Cascadia Prospectus

The New York State legislature has taken the first step toward the possible implementation of congestion pricing in Manhattan by voting to establish a "New York City Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission."

The bill establishes a rigorous timeline for the development, review and approval of a preliminary traffic mitigation plan advocated by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, which would charge drivers entering Manhattan south of 86th Street an $8 toll between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. on weekdays, with much of the proceeds going to fund transit improvements. Under the new legislation, April 1, 2008 is the target date to give the City the green light to proceed with implementation of the traffic mitigation plan. The vote was 122-16 in the Assembly and 39-19 in the Senate in favor of the legislation.

The establishment of the Commission marks an initial step in what promises to be a complicated and contentious process whose ultimate outcome is difficult to predict. The plan to implement congestion pricing in Manhattan has to clear two major hurdles. The first is to obtain a federal grant under the US DOT's $1.2 billion Urban Partnerships program. The state legislation stipulates that the program cannot proceed unless the City obtains at least $250 million in funding -- either in the form of a single federal grant of $250 million or with a federal grant of $200 million to be supplemented by a City commitment of $50 million. The federal grant must be in place by October 1 and the city commitment by December 31.

The second hurdle is to obtain the blessings for congestion pricing from the 17-member Congestion Mitigation Commission and three separate politically elected bodies -- the City Council, the State Senate and the State Assembly. The bill, which uses the term "congestion mitigation" rather than "congestion pricing" in its title, empowers the Commission to come up with alternatives to areawide congestion pricing. However, the bill stipulates that the adopted congestion mitigation measures must produce at least a 6.3% reduction in average vehicle miles traveled (VMTs), as promised in the Mayor's original plan. Such a reduction might possibly be accomplished by tolling the East River bridges--- and do so with less disruption and at a lower capital and operating cost.

Both challenges bear further scrutiny.

The First Hurdle: Obtaining Federal Financial Support

The U.S. Department of Transportation is now faced with a difficult decision. It must decide whether New York City has met the conditions of the Urban Partnerships program and qualifies for a federal grant under that program. The Department has stipulated from the very outset that applicants must show evidence of having the authority to move forward with their proposed pricing strategy. New York City currently lacks such authority. The City will obtain authority to act only if and when the City Council and the State Legislature approve the implementation plan recommended by the Congestion Mitigation Commission. The consent will come at the end of March 2008 at the earliest. By selecting NYC for an award despite its current lack of authority to act, the Transportation Department would open itself to accusations of favoritism, since it had disqualified other candidate cities, such as Los Angeles, precisely because they offered to "study" rather than implement congestion pricing.

The quandary from the federal perspective comes from the fact that the NYC project offers a unique opportunity to demonstrate the concept of areawide (cordon) congestion pricing. It is generally agreed that New York City offers the most favorable venue for such a demonstration. A congestion pricing showcase in Manhattan could significantly enhance the political legitimacy of this concept and accelerate its public acceptance throughout the country -- an avowed policy goal of U.S. DOT leadership. We suspect there may also be some discomfort in denying an award to an important "client" such as New York City, although we think the Department would be on solid ground in defending a decision to turn the City down because of its inability to meet the program's eligibility criteria.

A possible way out of this dilemma is for the Department to employ the mechanism of a "pre-implementation grant" under the discretionary Value Pricing Pilot Program. An award of $200 million in the form of a pre-implementation grant would enable the New York initiative to go forward without doing violence to the Urban Partnerships program's selection criteria. The proceeds of the pre-implementation grant could go toward providing financial support to the Congestion Mitigation Commission and funding the City's activities preparatory to implementing the Commission's recommendations ( as, for example, improving bus service.)

So far, despite repeated press inquiries, the U.S. DOT has maintained silence as to its intentions. Its decision will be made known on August 8 when the Department announces the finalists in its Urban Partnerships program.

The Second Hurdle: Preserving the Integrity of the Congestion Pricing Option

The second hurdle facing Mayor Bloomberg's congestion pricing proposal is of a more substantive nature. It involves (1) convincing the 17-member politically appointed commission that congestion pricing ought to be a key element of its overall congestion mitigation implementation plan; and (2) persuading three independent politically elected bodies -- the City Council, the State Senate and the State Assembly-- to adopt the implementation plan substantially as proposed by the Commission.

At each stage of the process, opponents of congestion pricing will have an opportunity to challenge the Mayor's proposal, question his assumptions, offer amendments to his plan and propose other traffic mitigation alternatives, such as tolling East River Bridges.

