Cascadia Prospectus

This Monday July 2, our Cascadia Center For Regional Development hosted a jam-packed forum in West Seattle for stakeholders to discuss next steps toward funding an expanded system of passenger-only ferries on Puget Sound and Lake Washington. This would embody a modern-day return of the region's old "Mosquito Fleet" of foot ferries; providing today's commuters and others with expanded transit options in a region facing increasingly congested roads and steets, and major population growth in coming decades.

Cascadia Center's Director Bruce Agnew moderated the panel discussion featuring presentations by members of the Puget Sound Passenger Ferry Coalition. Among those speaking were King County Council members Dow Constantine and Julia Patterson.

KIRO 7 TV and KING-5 TV were among media reporting. (Click on the above link or the "embed" below for the KIRO 7 report).

Agnew told KIRO 7's Graham Johnson:

We have plenty of water and you don't have to purchase new right-of-way, so it seems like...bringing back these boats as a form of mass transit in Puget Sound, its time has really come.

Expanded foot ferries become more logical when one understands the dimensions of estimated future costs for roads and transit in and around Seattle. The final report of the Regional Transportation Commission study group, authorized by the state legislature and Gov. Christine Gregoire, notes Central Puget Sound faces a $62 billion shortfall in needed funding for roads and transit over the next 24 years. (See third page from the top, here, in the study's cover letter to Gov. Gregoire from commission co-chairs Norm Rice and John Stanton).

With regional traffic congestion at top of mind, Ed Friedrich of the Kitsap Sun filed this story after attending the forum Monday. Friedrich wrote:

King County, already gridlocked and with massive road construction projects on tap that will tie up traffic even more, formed a ferry district this year that will tap property taxes. It plans to boost West Seattle water taxi service to year-round, take over the state's Vashon-Seattle route, pay for a demonstration boat between Kirkland and the University of Washington, fund a feasibility study of other routes and provide money for better boats and docks. It will cost King County landowners 2 to 3 cents per $1,000 of assessed property value. "Compared with other modes of transportation, that's a bargain because the infrastructure is not as expensive," said King County Councilman Dow Constantine, who spearheaded the ferry district effort. "Water is free."

For 100 years, passenger ferries moved people and goods around the region, King County Council member Julia Patterson said. Service bottomed out in recent years after Washington State Ferries lost its motor vehicle excise tax funding and opted out of the foot-ferry business. "Next year, Washington state will be out of the business and will be looking to the region and local governments to provide that service," she said. "We cannot meet that demand with a patchwork approach. We need a regional vision. We need to be thinking big and working together on this issue."

Highlighting Patterson's remarks, King-5 TV aired this report the next morning. (Click on preceding link or the "embed" below).

All foot ferry proponents recognize that, as one participant at Monday's forum stated, "the difference between vision and hallucination is implementation." Will Echols of Crosscut details this morning how economic obstacles to expanded passenger-only ferry service in the region have proved daunting, so far.

But several factors suggest a turning point may be approaching. First, as the region's traffic mess intensifies, is the sheer cost of continuing to fund necessary landside roads and transit. The $62 billion shortfall identified by the Regional Transportation Commission study group only covers improvements needed in the next 24 years; but regional population will continue to grow thereafter, necessitating still more travel capacity. Next is our region's expansive water geography, providing connections between a plethora of major population centers. Third is substantial near-term growth, as the Puget Sound Regional Council notes in its "Destination 2030" transportation plan: a 30 percent increase in the region's four-county population (from the 2006 total of 3.5 million) and a 50 percent increase in travel by 2030 means more comprehensive transit, including more ferries, will be necessary. The PSRC notes:

Today, the central Puget Sound region has a high level of traffic congestion. By 2030, the region will grow by an additional 1.1 million people, add over 850,000 new jobs, and need to accommodate close to 50 percent more travel, putting even more strain on our transportation system. To ease current congestion and prepare for future growth, the region must expand its transportation system and complete key missing links. With smarter, more strategic transportation investments, traffic movement can be improved by the year 2030, even with additional people and increased use of our roads, buses, trains and ferries. With an expanded set of transportation choices offered by a more fully developed system, the region can prepare for continued economic growth, while protecting and enhancing its celebrated quality of life.

