Opinion: A New Transportation Plan

As I was reflecting on the numerous ideas offered by people attending the May 29, 2008, meeting on the Des Moines Area Metropolitan Planning Organization’s (DMAMPO) Year 2035 plan, I realized there is a gap between the need for truly long-range planning identified by the public and the scope of purpose of the vision plan. This commentary was sent to the DMAMPO as part of public comments.

We need a bold vision but we also need a process to get us to the reality of that future. The current plan’s format can be used to allow anybody to do basically anything. For example, in Goal #7 a reference to expanding accessibility to the existing transportation system could mean building a road to connect a new mall and housing development with I-35. I would like to see the plan include three to five key themes which all projects should incorporate. I suggest, as a a place to start discussion: (1) reduce imprint on land, (2) reduce environmental impact at points of source, of use, and of disposal (e.g., remember coal-burning power plants can fuel electric cars), (3) allow individuals and families to choose their primary mode of transportation (i.e., do not have the default set to “owns an automobile”), (4) maintain resources for current transportation resources (e.g., new capital projects should not create a burden on the operating budget for existing sidewalks, roads, etc.), and (5) develop a diversified and equally-accessible regional economy.

I recommend that the DMAMPO then requires requests for funding to include a statement on how any particular project will support movement towards all of those five themes. I’ll use DART’s D-Line shuttle as an example. The shuttle is a great photo opportunity and a matter of pride for the large employers with offices on Locust and Grand and for legislators with development projects in the East Village. The people working for these companies and living in the new condos already have a wide range of breakfast and lunch options, including private cafeterias. The D-Line does not bring new people into the downtown or East Village to spend money. The D-Line does not encourage people to sell their cars and to ride the buses because the shuttle only runs a very limited route. I would have preferred the money spent on buses, drivers, and fuel to have been used to add a bus to each of the #1, #4, #5, and #7 routes during the hours of the D-Line. This would have created a similar speedier option for downtown travelers while offering more options to residents and workers throughout Des Moines. That would really be a start towards getting people to reduce their reliance on automobiles and related detritus.

Looking at the draft plan in more detail, I see many problems with it. For example, Goal #7, System Integrity and Preservation, lists items that are more research needs than objectives of a vision. (E.g., #7f) Identify and address needed railroad track improvements: Is this freight, passenger, or light rail tracks? Who needs to identify it? Who needs to address it?) Another example is #9d) and #9e) that talk about identifying specific transportation needs of and representation for minority, elderly, and low-income populations. I cannot speak for all of the DMAMPO area, but I can tell you with 100% certainty that it is time for the needs of the working class and middle class in Des Moines to be considered by DART. While the federal government requires consideration be given to the specified populations, many public transportation systems are designed around the assumption that the middle class only goes to work on the bus and that elderly and low-income individuals will not be out at night.

There are also many objectives with which I outright disagree. Potential environmental impacts should be identified early according to #9a) to mitigate impacts before development. This should not be a goal since environmental impact reports are usually required. I would prefer an objective that offers guidelines on what types of impacts could prevent funding of a project. Are Environmental Protection Agency standards going to be the requirement or is the DMAMPO going to strive for higher or more complete standards? Promoting the airport as a freight center is a perfect example of where conflicts between residents, environmentalists, and businesses are going to arise. The Long-Range Plan does absolutely nothing to provide guidance on which side should be given priority when a decision must be made

As one of the gentlemen at the May 29th meeting noted, the needs of unincorporated areas are different from the urban centers. Yet the draft plan serves neither with #8c). This particular objective encourages transit-oriented development and is being used to plan new land annexation and a massive building project to the south of Des Moines.

M.R. Field has learned the value of taking public comment periods seriously.