"Real questions are going to be asked and answered, whether the mayor likes it or not," said Assemblyman Richard Brodsky, a sharp critic of the Mayor's plan. Echoed John C. Liu, Chairman of the City Council's Transportation Committee, "Speaker Christine Quinn and I and our colleagues in the Council will be looking very carefully at the issues involved. We have local constituents who are very concerned about the impact that congestion pricing will have on their neighborhoods."

The latest Quinnipiac poll tends to support the lawmakers' concerns. It shows NYC respondents to be against congestion pricing by a margin of 52% to 41% (Manhattan voters support it 59% to 37%).

Challenges may be expected to many aspects of the Mayor's proposal. Among them are the proposed northern boundary of the charge zone (86th Street), the proposed schedule of fees, the number and nature of exempted categories of drivers, the nature and timing of transit service improvements, ways of handling traffic and parking at the periphery of the zone, methods of collecting fees from drivers that do not have E-ZPass, the ability of the trans-Hudson transit links to handle the extra commuters diverted from their cars, and the possibility of substituting a targeted tolling component (such as tolls on the East River bridges) for a citywide congestion fee.

The Commission may also want to raise the larger question of the impact of congestion pricing on residents of other boroughs and of suburban jurisdictions. Finally, there exists the possibility of a lawsuit challenging the plan on the grounds it lacks an environmental impact statement (EIS), an eventuality that could seriously delay implementation..

"I am afraid the final outcome may bear little resemblance to what Mayor Bloomberg had in mind," one local elected official who considers himself supportive of the Mayor's plan told us. What he meant was that a number of things could still derail or seriously modify the plan or delay the start of implementation. Adding further uncertainty is the fact that 2009 is a mayoral election year. Congestion pricing could well become a volatile electoral issue.

Implementation Timeline

July 26, 2007: The state legislature approves A9362, a bill to establish the New York City Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission, a 17-member body appointed by the Governor (3 appointees), the Mayor (3), City Council (3), State Senate Majority Leader (3), State Assembly Speaker (3), Senate Minority Leader (1), and Assembly Minority Leader (1)

By August 1, 2007: The Mayor submits a congestion pricing plan to the Commission. The Commission may hold hearings and consider a variety of options before producing an "Implementation Plan."

August 8, 2007: US DOT announces finalists in the Urban Partnerships Program. US DOT must award New York City at least $200 million or the deal is off.

By October 1, 2007: The NY State DOT and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority submit comments on the Mayor's plan, including additional capital required by the plan. US DOT must "commit" at least $200 million or the deal is off.

By January 31, 2008: The Commission votes on an Implementation Plan.

By March 28, 2008: The City Council votes on the Implementation Plan, and sends a "home rule message" to the state legislature indicating the outcome of its vote.

By March 31, 2008: The New York State Assembly and Senate vote on the Implementation Plan.

TECHNORATI TAGS: NEW YORK CITY, TRAFFIC CONGESTION, CONGESTION PRICING, MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, URBAN PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM

The catastrophic collapse yesterday of a worn down, 40-year-old, 1,900-foot-long bridge with a single steel arch at its center, spanning Interstate 35W across the Mississippi River in Minneapolis had as of this morning resulted in four deaths, up to 30 people unaccounted for, and at least 79 more injured - some quite severely. The fatality toll is likely to grow. Very recent maintenance work on the bridge had focused on joints, lights and guardrails, and resurfacing work was being done on it when it failed. The cause of the collapse is unknown and will remain so until an investigation is completed. However, it can come as little comfort that, as the Associated Press notes in a report today from Minneapolis, the feds identified the bridge as "structurally deficient" in 2005. Yet it turns out that term is considered by many officials to be less alarming than it sounds.

The bridge had been inspected by the Minnesota Department of Transportation in 2005 and 2006 and no immediate structural problems were noted, Gov. Tim Pawlenty said Wednesday. A federal database, however, showed the 40-year-old bridge had been rated as "structurally deficient" in 2005 and possibly in need of replacement, the (Minneapolis) Star Tribune reported citing the U.S. Department of Transportation's National Bridge Inventory. The White House also confirmed the 2005 inspection. White House press secretary Tony Snow said the span rated 50 on a scale of 120 for structural stability. "This doesn't mean there was a risk of failure, but if an inspection report identifies deficiencies, the state is responsible for taking corrective actions," he said.

Jeanne Aamodt, a spokeswoman for the Minnesota Department of Transportation, said her agency was aware of the 2005 assessment. She noted that many other bridges around the country carry the same designation and declined to say what the agency had done to address the deficiencies.