Finally, having recently formed a passenger-only ferry district with taxing authority, King County is postioned to fund a first-stage passenger-only ferry system expansion. Regional funding for more passenger-only ferries need not necessarily be secured through ballot measures posed to voters, nor from the state. While it is premature to make such a recommendation, it is worth considering that Pierce, Snohomish and Kitsap counties could - as King County is positioned to do - approve by council vote a modest property tax increase to fund more passenger-only ferries. The legislature would merely have to alter the enabling legislation for the King County ferry district to allow the other three counties the same powers, and additionally grant all four the option of joint governance, along with key local governments, of a regional foot ferry system.

An ensuing challenge would be seamless integration of foot ferry, bus and commuter train traffic across the region - a priority which may well beg the question of a regional transportation commission empowered to plan, prioritize and fund road and transit projects, employing "best practices" such as public-private partnerships, system-wide and variegated vehicle tolling on major highways, and cost-effective "design-build" project bidding.

It is early, though. Very early. The first step in the possible "return of the Mosquito Fleet" is to see what happens in King County. As noted in stories by the Tacoma News Tribune and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, the county council could approve a modest tax increase for more foot ferries as soon as November.

There is of course no "silver bullet" to the region's pressing need for improved transportation; but rather a series of necessary road and transit improvements to ease congestion and broaden choices, of which passenger-only ferries are one.

UPDATE, 7/10/07: Also reporting in connection with Cascadia Center's July 2 passenger-only ferries forum were KPLU-FM and KIRO-AM 710; as well as the West Seattle Herald, the Port Orchard Independent, and the North Kitsap Herald.

TECHNORATI TAGS: PASSENGER-ONLY FERRIES, PUGET SOUND, CASCADIA CENTER, KING COUNTY, SEATTLE, KITSAP COUNTY, PIERCE COUNTY, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, REGIONAL GOVERNANCE, FUNDING

We've already mentioned the 50 km tunnel for $3.5 billion that the Swiss voted to build. I wondered: the Swiss are building some fantastic tunnel in the Alps (see Matt's 6/11 post)... but they're Swiss. Surely they must be crazy.

As it turns out, their costs are not unusual for transportation infrastructure projects in developed countries. A random grab-bag since 1994:

English Channel Tunnel
Cost: 9 billion pounds (US $14 billion)
Length: 50 km (31 miles)
Cost per mile: $451 mil

Cooper River Bridge, SC, longest cable-stay bridge in America
Cost: $531 million
Length: 2.5 miles
Cost per mile: $212 mil

Woodrow Wilson Bridge, Washington DC
Cost: $2.4 billion
Length: 1.1 miles
Cost per mile: $2.2 bil
Daily Commuters: 200,000 (twice the capacity for the same price as ours)

Millau Viaduct, France
Cost: $394 million
The builders, Eiffage, financed the construction in return for a concession to collect the tolls for 75 years, until 2080. However, if the concession is very profitable, the French government can assume control of the bridge in 2044.
Length: 1.5 miles
Cost per mile: $262 mil

Sydney Harbor Tunnel, Australia
Cost: A$ 554 mil
Built by a private partnership, the tunnel is currently on a thirty-year lease, and will be handed back to the State Government in August 2022.
Length: 1.4 miles
Cost per mile: A$ 395 mil

The Columbian reports this morning that an affiliate of a Swedish-Norwegian shipping concern has announced its preliminary intent to build a big vehicle import center as part of the Port of Vancouver, Washington's Columbia Gateway industrial development.

On Tuesday, port officials signed a letter of intent with Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics Americas to develop the $453 million facility that would dwarf the port's existing Subaru operation and match the Port of Portland's auto business. Wallenius Wilhelmsen would build a marine terminal and processing facility on 344 acres that the port would make construction-ready, according to the deal. The facility, projected to generate a $62 million annual payroll, could be operational by late 2010 or 2011.

...the facility will be able to handle more than 500,000 cars annually....At the Port of Portland, Hyundai, Honda and Toyota moved 463,557 vehicles in 2006 through two terminals. It was a record year, up 31 percent from 2005....Wallenius Wilhelmsen Americas signed a deal last summer with Subaru of America to process the automaker's vehicles in Baltimore. The agreement was part of Wallenius Wilhelmsen's larger expansion plans in the Eastern city.

Earlier this month, Rappaport Energy Consulting of Olympia, Washington, announced plans to build at Columbia Gateway a biodiesel processing plant and a wood-based ethanol refinery.

