From: "Friends of Transit" To: Subject: Setting the record straight on transportation plan Date: Thursday, April 08, 2004 10:31 AM Setting the record straight on transportation plan - Tempe Mayor Neil Giuliano is chair of the Transportation Policy Committee of the Maricopa Association of Governments. As chair of the Transportation Policy Committee, it is disappointing to see conscientious policy work by citizens and elected officials continually misrepresented in the Tribune by Becky Fenger and John Semmens regarding the Valley's comprehensive Regional Transportation Plan. For months, Ms. Fenger and Mr. Semmens have erroneously stated that the light rail portion of the plan will increase air pollution and traffic congestion. Both of these statements are incorrect and reflect a gross misinterpretation of the findings of an environmental impact statement conducted on behalf of Valley Metro Rail. They also continue to misrepresent the cost per boarding for light rail. Allow me to make four key points: 1) The plan is much more than light rail. The Regional Transportation Plan encompasses improvements across the entire Valley, including hundreds of miles of new and improved freeways; expanded and more frequent bus and bus rapid transit service; a tripling of vanpool and dial-a-ride services; hundreds of miles of major street improvements; numerous safety improvements; neighborhood mitigation projects; bicycle and pedestrian facilities; and more commuter choices overall. Only 15 percent of the plan is dedicated to light rail, and this funding is for 27.5 miles of extensions to the initial 30 miles already being funded. The critics continue to center debate around the small portion of the plan that includes light rail, ignoring the other 85 percent of the plan. 2) The environmental impact statement shows no increase in pollution due to light rail. Light rail is electrically powered and is virtually emission free. The EIS includes an air quality analysis table that examines existing and predicted worst-case concentrations at 11 intersections and one park-and-ride lot. These 12 sites were chosen because they are heavily traveled, very congested, or located where the greatest air quality impacts could occur. Most importantly, the EIS shows there are NO existing or projected violations of the federal carbon monoxide standards in the 12 locations. Despite rail opponents' repeated claims that light rail will increase pollution, the fact is that at every monitor except one, emission levels are projected to decrease from their current levels. This means that emission levels in the future will be lower than they are today. In fact, predicted emission levels at these locations are so low, it's erroneous to suggest that these sites are unhealthy or polluted. What the EIS shows, rather, is a minute increase in emission levels at eight of these sites if rail is built. That is because there will be an increase in cars traveling to the park-and-ride lots and stopped at intersections. The Federal Transit Administration has given the Valley's light rail project its highest rating in the environmental category in its annual evaluation of rail projects nationwide. The Environmental Protection Agency has also approved the Valley's light rail project. 3) Light rail does not increase congestion. The opponents of a multimodal future for our region also continue to state that, "Valley Metro Rail's own figures show that light rail will increase congestion." This is absolutely false, and again is a misrepresentation of the EIS. The documentation instead clearly shows that light rail reduces congestion by reducing vehicle travel on some of our Valley's most congested arterial streets. What the critics misinterpret as "congestion" is a slight increase in vehicle hours of travel, but this change is the result of a variety of factors, such as changes in travel patterns. The fact is, with or without light rail, congestion will increase with future growth. Light rail will reduce congestion by eliminating 8.3 million trips off our roadways each year. 4) Cost per passenger boarding will be $6, NOT $12. Mr. S emmens and Ms. Fenger continue to erroneously claim that the system will cost $12 per passenger boarding. This figure, which is published in the project's Annual New Starts Report, is derived through a complex federal formula designed to evaluate the number of new transit riders (both bus and rail) and what the cost of those riders will be based on the entire cost of building and maintaining the system. It includes the annual cost of every new rider on the entire system and includes bus costs and riders as well as rail costs and riders. In addition, that figure is reported in inflationary dollars for the year 2020. If you remove the bus portion and bring the figure to today's dollars, the cost to build and operate the light rail system is about $6 per passenger. If you look at just operating and maintenance costs, the average is less than $2 per boarding. NEIL GIULIANO COMMENTARY