Lowered expectations for bridge condition standards and repair funding is well-integrated into governmental rubric. In the The Federal Highway Administration's "Status of the Nation's Highways, Bridges and Transit: 2006 Conditions and Performance," the report's authors state in Chapter 3 that:

Two terms used to summarize bridge deficiencies are "structurally deficient" and "functionally obsolete." Structural deficiencies are characterized by deteriorated conditions of significant bridge elements and reduced load-carrying capacity. Functional obsolescence is a function of the geometrics of the bridge not meeting current design standards. Neither type of deficiency indicates that a bridge is unsafe.

Got that? "Deteriorated conditions of significant bridge elements and reduced load-carrying capacity" does not indicate that a bridge is unsafe. What a relief!

Call it "defining deterioration down." According to the report, as of 2004, 26.7 percent of the nation's bridges were either "structurally deficient" or "functionally obsolete." It wouldn't do to have one-quarter of our nation's bridges considered unsafe: that would raise the scepter of malignant neglect.

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer this morning reports that in a 2005 study, the American Society of Civil Engineers found that 26 percent of Washington state's 3,000 bridges also earned the classification of "structurally deficient" or "functionally obsolete."

Of the state's bridges, (Washingtoon State Department of Transportation chief bridge engineer Jugesh) Kapur said two -- the (Alaskan Way) viaduct and the Evergreen Point Bridge, which crosses Lake Washington as part of state Route 520 -- cause him the most concern. "Those two keep me up at night," he said. Six years ago, engineers determined that a magnitude 6.5 earthquake in the wrong spot could collapse the Evergreen Point Bridge and the viaduct.

....The city and state remain at an impasse over the elevated structure's future and a possible replacement option. A $4 billion-plus initiative is planned to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge. Studies have shown that the bridge wouldn't survive a catastrophic earthquake and could also sink in a windstorm. A review panel -- mostly lawyers and engineers appointed by Gov. Chris Gregoire -- has advocated decisive action. "The existing viaduct and bridge will continue to deteriorate and inch closer to catastrophic failure" until a decision is made, panelists wrote in a September report.

Richard Miller, director of roadway structures for Seattle, said Wednesday that several of the city's 180 bridges need to be replaced, most notably the Magnolia Bridge. Miller said the city Transportation Department is reviewing several design options for a new Magnolia Bridge. Construction of a new bridge would likely start no earlier than 2009. Several South Seattle bridges are also in need of repair or improvement, Miller said. The Airport Way South Bridge is being help up by temporary supports, and several other smaller bridges are due to receive seismic retrofits.

WSDOT in April released a YouTube a video simulation of the 44-year-old SR 520 bridge collapsing in an earthquake. The $4.4 billion question is whether political leaders can summon the courage to fully fund the replacement sooner rather than later, something which will require tolling not only on 520 but also I-90.

The national problem of bridge safety carries a daunting price tag. In Chapter 7 of the FWHA 2006 report, the agency warns that merely to keep travel time, operational and crash costs from deteriorated bridges at their current (2004 constant dollar) level through 2024 will cost $78.8 billion; and to actually reduce such infrastructure-related costs in the same time frame would cost $131.7 billion in improvements, including increased local, regional and state user fees or taxes.

In its "Report Card For America's Infrastructure," the ASCE gave our nation a "C" grade for the condition of its bridges, and in that section adds:

Solutions intended to ease the increasing demands on our transportation system and to improve highway conditions, capacity and safety are multifaceted, and do not always mean simply building more roads and bridges. America must change its transportation behavior, increase transportation investment at all levels of government, and make use of the latest technology. Cities and communities should be better planned to reduce dependence on personal vehicles for errands and work commutes, and businesses must encourage more flexible schedules and telecommuting. By 2010, all levels of government should ensure that fewer than 15% of the nation's bridges are classified as structurally deficient or functionally obsolete (itals in original).

As Cascadia Center pointed out in this 2005 Puget Sound Business Journal op-ed, the federal Highway Trust Fund generated via the federal gas tax and additional fees is increasingly insufficient for repairs and improvement of major transportation infrastructure.

Now in Washington state, political and business leaders and policy experts need to join with voters to build trust in transportation system management, funding and decision-making. That means an end to balkanization in transportation governance. That means developing a shared vision of convenient, fast transit options needed to dramatically boost actual transit usage. And that means innovative financing of necessary road and bridge repairs or replacements using tools such system-wide time-variable tolling on major highways, and public-private partnerships.

Let's not wait for one of our bridges to collapse before we get moving.

