Moving toward Illinois legislation to merge metropolitan transit agencies

Limited budgets. Lots of traffic. Multiple regional actors, including city and suburban officials. A legislative process plus backroom conversations. All of these are involved in developing a proposal for merging Chicago area transit agencies:

Photo by Mike Wojan on Pexels.com

The proposal is part of a broader look at transit funding, as the region’s public transit agencies face a combined $730 million budget hole once federal COVID-19 relief funding starts running out, which could be as soon as 2025. Transit agencies have warned failure to plug the financial hole could lead to catastrophic service cuts and fare increases, and the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning was tasked by the Illinois General Assembly with developing recommendations to overhaul transit, which were delivered to lawmakers in December.

The decision to introduce legislation is a signal of how some lawmakers and civic organizations want to proceed. Already, the transit agencies have sought more state funding, while the civic organizations and lawmakers say funding must be linked to changes to the way transit is overseen. But debate about consolidating the transit agencies and funding could prove thorny in Springfield.

Still, merging the transit agencies has garnered some support. The Civic Federation, a business-backed Chicago watchdog group, recently endorsed the idea, and Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle also previously expressed her support for the concept…

The proposal set to be introduced this week in Springfield is expected to replace the Regional Transportation Authority, which coordinates financing for the agencies, with a new Metropolitan Mobility Authority. The new agency would oversee the operation of buses, trains and paratransit, rather than having the CTA, Metra and Pace each operate their own services.

The proposal would revamp the number of board members on the new agency and who appoints them. The current system is complex and layered, regional planners have pointed out, with 47 board members across the agencies appointed by 21 elected officials. That has given nearly two dozen state, suburban and city officials varying levels of influence on the transit boards.

There is a lot to be worked out. No one community can address this issue. Even if the big city in a region has a great system, that city does not stand alone as people and business moves throughout the region. Indeed, in many regions, many of the jobs and much of the activity takes place in the suburbs where driving is even more prominent. Thus, I am in favor of this if it can improve transit options, create budget efficiencies, and help the region plan for the future.

One outcome is consistent in postwar era in the United States: we tend to get more roads and increasing traffic. In many regions, there are multiple competing interests regarding transportation. Do suburbanites want mass transit lines? What infrastructure already exists? Who controls the budgets? What political processes do ideas and plans need to work through? In a country devoted to driving, it can be hard to promote alternative options.

What you see when you drive in American cities: signs

After seeing plenty of vehicles and buildings while driving recently through cities, I also observed a lot of signs. When driving at fast speeds, large signs are necessary so that drivers can read them and so that they catch people’s attention.

Photo by Charles Parker on Pexels.com

What can be learned from these signs? Here are a few of the domains:

-Information about roadways. From street signs to exit signs, there is a uniformity to information drivers need to navigate. These signs can help a driver navigate a complicated city full of other vehicles and buildings.

-Information about goods and services. Advertising signs are all over the place. They might be for a particular brand, a product, a store or restaurant, or an experience. While road signs are bland and to the point, advertisements tend use more images and text to deliver a particular message.

-Information about local attractions. These could be simple notes on highway signs for a stadium or park or more elaborate advertisement for specific local institutions.

In other words, there are a lot of signs vying for a driver’s attention. If there is time to read even most of the signs (such as being stuck in traffic or at an intersection), they can reveal much about the location and the city. But, add all these signs to the buildings and vehicles and it can be hard to take it all in.

What you see when you drive in American cities: buildings

Continuing a short series on what I observed of cities in recent driving journeys, I noticed many buildings. This included residences, businesses, office buildings, schools, skyscrapers in the bigger cities, and more. Some are newer, some are older.

Photo by Joey Kyber on Pexels.com

Driving by at a fast speed, it is easier to observe a sizable building. A really tall structure might be visible for miles. A long structure means a driver has a few seconds to see the building while driving by. Small buildings go by really quickly. The single-family home, an American favorite, is hard to see well at high speeds.