As the Columbian reports today, both projects depend heavily on retention of a special six-year, non-renewable Industrial Development District levy approved by the port to purchase riverfront acerage for Columbia Gateway tenants and build an east-west train freight line considered critical to the project. Local voters aggrieved that state legislation obviated their veto powers over the special port tax have successfully placed a yea-nay measure on the Aug. 21 primary election ballot. If the special tax is rescinded, the Gateway project is at least temporarily stymied, and the two initial tenants either cool their heels or go elsewhere.

Even if that happens, there's a larger lesson to be drawn. The American yen for purchasing new Asian cars shows no signs of abating, and vehicle miles traveled continue to trend upward. That has implications for the push to develop "green" fuels; and efforts to expand mass transit in locales such as Central Puget Sound.

Biodiesel derived from palm oil isn't so green, compared to that manufactured from vegetable oils or animal fats. And both wood-based ethanol and fuel derived from bio-mass beat by miles corn-based ethanol, which gobbles energy in the production process. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles hold great promise, but the environmental benefits are far greater if the electricity used to power them comes from non-fossil fuel sources.

Meanwhile, many putative progressives eye the whole alternative fuels scrum warily, thinking that anything which makes driving cars more environmentally palatable will ultimately discourage transit use, enhance sprawl and worsen global warming.

Let's take these one by one.

To the extent current global warming is caused by man's activites, it will require far-reaching efforts by major nations - especially huge players such as China and India, and yes, the United States - to develop and implement comprehensive clean energy initiatives, in addition to boosting alternative fuel usage. All rhetorical chest-beating aside, the challenge of replacing conventional with clean energy sources is rather bracing, as illustrated by a recent report from the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration titled, "Annual Energy Outlook 2007 - With Projections To 2030." As the report notes on page 2 of the "Overview" section:

Despite the rapid growth projected for biofuels and other nonhydroelectric renewable energy sources and the expectation that orders will be placed for new nuclear power plants for the first time in more than 25 years, oil, coal, and natural gas still are projected to provide roughly the same 86-percent share of the total U.S. primary energy supply in 2030 that they did in 2005 (assuming no changes in existing laws and regulations - itals added). The expected rapid growth in the use of biofuels and other nonhydropower renewable energy sources begins from a very low current share of total energy use; hydroelectric power production, which accounts for the bulk of current renewable electricity supply, is nearly stagnant; and the share of total electricity supplied from nuclear power falls despite the projected new plant builds, which more than offset retirements, because the overall market for electricity continues to expand rapidly in the projection.

Books by candlelight, and woodstoves, anybody? Or microwaves and plasma screens, plus a carbon tax?

For its part, "sprawl" is a somewhat loaded concept, reducing to a disease-like term the proclivity of actors in the free market to decide where to live based on laws of supply, demand and consequent household costs.

Just as people cannot be hectored into pricey and pinched urban townhomes merely to suit the objectives of planners and environmentalists, they cannot be browbeaten into taking mass transit. It will work for some on a daily basis, but not for many others, based on their daily travel patterns.

If those 463,557 vehicles don't end up passing through Wallenius Wilhelmsen's envisioned distribution center in Vancouver, Washington, they will likely come - along with all their economic benefits and environmental and public policy implications - into some other regional port. Of course, they're only a fraction of the new imported passenger vehicles regularly landing in Northwest and other U.S. ports.

To shape metropolitan region transportation policy accordingly, governments, business and stakeholders should develop a multi-pronged approach which includes: system-wide time-variable tolling on major highways and state routes; greater emphasis on public-private partnerships to cost-effectively provide transportation infrastructure and services; mass transit which delivers the most ridership per dollar spent; improved inter-city rail travel; and ongoing research and development to deliver to market larger quantities of clean, green alternative fuels.

TECHNORATI TAGS: VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON, PORT OF VANCOUVER, COLUMBIA GATEWAY, WALLENIUS WILHELMSEN, RAPPAPORT ENERGY CONSULTING, ALTERNATIVE FUELS, MASS TRANSIT, TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE

A new study issued by the Electric Power Research Institute and the Natural Resources Defense Council reports that adoption of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles by consumers and fleet managers could by 2050 cut U.S. carbon dioxide emissions by 163 to 612 million metric tons, and total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 3.4 to 10.3 billion metric tons.