TECHNORATI TAGS: MINNEAPOLIS, 35W, BRIDGE COLLAPSE, BRIDGE SAFETY, MAINTENANCE, FUNDING, WASHINGTON STATE, EVERGREEN POINT FLOATING BRIDGE, ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT, TOLLING, PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS, AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS

My colleague Steve Marshall, a senior fellow at Discovery Institute's Cascadia Center For Regional Development, has authored a new white paper, for the Third Annual Conference On Renewable Energy In The Northwest. It's titled, "Replacing Oil with Electricity and Biofuels in Transportation: The Convergence of Technology and Public Policy." The pdf file is here.

Marshall cites data showing transportation plays a major role in greenhouse gas emissions, especially in Washington state, and argues that clean electricity and biofuels used to power vehicles can yield substantial environmental, economic and political benefits. Marshall provides a detailed factual narrative of commitments to test and develop plug-in hybrid vehicle technology by vehicle manufacturers, electric power utilities and technology companies. He also highlights the potential for a Northwest Pilot Project to help policy-makers and electric utilities better understand how plug-in hybrids can be integrated with our region's electric power system.

He writes:

Washington State enacted legislation that provides initial funding for a plug-in hybrid pilot project...There is an effort underway for our region to work with the federal government to design a pilot program to determine how best to integrate plug-in hybrids into our power grid and the existing transportation system...Should we provide recharging at bus park and ride lots and transit centers? Provide "green lane" incentives? What replaces gas tax revenues if and when flex-fuel hybrids cut gas consumption and thus gas tax revenues? Is it time to test congestion pricing as a substitute?

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission member Jon Wellinghoff has proposed a "cash-back hybrid," that would link the vehicle to grid with two way power flows. Imagine an owner of a PHEV being able to drive to a park and ride lot, park and plug in his or her car and get free recharging and a small check at the end of the month simply for being connected to the grid and able to supply ancillary services or standby peak power.....A Northwest pilot project could test and refine, for example, the use of a utility-controlled chip for allowing recharging at optimum times and for Vehicle to Grid (V2G) services.

Much as Thomas Edison's Pearl Street project...demonstrated...the electric light bulb was part of a larger and necessary system of electric power production and delivery, we need a similar demonstration for flex-fuel, plug-in hybrids as part of an overall transportation and power system.

We'll keep you posted on progress toward the goal of fully funding a Northwest Pilot Project to help integrate PHEVs with the regional transportation and power system.

Additional resources:

"Environmental Assessment of Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles," Electric Power Research Institute, Natural Resources Defense Council, 7/07;

"Go Green, Go Fast: Jump Start To A Clean, Secure Energy Future With Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles," Steve Marshall, Bruce Agnew, Seattle Times, July 2, 2007;

"Green Wheels Are Spinning For Venture Backers," Steve Marshall, Bruce Agnew, Puget Sound Business Journal, May 25, 2007

"City Plugs In To Hybrid Car Trend: Toronto To Launch Pilot Project With Cars That Can Be Charged From Any Wall Socket," Tyler Hamilton, Toronto Star, May 24, 2007;

"How To Improve The Efficiency Of The World's Biggest Machine - While Solving A Few Other Problems Along The Way," Jon Wellinghoff, Commissioner, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, May 7, 2007;

"Plug-In Hybrid Electric Cars - How They'll Solve The Fuel Crunch," Ben Hewitt, Popular Mechanics, 5/07;

"Gentlemen, Start Your Plug-Ins," R. James Woolsey, Opinion Journal (Wall Street Journal), Jan. 1, 2007;

Impacts Assessment Of Plug-In Hybrid Vehicles On Electric Utilities And Regional U.S. Power Grids - Part 1: Technical Analysis," Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 12/06.

TECHNORATI TAGS: PLUG-IN HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES, GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, FUEL EFFICIENCY, ELECTRIC POWER GRID, CASCADIA CENTER, NORTHWEST PILOT PROJECT, STEVE MARSHALL

In a Puget Sound Business Journal op-ed published this morning, our Cascadia Center's Director Bruce Agnew posits that tolling and private investment could pay for replacement of the shaky Alaskan Way Viaduct on State Route 99 in Seattle - and for reconfiguration of badly-congested Interstate 5 in the city, as well. Neither are included in a multi-billion-dollar roads and transit ballot measure facing Central Puget Sound voters in November.

...two crucial transportation projects relevant to the Minnesota tragedy are partially on hold -- replacement of the central waterfront section of Alaska Way Viaduct on State Route 99, and full funding for reconstruction of the 40-year-old stretch of Interstate 5 from Northgate to Tukwila.