The scale between vehicles, buildings, and roadways can be interesting. Highways might be above the ground, at ground level, or below ground. Because of the highway speed, they are not at the same spatial scale as local roadways. Buildings can tower over a roadway, making it difficult to see over or around them.

The view from the highway does not always present the best side of buildings. In denser areas, the back side of buildings tend to face the highway as their primary orientation is toward a local street. However, some buildings, including suburban office buildings, are set back a bit more from highways and offer different views. Driving down major roads (not highways) in cities can often present a range of structures within a short amount of space. In a land where land uses can be rather uniform in places, the variety of urban structures can make for a fun sight.

While this is not new, I was reminded on these recent drives that many American buildings have hard or cold exteriors. This means a lot of brick, stone, metal, or glass. These materials might be durable or fit a particular style, but this does not mean the buildings necessarily look inviting or warm.

What you see when you drive in American cities: lots of motor vehicles

In recently driving in and around several big cities, I was struck by what I could (and could not) see. I certainly observed a lot of motor vehicles on highways and roads.

Photo by Miguel Barrera on Pexels.com

It is long evident that Americans prioritize cars and trucks on their roads. There might be room for some pedestrians (be safe!), mass transit, and bicyclists and scooter users but these are not as numerous as all of the cars and trucks.

The range of vehicles really does run the gamut. On the same major roads, one can find all sorts of trucks (delivery trucks, dump trucks, tankers, car carriers, etc.) and cars ranging from expensive luxury models to those who look pieced together to newer electric vehicles. If I wanted to see what Americans are driving for personal and business trips, I would recommend driving some of the highways that go right through urban centers and one can observe a wide variety.

Even with at least some people working from home, there are plenty of vehicles at many hours of the day. For many residents and companies, it is easiest to go via vehicle than other option. Driving is still a preferred method, even in cities with busy roadways.

If a driver truly wanted to be safe and only focus on the road around them, there is plenty to see. On many of these busy roads, tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of vehicles might pass by each day.

Accounting for the “iron law of congestion”

Why is building more lanes to address traffic issues not the best way to go? See the iron law of congestion:

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

There’s a name for the principle behind that apparent paradox: induced demand. Economist Anthony Downs is often credited with first articulating this “iron law of congestion” in 1962, as construction crews were hacking interstates through American cities. Downs published a seminal paper with a stark warning: “On urban commuter expressways, peak-hour traffic congestion rises to meet maximum capacity.” In other words, adding lanes won’t cure snarled traffic; the additional car space inevitably invites more trips, until gridlock is as bad as ever.

Downs was not the first to sound an alarm about the futility of expanding urban roadways — not by a long shot. In 1932, an association representing streetcars warned that “as fast as improvements are made in existing arteries of travel … they are saturated by an increasing volume of traffic.” In 1955, urban observer Lewis Mumford wrote a series of essays in the New Yorker titled “The Roaring Traffic’s Boom,” in which he memorably compared a highway planner widening a congested highway to “the tailor’s remedy for obesity — letting out the seams of trousers and loosening the belt. [T]his does nothing to curb the greedy appetites that have caused the fat to accumulate.”

Downs’ iron law applies not only to U.S. cities, which have grown more traffic-jammed despite billions of dollars in fresh pavement, but also to those around the world. Highway expansions in Norway and Britain haven’t reduced congestion there, either. The principle now meets little opposition among economists and urban planners. “It’s widely accepted,” says John Caskey, who teaches induced demand as part of his urban economics course at Swarthmore College. “For economists interested in urban transportation, there isn’t really any debate.”…

But turning down a new highway lane remains politically challenging. “The highway construction system has vast momentum,” says Rose, the historian. “It has the authority of highway contractors, builders and labor unions. Here is something that labor and management really can agree on: a highway contract.” The auto industry, too, continues to benefit from ongoing investments that expand the “floor space” allotted to its products. In 2019, Tesla CEO Elon Musk tweeted that induced demand “is one of the most irrational theories I’ve ever heard.”

Build it and they will come.

