APPENDIX D

STATEMENTS DESCRIBING HOW AND WHY METRO PLANNING MUST BE A CONTINUOUS PROCESS

(See app. I for identification to references cited)

Atlanta (reference No. 1)

It has been emphasized here that separate traffic projects and needs can best be considered within the framework of a single major thoroughfare plan. But the thoroughfare plan itself can only be properly considered within an even larger context-that of the overall metropolitan transportation policies affecting not only streets and autos, but our entire social, economic, and physical environment. Everyone is fairly well agreed on the desirable objectives of our transportation policy.

*** The accomplishment of these objectives often seems long range in nature and therefore less impressive than the realities of short-term needs.

Furthermore, the choices are not always clear because of changing transportation technology: monorails, moving sidewalks, flying belts, and others not yet anticipated. For this reason, transportation policy, planning, and implementation blend into a continuing community process, and there is no one-shot cure-all or master blueprint that will settle things once and for all and then proceed to implement itself.

The addition since 1953 of 4,666 new parking spaces downtown and the trend toward increased auto usage are good in that more people who desire to come downtown to work or shop by auto are able to do so. However, these trends jeopardize the central accessibility of the central area by saturating street capacity at a person-carrying level lower than that which had been originally projected, i.e., the 1953 transit and parking studies and "now-for tomorrow" assumed that the then prevailing proportion, 50 percent, of the people entering downtown by transit would be maintained. However, due to the recent spurt in automobile usage, this proportion has declined. As of 1958, the downtown street system is virtually at capacity under present operating conditions (pp. 26, 29). New York City (reference No. 11)

There has been a substantial shift in the origins and destinations of commuters due to the development of outlying residential areas not served by railroad lines, on the one hand, and to the expansion of the midtown portion of the central business district in Manhattan while the railroads remain oriented to serve their old areas.

** Since 1925, the growing importance of midtown Manhattan as an office center has led to a definite shift in the destination of New Jersey commuters from downtown to the area between 34th and 59th Streets. This shift in destinations of places of work, together with the development of new residential areas, has meant that the routes of the established railroad lines in New Jersey have become inadequate for the present and future transportation needs of the region, particularly as to the crossing of the Hudson River.

*** The result has been a definite and continuing shift of commuting from rail to bus and automobile in New Jersey. Rail commuting in that sector has declined 50 percent in the past 25 years. During the same period commuting by rail has increased in the Westchester-Fairfield and Long Island sectors. Commutation by automobile from New Jersey is growing in importance. In 1948, auto commutation to Manhattan amounted to 5 percent of the total and in 1955 it rose to 10 percent of the total (p. 15).

Commuter traffic and revenues of the principal railroads-Continued

[All data in thousands]

1959:

1954:

1949:

Source: Interstate Commerce Commission, "Form 08-D: Revenue Traffic," Filed Monthly for Each Railroad.

APPENDIX F

Reported suburban service passenger deficit-Principal eastern suburban railroads, 1957

(a) Total passenger

service (deficit)--$12, 590-$15, 225-$52, 283 -$5, 543 -$7,054-$12, 375-$57, 531-$9,047 (b) Estimated subur

ban service (de

ficit)..

-$2,646 -$7, 623-$6, 300-$3,354 -$6, 300-$2,350-$13, 213 -$3,183

Source: Presentation by Eastern Railroad President's Conference, exhibit A, before Transportation Study Group, Senate Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, April 1960.

Source: "The Federal Interest in Railroad Passenger Service," a report for the Secretary of Commerce by W. B. Saunders, Nov. 15, 1959.

APPENDIX H

NEW YORK STATE'S RAILROAD TAX RELIEF PROGRAM

In April of 1959 the New York State Legislature passed a group of bills which embodied a tax relief program based upon the recommendations of the New York Public Service Commission and the Governor's Special Consultant Robert W. Purcell.

The legislature made the following statement of legislative intent in adopting these measures.

Legislative declaration. It is hereby found and declared that continued operation of railroads in the State and improvement of their service and facilities are essential to the commerce, defense, and general welfare of the people of the State; that the financial condition of railroads in the State has deteriorated in recent years to the extent that it now constitutes a serious threat to continuation of vital operations; that this condition is the result, among other things, of competition from other forms of transportation, increased costs, and the incidence of taxation; that the consequences of these developments have been a loss of commerce, a decrease in employment, and a decrease in service rendered by railroads; that the reversal of these trends is a matter of public concern; that it is in the public interest to enhance the ability of railroads to continue their operations and improve their service under private enterprise; that the real property tax burden on railroads in the State does not fluctuate in accordance with earnings and generally cannot be readily passed on to users of the service because of the industry's economic position; that substantial tax relief will help strengthen railroads financially so that they can contribute their share to the economic well-being of the State; and that therefore it is the policy of the State to grant to the railroads in the State partial tax exemption in a manner which will grant greater relief to the railroads that need it more by giving increasingly greater exemptions as the rate of earnings of a railroad system declines.

Immediate railroad relief is provided by elimination of the special franchise tax on intangible property and by freezing all other railroad real property taxes at current levels, with an exemption for certain capital improvements made in the public interest; e.g., grade crossing eliminations. Long-term tax relief is provided by means of a basic revision in railroad property taxation to go into effect after July of 1960. This will result in a system of taxation involving exemptions to railroads with inadequate earning power-a tax system which partially reflects earnings, and thereby the economic condition of the particular railroad being taxed. The amount of exemption will be determined by a formula which will provide greatest relief where most needed. For the localities suffering consequent loss of revenues, State aid will be provided to any taxing district in which tax revenues from railroad real property are now substantial, in the amount of 50 percent of the loss of tax revenue.

APPENDIX I

RESOURCE MATERIALS OTHER THAN BOOKS AND PERIODICALS
USED IN PREPARATION OF REPORT

The reference numbers appearing on exhibits and prefixed to quotations are keyed to the numbers appearing below.

1. Comprehensive Plan, City of Atlanta, 1958: Atlanta-Fulton County Joint Planning Board with technical assistance from the metropolitan planning commission.

1a. Rapid Atlanta: Proposal by Atlanta Transit System, Inc., August 1960. 2. Baltimore Transit Study-Parts I-III, June 1958: Department of transit and traffic.

3. Transportation Facts and Public Policy for Downtown Boston: Studies of urban transportation, Seminar Research Bureau, College of Business Administration, Boston College, March 1958.

4. Problems of the Railroads: Studies of urban transportation, Seminar Research Bureau, College of Business Administration, Boston College, June 1959. 5. Cincinnati Metropolitan Master Plan Study Public Transit: City planning commission, Cincinnati, Ohio.

6. The Mass Transportation Problem in Illinois: A final report prepared by the State mass transportation commission, June 1959.