....any notion that the viaduct's 110,000 daily vehicle trips can be replaced by a series of transit enhancements fails to comprehend the complexity of moving freight in a constricted north-south corridor. Simply put, I-5 can't take any more traffic and freight can't take a bus. Solutions so far have been piecemeal and money is scarce.

....So we propose a bold -- some would say radical -- rethink. Our plan would consider both I-5 reconstruction and added capacity and replacement of the central section of the Alaskan Way Viaduct, within the context of regionwide tolling and partnerships for private capital. A deep-bored tunnel through downtown to replace the viaduct, beginning at Sodo and splitting to either State Route 99 east of the Seattle Center or continuing to the Mercer/I-5 ramp, would segregate local traffic from through traffic, and would avoid the construction disruptions on the central waterfront that threaten businesses....

A twin-bore tunnel is being built right now in Seattle, for light rail: more details in Agnew's op-ed.

In addition to accelerating the reconstruction of I-5, our plan would redesign the reversible express lanes from Northgate to downtown...(with)...an additional "contra flow lane" in the opposite direction.

This would allow the (I-5) express lanes to operate 24 hours a day in each direction and provide an additional through lane in the difficult downtown area, which currently has only two through lanes. Overpasses and ramps would have to be modified or removed, but a bottleneck of gigantic proportions would be eliminated, and it could be done on the existing footprint. For this premium service, a variable toll would be charged for the express lanes only; drivers could still access the regular lanes free. We'd dedicate a portion of the toll to expand bus rapid transit options as a supplement to current transit investments on I-5 and Highway 99.

How do we pay for such a feat of engineering without added taxpayer exposure? Answer: In addition to tolls, union and public employee pension funds could be invested in these projects and would pay back a return over many years.

In the op-ed, Agnew explains why this is not merely wishful thinking. He concludes:

Gov. Chris Gregoire and the Legislature should consider modifying state law to allow this partnership with union pension funds. And if the November ballot measure fails, (replacement of) the State Route 520 bridge should be added to the I-5/Highway 99 pilot project.

Our failure to think big in the past is one reason we're in today's transportation mess. Let's start now to change that.

Read the whole thing; and let us know what you think, in the comments section of this blog entry.

TECHNORATI TAGS: TOLLING, PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS, ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT, TUNNEL, SEATTLE, INTERSTATE 5, TRAFFIC CONGESTION

Add the concept of "shadow tolling" to the roster of innovative road financing methods. Introduced in the United Kingdom some ten years ago, the concept of shadow tolling has crossed the Atlantic and is being considered by the Florida Department of Transportation in its I-595 corridor project. The state is inviting the private sector to help finance, build and operate a 10.5-mile stretch of elevated toll lanes intended to relieve congestion in the busy I-595 corridor that connects I-75 with the Florida Turnpike and I-95 in Broward County. I-595 currently carries about 180,000 vehicles/day in the busiest stretch of the corridor, and the volume is expected to rise to 300,000 by 2035.

The state is ready to commit $900 million to the project and is asking the private sector to finance the remaining $300 million of the $1.2 billion project as well as to build, operate and maintain the facility. But instead of letting out a toll concession wherein the private concessionaire would collect and pocket the toll revenue, the state proposes to collect the tolls and pay the private builder-operator a fee based on the number of vehicles using the toll facility. More here from Miami Herald reporter Larry Lebowitz.

The $1.2 billion project would expand and improve the existing east-west corridor that currently supports close to 200,000 vehicles a day, and add three elevated, reversible, variably priced toll lanes (on I-595) from Interstate 75 and the Sawgrass Expressway in the west to U.S. 441 and Florida's Turnpike in the east.

From the average commuter's perspective, the highest profile change would be the addition of the 10-mile tier of variably priced toll lanes -- charging real tolls, not spectral ones. The express lanes, which would be open eastbound in the mornings and westbound at night, are designed to enhance ''through'' traffic only. This means all traffic entering or exiting between the end points will have to use the at-grade ''free'' lanes. Toll prices would be posted on electronic message signs as drivers approach the elevated lanes and change every few minutes depending on how many cars are using the special lanes.

The idea is pure supply-and-demand economics: promise motorists a theoretical 55 mph trip on the elevated pay lanes regardless of how congested the ''free'' lanes are moving below. The more congested the roadway, the higher the toll....this method has been used to finance major infrastructure projects in the United Kingdom, Spain and Australia, but never in North America.

From the perspective of the state, shadow tolling has several advantages over a private concession.

In another Miami Herald story earlier this summer on the I-595 elevated express lane plans, financing options took a back seat to the access and aesthetic concerns of some local residents.