As I read through the longer narrative in this article, it seems that the needs of the automobile were prioritized by drivers, businesses, those in the road industry, and politicians. This has been going on for roughly a century; would academic theories with evidence behind them be able to overcome these interests?

Perhaps at some point in the future, we will able to look back at “peak road” or “peak highway.” Is there a point where new roads and highways or lanes are no longer pursued in the United States? Even if population growth stagnated or slowed, would the United States continue to build roadways? Maybe the costs of maintaining all those roadways will help lead to this moment. It is hard to imagine other scenarios; even as fewer people drive to work compared to earlier years, traffic continues.

The disadvantages and advantages to living on a major suburban road

I regularly drive by a single-family home that is located on a busy four lane road. Decades ago, this was a two lane road and traffic was lighter. Now, it is a road with a 50 MPH speed limit and many cars zooming daily between suburbs. In the morning, the school bus stops on the busy road to pick up kids from one house. Most of the housing in this area is located on streets that branch off this main road; this is common in suburban areas as residential neighborhood traffic is routed to arterial roads.

Photo by Caio on Pexels.com

When looking for housing years ago, I remember seeing homes located on such roads. What might be the advantages and disadvantages of such properties?

Advantages:

-Quick access to a major road. Suburban subdivisions can be big and the roads winding. It can take minutes just to leave the neighborhood.

-A reduced price. If the road is busy and noisy, this may mean the property is cheaper than comparable houses and lots.

-A location along a known road.

Disadvantages:

-Noise. The sound of cars and trucks is constant.

-Safety. Many suburbanites might wonder whether kids can safely play.

-Lower property values in comparison to similar properties.

-Less parking. If you have lots of people over, is the driveway big enough for everyone?

I would guess many suburbanites would choose not to live on or even near such a major road if they can help it. At the same time, plenty of suburbs have houses located along busy and fast roads.

Turning a busy road into a “smart corridor”

The Illinois Department of Transportation has plans to create two new “smart corridors” along major suburban roads:

Photo by Kaique Rocha on Pexels.com

The improvements include: traffic signal upgrades to modernize the corridors, synchronizing signals, dynamic message signs in strategic spots, and accommodations for pedestrians, officials said.

The Route 64 revamp stretches between Smith/Kautz Road and Route 50 (Cicero Avenue); the Route 56 redo runs from Route 59 to York Street.

For walkers and transit users, upgrades to sidewalks, crosswalks and pedestrian signals are coming, plus new, strategically located bus stops that expedite traffic flow.

“The long-range idea is to get those corridors working as efficiently as possible and to help support transit and buses,” IDOT District 1 Program Development Engineer John Baszek said.

These are busy roads – tens of thousands of vehicles each day – with high rates of speed. The project seems to have two goals: (1) improve traffic flow and (2) facilitate use beyond cars and trucks. Can both be done at the same time?

Not only have I driven these roads, I have biked along both roads. There is a lot that would have to be done to make this feel like a safe and pleasant experience for bicyclists and pedestrians. Having more cars flowing more efficiently does not seem like it necessarily fits with this.

As a driver, synchronized lights seem to make a lot of sense. On some of the regular routes I drive, I am pretty sure the lights are intentionally not in my favor; i.e., I turn left at the green arrow from one major road to the next and am immediately met with a red light. Keeping traffic flowing would seem to be good for congestion and the environment (through avoiding idling and stopping and starting).

Putting together statistical data and experiences, Right Turn on Red edition

A discussion of Red Turn on Red (ROTR) pits statistical evidence and experiential data:

Photo by Jack Gittoes on Pexels.com

Critics of the D.C. bill have pointed out the lack of data showing the dangers of RTOR, but many people who don’t use cars know instinctively how dangerous turning vehicles can be. “Our current safety studies fail to capture the reality of the constant near misses and confrontations that result between these motorists and pedestrians, which can be observed daily just by observing a typical busy intersection with RTOR,” Schultheiss says.

