scottsdale www.azcentral.com/specials/special28/articles/0226netransit26.html. (Gotta keep the hoi polloi away from our golf courses and country clubs!)

Light rail is a popular idea elsewhere in the region. An 18-month, $2.5 million study was approved by the Phoenix city council early in 2003 to investigate a light-rail extension from Phoenix Spectrum mall to Metrocenter Mall in North Phoenix. This would extend about four miles with about four stations. The target date for completion is 2010. See here for details. phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2003/01/06/daily15.html.

And, as a postscript -- that's about all he deserves -- we'll note that Wendell is VERY displeased.

The Wonderful Wizard of Fudge got one of his usual screeds published in the "East Valley Tribune," Mesa, AZ ("Playing with Trains," August 6, 2002). He claims, among other things, that "Light Rail Results in Increased Traffic Congestion in Portland, Dallas, and St. Louis" (no, no, no, we're not making this up; see www.jeffersonreview.com/articles/2002/081202/lightrail.htm; the "Jefferson Review" is a Libertarian-leaning online publication). This drew a snappy response by Bill Becwar and published online by The New New Electric Railway Journal here.

(Try not to laugh too loudly as you read Wendell's windy wordplay . . .)

posted by The Cabalmaster, Master of All Transit-dom 7/17/2003 07:54:00 PM