The state and a federal agency have approved the elevated express lanes after a public hearing in 2005. Since then, the municipalities of Plantation and Davie have come out against the elevated lanes. FDOT is trying to figure out how to pay for them.

"When 595 opened, in a very short period of time it was already over capacity," said Alicia Gonzalez, a spokeswoman for the Florida Department of Transportation. "We understand the residents may not see the value of improving this corridor with elevated lanes, but what good is looking out of their back door and seeing a parking lot called Interstate 595? We need to come up with an alternative for the next 30 to 50 years," Gonzalez said.

Also, Gonzalez said, while Plantation wouldn't have an on-ramp for the express lanes, every car that gets on the special lanes in Weston is a car that Plantation residents wouldn't have to compete with on the main highway. As for appearances, double-deck expressways are widely thought of as eyesores. But FDOT is hoping to build a newer style of elevated lanes, built on a single row of pillars running down the center of the median. A similar design in Tampa drew little opposition once people saw the pictures, officials there said.

A decision on whether to green light the "shadow-tolling" finance plan for the elevated express lanes on I-595 is due in early September. If the financing approach is approved, a contractor would be selected by late 2008, construction started in 2009, and completed in 2014.

TECHNORATI TAGS: SHADOW TOLLING, TOLLING, PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS, FLORIDA, I-595, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

News that federal DOT officials have accepted the offer by Puget Sound transportation leaders to toll a new State Route 520 bridge by September of 2009 in exchange for $139 million in new bridge-rebuild cash from the feds will accelerate a much needed debate about the eventual need for system-wide tolling here. This dialog is coming despite two state gas tax hikes in recent years, and a hard-to-get-your-mind-around $17.8 billion regional Roads and Transit vote on November 6. The new federal money for rebuilding the unsafe and congested SR 520 bridge - money explicitly conditioned upon supplemental tolling of the bridge - comes in response to a successful Urban Partnership grant application to USDOT from a team including WSDOT, the Puget Sound Regional Council and King County.

Several developments would add impetus to the dialog on regional highway tolling for Puget Sound.

First, the state legislature has to authorize tolls on SR 520 as part of the deal. Once that happens -- and given the inevitable backlash from some corners in the contentious local transportation scene -- the debate will start in earnest.

Another key player is Governor Chris Gregoire, who did not assert a pro-tolling position in the unsettled examination earlier this year of how to pay for replacing the aged and unstable Alaskan Way Viaduct on State Route 99 in Seattle. One major concern for the Governor was "leaking" revenue as motorists used other untolled routes versus a tolled Viaduct. Given that a valuable federal grant for the crucial SR 520 bridge rebuild is conditioned on tolling that bridge, the stakes grow larger. The Governor needs to make regional highway tolling a big deal in next year's proposals to the Legislature.

In addition, local elected leaders who want to add a third major tax increase for transportation in four years to Puget Sound households (this fall's Roads and Transit ballot measure), need to be clear and honest about the inevitability of tolls and taxes. Study after study has shown that we will need twice as much funding as we have for safety, capacity and technology improvements to meet the twin challenges of more people and freight coming to our region.

Environmental and other prerogatives add to the impetus for expanded transportation funding options, including regional tolling. The transportation system is moving inexorably to biofuels and electricity due to national security and global warming concerns. As a result, the gas tax will soon fade away as the chief funding source.

So let's use the relatively positive experience from tolling on the new Tacoma Narrows Bridge - and the current debate over SR 520 - to launch a much larger community discussion about system-wide tolling in Puget Sound.

Highways in congested metropolitan regions need to be thought of as a scarce resource, and priced accordingly for single-occupant vehicles.

RELATED:

"Highway Tolls Are Inevitable In Metro Puget Sound," Dean Paton, Crosscut;

"Destination 2030 - Taking An Alternative Route," (regional tolling study prepared for King County Executive Ron Sims by Washington Transportation Research Center - University of Washington, & Booz Allen Hamilton);

"Public-Private Partnerships For Toll Highways," Robert Poole, Reason Foundation (Congressional testimony);

WSDOT news release on $138.7 million federal grant for 520 bridge rebuild;

WSDOT's "State Route 520 Bridge Replacement and HOV Project" Web page.

