Valley Metro conducted a transit on-board survey between October 2010 and February 2011. The purpose of the survey was to better understand the travel pattern of transit users in the metropolitan Phoenix area, particularly the impact that light rail has had on regional travel patterns. The survey included nearly 100 bus routes and all light rail stations.

The development of a Life Cycle program began for each of the three major transportation elements identified within the Regional Transportation Plan. The RPTA is responsible for preparation of the transit component of the Life Cycle program, and METRO has been further delegated the responsibility to prepare the high capacity transit/light rail transit element.

Presents results of a 2010 survey aimed at understanding water resource and land use planning. First it explores how professional views about water resource stressors and management strategies converge and diverge among water resource managers and land use planners. Second, it examines the degree to which water managers and land planners are engaging in integrated planning.

The Decision Center for a Desert City at Arizona State University—funded by the National Science Foundation since 2004—conducts research relevant to water resources and urban climate dynamics under multiple uncertainties. This report summarizes and synthesizes research findings and achievements of DCDC after almost a decade of research and science-policy interactions. Water resource decision-making is complicated by climate change and variability, population growth and economic development, diverse stakeholder interests and fragmented governance. While these factors generate various uncertainties and complexities for decision-makers, DCDC pursues research to create a more sustainable future. The DCDC contributes to water management and urban sustainability by conducting basic science and collaborating with policymakers and stakeholders to solve real-world problems. As detailed herein, DCDC research, education, and community outreach have made substantial contributions to improving water-resource governance and climate adaptation.

Unlike the rest of the Phoenix metropolitan area, population density in central Phoenix dropped during the 1970s and 1980s. The primary cause was a decrease in the number of housing units. Rising vacancy rates contributed, but the increase in vacancy rates was similar to that of the entire metropolitan area. Between 1990 and 1995, population density rose in central Phoenix. A sharp decline in vacancy rates was a major factor in the turnaround, though the vacancy rate decline only matched that of the entire metro area. Another major factor in the increase in density was the rising number of people residing in prisons, homeless shelters, or on the streets.

The age of housing in the Phoenix metropolitan area reflects the mostly steady outward spread of development. Large differences exist across the area in other housing measures. Many of these differences are closely related to geographic variations in household income and in the type of housing. As in the rest of the country, housing affordability in the Phoenix metropolitan area fell substantially in the 1970s. During the 1980s, the change in affordability varied by situation. Affordability rose for the median-income household, especially for homeownership. For those at the low end of the income spectrum, affordability of rental units improved slightly, but affordability of owned units worsened. Data for the 1990s are limited; the affordability of owned units rose for the median-income household, which could afford the median-priced home in 1998. An inadequate supply of very low-cost housing existed in the Phoenix metropolitan area in 1990. Even if low-income households were perfectly matched to low-income housing that they could afford, a little less than 3 percent of all households (about 23,000) could not have found affordable housing. The inadequacy expanded in the 1980s. The percentage of households reporting an unaffordable housing payment was much greater. Considering only low-income households who spent more than 30 percent of their income on housing, about 21 percent of all households had a housing problem related to affordability.