How much of a difference would that really make? MIT Technology Review assesses the study's findings this way:

The study shows that if plug-in hybrids are adopted widely in the United States, and if measures are taken to clean up power plants, by 2050, plug-in hybrids could reduce carbon-dioxide emissions by 612 million metric tons, or roughly 5 percent of the total U.S. emissions expected in that time frame, according to Marcus Sarofim, a researcher at MIT's Joint Program for the Science and Policy of Global Change. That's a significant amount, he says, considering that transportation accounts for only about a third of the total greenhouse-gas emissions.

But if plug-in hybrids account for only a small part of the total vehicle sales in 2050 (about 20 percent, compared with 80 percent in the first scenario), and if little is done to improve pollution from power plants, the vehicles will still reduce greenhouse emissions by about 163 metric tons, according to the study.

More here from the Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, International Herald Tribune, and San Jose Mercury-News.

The NRDC, a prominent environmental group, stipulates (p. 10 of Executive Summary section) that it supports introduction of PHEVs "accompanied by substantial improvements in power plant emission rates." That's an appropriate caveat which highlights the need for an intensified focus on acheiving a cleaner electricity supply.

Today's hybrid electric vehicles, such as the popular Toyota Prius, have helped generate a growing interest in making personal transportation cleaner, something that's an important societal objective because despite a worthy focus on improving metropolitan region transit services, the majority of vehicle trips nationally will continue to occur in privately-owned vehicles.

Current hybrids such as the Prius are not plugged into a wall socket overnight but use electricity generated through an on-board battery to intermittently power their ride, along with conventional fuel when necessary. Hence the name "hybrid."

But a greener plug-in hybrid is now being developed by none other than Toyota, as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle and the MIT Technology Review editors' blog. Also engineering their own PHEVs for market are Chevrolet and Ford. The automakers will employ increasingly smaller, lighter and eventually less costly state-of-the-art lithium ion batteries to power vehicles electrically and achieve greater fuel efficiency than today's hybrid electric vehicles.

The EPRI/NRDC study reports that the lower the carbon dioxide emissions in the national electric power sector, and the longer the range of the PHEV, the greater the reduction in overall greenhouse gases versus a conventional hybrid vehicle in 2050. The GGE improvement, for medium and longer range PHEVs versus hybrids, will range from 27% to 46% per vehicle, according to table 5-3 on p. 5-6 of the study.

Imagine a national fleet with an increasing proportion of plug-in hybrids that run one-quarter to one-half cleaner than an advanced conventional hybrid electric vehicle. Imagine that truck fleets are plugged into the grid too, with corresponding decreases in diesel fuel emissions.

To get there will take not only a cleaner electricity supply, but advances in developing and distributing truly green biofuels, as well. Should the path to widespread use of green vehicle fuels include a carbon tax or a higher federal gasoline tax? Syndicated columnist Steve Chapman thinks so.

Given the huge political obstacles, a successful push for either would need to emphasize the serious public health effects of airborne particulates as much or more than the current de riguer hand-wringing and blame-casting over global warming.

TECHNORATI TAGS: PLUG-IN HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES, GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, CARBON DIOXIDE, ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, GREEN ELECTRICITY, BIOFUELS, CARBON TAX, FEDERAL GAS TAX, AIR POLLUTION, PUBLIC HEALTH

In an Oregonian op-ed titled "The Ready River Of Transit At Our Core," sustainable developer Peter Wilcox argues for the innate feasibility of an urban water bus system connecting otherwise disparate communities along the landmark Willamette River, a major north-south regional artery. As in the Seattle region, where supporters of an expanded regional passenger-only ferry network met recently to plot next steps, the water in Portland seems a natural piece of transit infrastructure waiting to be more fully developed. Wilcox writes:

What would Portland look like if we made the incredible Willamette River our most visible and sustainable public transportation mode? Talk about disparate parts getting connected. Talk about opportunities for many more carless trips....It has long puzzled me that so many of us are willing to let the river exist mostly as something we observe from afar or as a speedy thoroughfare for powerful big-wake boats.....the Willamette could be so much more to our residents and a much more accessible attracter for visitors as well.

The feasibility study that Portland's Office of Transportation commissioned a year ago... found that a "central city circulator" -- another term for a river-based bus line connecting what are now disparate close-in neighborhoods -- is feasible right now. River buses could readily circulate from Oaks Park, Ross Island and South Waterfront to Union Station, the Pearl and Swan Island, crossing the river at key places and times. Later, as more people were able to use the system for travel and commuting, it could stretch to Milwaukie and St. Johns or beyond, spurring transit-friendly development.