TECHNORATI TAGS: SR 520 BRIDGE, TOLLING, REGIONAL TOLLING, GAS TAX, URBAN PARTNERSHIPS, WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, KING COUNTY, PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL

The bridge collapse in Minneapolis stressed the precarious state of the nation's infrastructure, and has made infrastructure financing a tempting subject for an election-year policy debate. First to react publicly was Rep. James Oberstar (D-MN), chairman of the powerful House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. He said a temporary 5-cent/gallon gas tax extending over 3 years might be necessary to finance his proposed trust fund to repair structurally deficient bridges in the National Highway System; that would raise roughly $28-30 billion. He'll hold a hearing on the state of the nation's bridges on September 5.

Ranking Member John Mica (R-FL) was next to react. He called the chairman's proposal inadequate, "a band-aid solution" which ignores the larger problem of the deteriorated condition of other transportation modes, for which dramatic investment in all is required. Toward that end, national columnist Neal Pierce offers a provocative proposal for a new weight-based federal excise tax on every new vehicle sold in the U.S.

President Bush, at a press conference on August 9, threw cold water on the congressional talk. He rejected the idea of a gas tax increase, saying that Congress should first look at how it spends existing funds before calling for more money. He said, "if bridges are a priority, let's make sure they get funded first" in an obvious allusion to the congressional penchant for earmarking transportation funds for pet local projects ($24 billion or approximately 8 percent of the total SAFETEA-LU authorization.) It is clear from Mr. Bush's remarks that any congressional proposal to raise gas taxes during this session of Congress will invite a presidential veto.

Senator Max Baucus (D-MT), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, also came out against an increase in the federal gasoline tax, further dimming the hopes of Rep. Oberstar and other tax proponents. In an interview, Baucus said continuing to rely on gas tax revenue is not practical. "There are better alternatives," he said, "I don't think an increase in the gasoline tax is needed." Baucus' opposition is particularly significant since his Senate Finance Committee (along with the House Ways and Means Committee), would have to pass upon any tax increase.

That is how the lines were drawn as Congress adjourned for the summer recess.

With national elections 15 months away, the state of public infrastructure and how to pay for its upkeep and reconstruction could become the subject of a lively policy debate.

The Conservatives vs. The Innovators

At the risk of oversimplification, we shall call the advocates of the opposing perspectives, the Conservatives and the Innovators. Both the Conservatives and the Innovators see a need to increase transportation funding. And both condemn the excessive use of congressional earmarks. Where they differ is how to finance the funding shortfall.

The Conservatives (in the Adam Smith sense of the word) look upon the gas tax as the mainstay of the surface transportation program and favor a fuel tax increase (plus indexing) as the principal means of dealing with the funding shortfall. They cite ease of collection and proven revenue raising capacity of the gas tax as compelling reasons for retaining it as the main source of highway funding. They acknowledge the value of tolling, private capital and public-private partnerships but tend to dismiss them as minor contributors to the transportation program. Nor are they convinced that congestion pricing can be a serious source of revenue.

The Conservatives favor maintaining a strong federal role in the surface transportation program and oppose any movement toward devolution. Rep. Oberstar and Jack Schenendorf, vice chairman of the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Commission appear as the most prominent spokesmen for this point of view.

The Innovators, on the other hand, tend to think that the time has come for a fundamental rethinking of how the nation's surface transportation system should be financed and managed. They question whether the gasoline tax alone can continue to fund the nation's growing transportation needs. They point to the likely trend of rising vehicle fuel efficiency, increasing cost of road construction and eroding value of the tax dollar as reasons why we need to diversify the funding sources.

They do not suggest doing away with the Highway Trust Fund, for its resources will be vitally needed to help preserve, rehabilitate and upgrade existing highways and bridges. But they think that funding new infrastructure will require a fresh approach. They see tolling, congestion pricing, private capital, private road concessions and public-private partnerships becoming vital elements of highway financing and management.

With financial responsibility for new infrastructure shifted to the states, Innovators see the federal role in surface transportation diminishing. They think inflation-indexed tolling may become a significant source of revenue to the states and they assume that toll roads will become a sound investment for the private sector. Finally, they believe that the surface transportation program should become more targeted. Federal funding, they contend, should be focused on the most pressing problems such as traffic congestion and freight movement and not dissipated on a large number of unrelated projects of local interest.

The most prominent spokesmen for this point of view are Transportation Secretary Mary Peters, certain members of the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Finance Commission and several governors, notably Mitch Daniels (IN), Rick Perry (TX) and Charlie Crist (FL). Secretary Peters summarized the Innovators' philosophy succinctly when she said, in announcing the winners of the USDOT Urban Partnership grants: "We must stop relying on yesterday's ideas to fight today's traffic jams."