When teaching a research methods class, I can often come back to this observation about how sociologists approach data and evidence: we want both “facts” and “interpretations” to get the complete story of what is going on. In this particular situation, here is what that might mean: even if the statistical data suggests ROTR is not very dangerous, it matters that people still fear cars turning right on red. The experiences of pedestrians, bicyclists, and others on sidewalks and streets is part of the larger picture of understanding turning right on red. This would go alongside the data and experiences of vehicles and drivers.

Once this full set of data is collected, making policy decisions is another matter. If leaders want to prioritize vehicles, that is one choice. Or, as the piece suggests, some cities want to rethink streets and transportation, and they can end ROTR. But, it would be advisable to have all of the evidence before acting.

The limited safety of pedestrians and bicyclists even in quiet residential neighborhoods

Street and intersections in quiet suburban subdivisions are not necessarily designed with the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists in mind:

Photo by Jeswin Thomas on Pexels.com

The station reached out to county officials and the local police precinct; everyone sure scratched their heads about that one. There was supposed to be a stop sign there, said the county, and they didn’t know why there wasn’t one installed. The police made sure to point out that it wasn’t their fault, either, because, they said, residents hadn’t complained. “Some residents have now reached out to us requesting additional signage,” said the precinct’s commissioner, James Mett. “In the coming days, we plan to examine and research the issue to determine the best course of action moving forward.” A few phone calls later, it was announced that a new stop sign would be installed Thursday.

So, that’s one thing that made this street unsafe. But there are plenty of other problems, not unique to this intersection but common to many, many American streets, that also made it unsafe. There’s no signage of any kind to alert drivers to the possibility that walkers or cyclists might want to cross. There are no traffic-calming design elements, like speed bumps, raised crosswalks (or any kind of crosswalk), or extended curbs. There’s no protected bike lane.

The speed limit on this road is 30 miles per hour, as it is on roads in all Texas cities. Last year a Texas lawmaker introduced a bill to lower the speed limit on such roads to 25 miles per hour. Cars traveling 30 miles per hour are 43 percent more likely to kill pedestrians they hit than cars traveling 25 miles per hour, according to the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. This is the lawmaker’s third attempt to pass this bill, and it seems to have been just as successful as the first two times, as nothing has happened to the bill in more than a year. (We don’t know how fast the driver of the Hyundai was traveling. Maybe she was going less than 30 miles per hour. Or maybe she was going faster; after all, Google Street View suggests you can drive the entire length of Kings Mill Road, a circuit of nearly a mile, and never see a single speed limit sign.)

And notably, the driver who struck and killed Chase Delarios was driving a midsize SUV. The heavier the car, the more likely it is to kill a person if it strikes them. At between 3,500 and 5,000 pounds (depending on specific model), a 2017 Hyundai Santa Fe is more than a match for an 8-year-old and his bike. (The post-crash local news coverage shows the bike, horribly, jammed under the Hyundai’s rear wheel.)

And the conclusion:

Like most American streets, Kings Mill Road is not a safe area for pedestrians or people riding bikes. It’s designed for drivers, and drivers use it that way. That’s the system we’re trapped in…

In the United States, cars and vehicles with engines rule the roads. We have built whole systems and ways of life to accommodate them and ease their travel. It is supported by public and private money, public sentiment, and an ongoing series of decisions.

If you are traveling via other means, you have to be aware and careful. Know where vehicles are at all times. Be cautious in crossing, even at clearly marked walkways. Be ready to move quickly if needed. Make yourself visible to vehicles.

To change this or seriously address this would require a long-term effort to redesign basic aspects of everyday American life. It can be done, but a sustained series of actions is difficult to organize and execute.

I missed the urban scooter revolution

On a recent trip to Los Angeles, I saw a part of urban life I primarily read about: the proliferation of electric scooters.

The scooters were all over the place. There were more scooter users in the bike lanes than bicycles. Scooters of multiple services zoomed by. They could be parked anywhere.

They make a lot of sense in a place with good weather, limited mass transit, and a good number of visitors. (On the other hand, they do not make as much sense right next to the large vehicles Americans often drive.)

One additional thought: are these scooters doing what the Segway was supposed to do or could have done?