...the city (should) set standards for docks, begin including sustainable river transit in political visions and plans, and agree on ways to go after the same available dock and shoreside facility funds that other cities are using. Given at least 10,000 years of river transport in the Northwest -- certainly the first public transit in Portland -- we deserve a web of transportation that includes green river transit...

It's certainly true that the City DOT's 2006 Willamette River Ferry Feasibility Study includes some upbeat views on passenger-only ferries serving Portland.

For years, Portlanders have debated the value of passenger services operating on the Willamette River. Not only could such services offer promise for moving people without claiming expensive new rights-of-way, but they also present an opportunity to reconnect the City with one of its greatest natural assets. Throughout Portland's history, the Willamette River has been the backbone for industry and commerce; as a result, the City has turned its residential neighborhoods and recreation facilities away from the river.

In recent years Portlanders have begun to recognize the unmistakable value of the Willamette River as an urban amenity. The Vera Katz Esplanade has created new access to the Riverfront east of downtown, rapid development at South Waterfront is transforming a riverside brownfield into an accessible waterfront neighborhood, planned improvements to Tom McCall Waterfront Park will improve the connection between Downtown/Old Town and the Willamette River, furthermore, development in the Pearl District is now reaching the river and will soon transform the waterfront between the Broadway and Fremont bridges. Increased business, residential and visitor activity on the riverfront increases the viability of river-based transportation services.

The study cites additional positives stemming from foot ferries on the Willamette - noting that river-oriented transit would:

However the study ultimately carries a mixed verdict for Portland-region foot ferry backers. On the upside, it finds that in-city "seasonal circulator" service could well be worth a shot, provided there is a strong push by advocates for both political support and supplemental funding from non-government sources. However, the study also finds that regional year-round commuter service isn't currently feasible due to high costs for operations and landside infrastructure. Such service could become feasible in the future, the study reports, if some of the following conditions are met:

From my read of the study, labor costs do not appear to be unreasonable, with each foot ferry requiring a U.S. Coast Guard-certified captain at an annual salary of $50,500 and an unlicensed deckhand at $24,600; with taxes and benefits bringing those combined crew costs per boat to $105,600 a year.

The real bugaboo is other operating costs including fuel and landside infrastructure, plus weak projected ridership, and what economists call "demand elasticity" - meaning in this case there's a price discomfort point for transit fares beyond which many potential customers will seek cheaper alternatives.

There is some point in urban region transportation planning at which the "green eyeshade" accountant's approach, reliant as it is on projections of future use and costs per rider, clashes with the visionary, or "build it and they will come" approach.

For passenger-only ferry commuter networks thought to compare poorly on costs to buses or rail, the willingness of private sector players to provide and rationalize funding grows in importance.

Major employers and business alliances with the most to gain from expanded foot ferry operations would need to be persuaded to get on board. This in turn goes back to employee and customer preferences regarding local and regional travel. Getting to and from the dock at each end has to be convenient and quick, or the premise can't go much further than a seasonal novelty. Marketing campaigns would need to highlight the "portal to portal" time advantage for specific foot ferry routes versus driving and other transit modes, as well. Softer sell "enjoy the ride - skip the traffic" pitches have value, but can only gain traction if travel time comparisons work.

Additionally, the more daily commerce that can be situated in proximity to foot ferry transit nodes - grocery stores, dry cleaners, even day care centers and schools - the greater the appeal. Of course, light rail and bus rapid transit centers can also enjoy such advantages; underscoring competition between modes and ultimately, the need for unified regional transportation governance which emphasizes balance between roads and transit, and putting the right transit modes in the right places.

Here's one more thing that would help. State legislatures, city governments and regional transportation authorities could help to better facilitate cost-effective foot ferry commuter networks - and corollary high-density residential development - by working together to ensure that transportation infrastructure projects and operations can be bid under the most competitive procedures, including due consideration to proposals from non-union labor, and public-private partnerships.

TECHNORATI TAGS: PORTLAND, OREGON, PETER WILCOX, PASSENGER-ONLY FERRIES, FOOT FERRIES, WILLAMETTE RIVER, SEATTLE, URBAN DENSITY, TRAFFIC CONGESTION, ORGANIZED LABOR