Public opinion and the mood of the times seem to be on the side of the Innovators. Voters are reluctant to accept gas tax increases in the face of $3 per gallon gasoline. Even in Minnesota, 57% of respondents in a recent Survey USA poll said they oppose higher gas taxes to fix infrastructure. Equally important, the public is skeptical that new taxes would be used to improve roads and bridges.

Secretary Peters agrees: "When you or I pay our gas taxes today we don't really know where that money is going to go or whether or not it's going to benefit us directly in our communities," she remarked in a PBS interview. "People are reluctant to spend more money [in taxes] unless they know that money is going to actually make an improvement in the transportation infrastructure,"

Nevertheless, a modest increase in the federal gas tax seems inevitable-- if not during this congressional session then in the next Congress. The Highway Trust Fund is expected to reach a negative balance in FY 2009 and needs an injection of fresh revenue simply to maintain current levels of expenditure. However, it seems equally inevitable that tolling, private capital and public-private partnerships, rather than new taxes, should become the primary means of expanding the surface transportation system. This conclusion does not stem from an ideological conviction. Rather, it is grounded in the reality that every last cent we can raise through the gas tax will be needed to maintain and reconstruct our aging infrastructure.

TECHNORATI TAGS: ROADS, BRIDGES, FINANCING, FEDERAL GAS TAX, JAMES OBERSTAR, JOHN MICA, GEORGE W. BUSH, MAX BAUCUS, MARY PETERS, TOLLING, PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS, NEIL PIERCE, FEDERAL VEHICLE EXCISE TAX

Did anyone miss the headlines? The much anticipated I-5 closures produced no traffic catastrophe. Instead, usage dropped 50% during the 2 week period. And apparently no one knows why. Was it the bikes? The transit? Flexible work hours? Signals? Here's another theory: it was also a coordinated effort by all levels of government in Puget Sound. It proved that when a major project is orchestrated at a regional level, the payoffs are substantial.

Some of the planning I read or heard about: an additional Sounder Commuter Rail train, additional Water Taxis, extra parking at Park and Ride stations all the way to Tacoma and Kent. Extra shuttle services between communities and drop-off points for transit. Increased vanpools and more bike transit options in all parts of the county.

The drop in traffic wasn't about Seattle telling Seattleites to find alternatives; it was about mobilizing the resources in the region to coordinate with each other and find alternatives. It wasn't just about relieving pressure on Seattle's surface streets, but relied on roadways from Bremerton to Carnation.

If there is one thing that we have learned from this experience, it should be that we are a regional metropolis and planning should be viewed through that lens. More importantly, that if reasonable, cross-county, user-friendly alternatives are provided, people will gladly use them.

TECHNORATI TAGS: PUGET SOUND, I-5, RESURFACING, TRAFFIC CONGESTION, TRANSIT, ALTERNATE ROUTES, REGIONAL PLANNING, PUBLIC INFORMATION

Recently, The Wall Street Journal provided a rosy update on Amtrak service and an increasing federal budget, particularly for the New York-Boston corridor.

Airplanes are getting stuck in lots of traffic jams this summer, but Amtrak is on a roll. Ridership on the passenger rail system is up 6% so far this year, the biggest jump since the late 1970s. On the Acela Express, trains that run at higher speeds between Washington, New York and Boston, the number of riders has surged 20% over the past 10 months. That's enough new passengers to fill 2,000 Boeing 757 jets.

Ridership is up, according to the article, as business people - wary of endless hassles at Northeast airports - increasingly turn to the comfort of Acela high-speed trains. Meanwhile, folks traveling on this side of the country (from Vancouver, B.C., to Portland, Ore.) are riding old Superliner equipment, while the eight-year-old sleek, highspeed, Spanish-made Talgo equipment is laid up because of cracks in the train sets.

Congress and the Administration need to get serious about funding a national freight and passenger rail system. And they should reward states like California and Washington who have invested hundreds of millions of dollars worth of state transportation funds in partnership with Amtrak - not just the politically well-connected Northeast states that have hardly invested any state or local resources.

Recently, the British Columbia government stepped up to invest nearly $5 million in track improvements to allow a second roundtrip between Seattle and Vancouver in advance of the 2010 Olympics. Perhaps it is time to petition Ottawa and Washington to form an international compact for coinvestment in the corridor for freight and passenger capacity. Real investment would go a long way toward relieving pressure on overcrowded I-5 and Highway 99. That, in turn, might have the added benefit of reducing this region's contribution to global warming gases.

TECHNORATI TAGS: AMTRAK, CASCADIA, CALIFORNIA, WASHINGTON, INVESTMENT, FREIGHT, PASSENGER RAIL, U.S. CONGRESS