Grand Canyon
Transportation Planning:
A Case Study in Public Choice Theory
Dr. Dennis Foster - W.A. Franke College of Business
Welcome to our ride
The GMP as an exercise in “scientific management”
The public rationale
Is this a market failure?
Can promises be kept?
The forced rider problem
Elitism
Pathological politics
An exercise in inefficiency
What is to be done?
Scientific Management, the General
Management Plan and a transit plan
1993 – Draft General Management Plan
New parking lots & voluntary shuttle in/out of park.
1995 – Final GMP
1997 – Mather Point Environmental Assessment
Remove most of parking inside the park.
All day use visitors to shuttle into the park.
1999 – Request for Proposals
Light rail as chosen outcome.
Page & Lake
Powell
Grand
Canyon
Las
Vegas
The Grand Canyon area
Flagstaff
Principal visitation areas of Grand Canyon.
South Rim – Desert View to Hermits Rest
South Rim Village area –
South Kaibab Trail to Bright Angel Trail.
South Rim –
•Light rail transit
network.
•Buses to link rim pts.
•Remove interior
parking.
•Build 3,041 space lot
in Tusayan.
Redesign of Mather Point as transit terminus.
Redesign of main hotel area of South Rim Village.
Rational by the NPS
Traffic congestion as a market failure.
Insufficient parking as a market
failure.
Visitor orientation can be better
managed.
Visitors can benefit from more public
facilities and fewer commercial
facilities.
Public Choice Critique –
Is this really a market failure?
Is this a public good?
Is this a market failure?
Are there externalities? Why?
Are there significant special interests here?
What rent-seeking behavior is expected?
Is the NPS able to adequately coordinate economic
activity?
Public Choice Critique –
Is this really a market failure?
What is the dimension of the problem?
“6,000 cars vying for 3,000 spaces.”
Grand Canyon stats:
-- 1900 mi2; village = 2 mi2.
-- Too much for 4.5 million visitors?
-- 25% arrive by bus/train.
NAU – 9,000 parking spaces (+/-)
Average Daily Traffic - 1999 (vehicles) & "Capacity"
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
1999
Au
gu
Se
st
pt
em
be
r
O
ct
ob
er
No
ve
m
be
De
r
ce
m
be
r
Ju
ly
Ju
ne
ay
M
Ap
ril
Ja
nu
ar
y
Fe
br
ua
ry
M
ar
ch
0
"Capacity"
Parking in the South Rim Village area.
Public Choice Critique –
Can promises be kept?
Will congestion be lessened?
Visitors will now arrive on trains.
Visitors will arrive in groups at Mather Point.
Peak use of the system is likely to
resemble metropolitan rush hour
subway use.
Congestion is rearranged and likely increased.
Actual & Projected Visitation
6,500,000
6,000,000
5,500,000
5,000,000
4,500,000
Actual 2011
4,000,000
0.8% Visitation growth
1.7% Visitation growth
2.75% Visitation growth
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
3,500,000
Public Choice Critique –
Can promises be kept?
Will visitors find the quality of their visit has
improved with the light rail?
Waiting in inclement weather.
Waiting due to crowded trains/buses.
Paying for taxis during off-peak times.
Riding with backpackers.
Keeping parties together.
Getting strollers/bikes on board.
Carrying cameras, purchases.
Public Choice Critique –
The forced rider problem – literally!
All the off-peak riders.
By season and by time of day.
Visitors along the East Rim Drive must pay.
“[F]olks who don’t want to use mass
transit can bike or walk into the park.”
Do visitors need a period of transition?
Public Choice Critique – Elitism
“Visitors who have driven hours to
get to the park should be allowed
a period of transition before
viewing the great natural spectacle
of the Grand Canyon.”
“Seeing the Grand Canyon out the
windshield of a car at Mather
Point, however does not provide
any transition period.”
“No impression of the place is more
constantly invoked than the abruptness of
its vision…The contrast with other
landscapes is profound.”
--Stephen J. Pyne; How the Canyon Became Grand
Public Choice Critique –
Pathological politics
Who supports this? GC Railway!
Who supports this? Various eco groups!
Who supports this? Park Service planners!
The public supports this. Or do they?
newspaper headlines…
“New poll supports Canyon light rail”
--AZ Daily Sun, 3/6/97
“Arizonans strongly prefer replacing
automobile traffic with mass transit in
Grand Canyon National Park.”
--SRL press release, 3/6/97

--The survey question:
“To protect Grand Canyon National Park,
by the year 2000 officials are proposing
that no cars be allowed into the Park
except for people staying at Park hotels.
Automobile traffic will be replaced by
mass transit. Do you agree or disagree
with the proposal . . .”

Public Choice Critique –
An exercise in inefficiency
Cost: $70 mill., $100 mill., $200 mill.
Gain = 1600 net parking spaces.
Note: More parking is unavoidable, train isn’t.
What if the rail employees unionize?
“A convenient, attractive, and energy-efficient
transit system would serve the developed area.”
What is to be done?
A Big Proposal
Remove the Village
area from NPS
jurisdiction !
Allow Coconino
County to regulate !
Amounts to some 6 to 8 square miles !
What is to be done?
A Moderate Proposal
Run a train from Tusayan to the Village.
Utilize the airport for increased parking.
How much work would this take...?
…None; it has already been approved.

What is to be done?
A Small Proposal
Develop Mather Point parking.
Leave Village parking intact.
Improve infrastructure.
Improve existing transit system.
• Cost: approx. $20 million.
• Raise parking to 7,000 vehicles.

Aftermath:
Like Osama bin Laden, the train is dead
Congressional actions
No $ for the train.
Must reconsider using buses.
2008 – South Rim Visitor Transportation
Plan Environmental Assessment
Build parking at new visitor center!
Leave parking in the village!
Add voluntary shuttle to Tusayan!
New Visitors’ Center & Parking Lots
Grand Canyon
Transportation Planning:
A Case Study in Public Choice Theory
Dr. Dennis Foster - W.A. Franke College of Business