Cascadia Prospectus

As I've said before, I am all about reducing fossil fuel consumption. I'm about to buy a Toyota Yaris (a.k.a. "pea") for this purpose. I strongly believe in carbon taxes, or a cap and trade program. I say all of this as a preface for what is about to come, because I have shocked more than one person this past week. What is up with the disappearing parking spots?

Don't get me wrong -- density is a GOOD thing, and I have a personal vendetta against surface parking lots. But I also am aware of what it takes to create a thriving living environment, to draw people from all parts of our region to participate in the many attractions of denser neighborhoods, and of the small businesses that depend on that traffic.

What I don't understand is how eliminating and not replacing public parking lots will help mobility, neighborhood establishments, or the environment. Yet somehow this logic pervades our thinking. Fewer parking spots somehow equals less fuel consumption, (or more parking spots equals more greenhouse gases), when in fact the opposite might be true.

Let's face the facts: our transit system is nonfunctional for most people outside of commuting hours. Even then it can be awfully spotty; and my die-hard bus friends don't take public transit on the weekends... it just isn't worth the time or energy. Thus, until we have a good transit system, we are stuck in our cars.

Thankfully, there is a lot we can do--buy smaller cars, run errands together, etc. But we still want to live and participate in the exciting place we call home... which inevitably means driving to places like Downtown Seattle, Belltown, Capitol Hill, Ballard, Greenlake, Kirkland... you get my point. Seriously, do we really expect people to get on a bus from Redmond to go to Tia Lou's on Saturday night? Or for someone to hop on Metro to get to the B&O Espresso or 5-Spot Cafe? It's simply not going to happen to any measurable extent.

So, we better have parking for all of those people who are supporting our thriving commercial districts. We haven't yet reached the critical point, but in some neighborhoods, we are coming close. For example, in my neighborhood on Capitol Hill, we are about to lose the only public pay lot for over a dozen blocks in either direction. The last lot on the Pine/Pike corridor vanished a few months ago.

So what results? Endless circling and distracted drivers who: a) are wasting large quantities of fuel driving for an extra 20-30 minutes; b) decrease pedestrian safety; and c) don't spend money in the area because they become less inclined to make the trip. I know people who refuse to patronize those areas anymore because they just can't find parking.

It's not that they won't drive as an alternative to not finding parking... it's that they will drive to a place that has parking instead. So this diatribe is not about solutions, it's just a warning.

Before we all get on the "parking is bad" bandwagon, let's be specific. Surface parking LOTS are a bad idea because they under-utilize the property and have a host of other unsightly problems. But PARKING is a necessary evil until we have a comprehensive transportation system. It can go underground, in stacked buildings, behind alleys, or on roofs. I just hope we realize this before all the parking is gone, and we lose the vibrancy of our commercial districts!

TECHNORATI TAGS: PARKING, TRANSIT, ECONOMY, PUGET SOUND, SEATTLE

Not all forms of public-private partnerships received an unreserved endorsement at the19th annual Conference on Public-Private Ventures in Transportation, staged recently by the American Road and Transportation Builders Association. Long term leases of existing toll roads, as exemplified by the Chicago Skyway and Indiana Toll Road, were viewed with skepticism by some speakers. Coming in for particularly severe criticism were leases whose proceeds would be dedicated to non-transportation purposes.

"If the motivation for a P3 project is to generate upfront cash that can be used to solve statewide budget problems or finance other expenditures not related to transportation, we will oppose that deal," announced AAA's Robert Darbelnet in a luncheon address. However, "public private partnerships are certainly one of the options, and I am here to say that AAA believes that these partnerships have a role to play."

Opposition to Chicago Skyway-type deals was also expressed by Jack Schenendorf, Vice Chairman of the federal commission on transportation policy and revenue, who cited the potential diversion of cash raised from long-term assets leases as a reason why the public and Congress are questioning the wisdom of letting out toll road concessions to private operators.

The current targets of this criticism -- proposals to lease the New Jersey Turnpike and the Pennsylvania Turnpike -- were absent from the program after having been prominently featured in past conference programs. Was this a subtle sign that the P3 community wishes to distance itself from these initiatives or at least to represent them as outside the mainstream of private sector involvement? That would be the hope of those who contend that the true purpose of public-private partnerships is to share in the risks (and rewards) of investing in new capacity-enhancing "greenfield" projects.

Confusing "monetization" of existing public assets with public-private partnerships sends a wrong message about the true purpose of the P3 process, and could lead to a withdrawal of congressional support from public-private ventures, or to the promulgation of restrictive congressional guidelines governing their use.

To Tax Or Not To Tax?

Many speakers voiced skepticism about the prospect for increased gasoline taxes and doubted that a small tax increase would make a dent in the infrastructure deficit. In sum, the consensus was that public resources will never be enough and complementary private capital will be needed to accomplish public purposes. A small increase in the fuel tax would be a band-aid solution, and with oil prices predicted to push past the $100-a-barrel mark, the prospect of Congress and state legislatures approving major increases in fuel taxes is remote.

Congressional reluctance to increase gas taxes was underscored by the news, made public on the eve of the Conference, that Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-MN) chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, bowed to political reality and withdrew his proposal for a 5-cent-a-gallon federal gas tax increase to fund his bridge reconstruction program. Oberstar's proposed tax hike was vetoed by the Congressional leadership and received little support from rank-and-file Democrats as well as Republicans. A gas tax increase faces bleak prospects heading into an election year, Oberstar acknowledged.

Discussions in the breakout sessions revealed a growing sophistication with the concepts of public-private ventures and a more cautious assessment of the rate of their penetration of the infrastructure market. Setbacks, such as the Texas moratorium, have moderated the initial "irrational exuberance," and the tendency now is to shift focus from high profile megadeals and long-term asset leases to more modest ventures, such as the public-private concessions in Mississippi and Georgia. New financing techniques such as "availability payments" that are tied to performance, and "shadow tolling" are emerging as alternatives to the first generation concession model.

TECHNORATI TAGS: PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS, TOLLING, REVENUE USE, CONCESSIONS, GAS TAX, TRANSPORTATION FUNDING, JAMES OBERSTAR, JACK SCHENENDORF, ROBERT DARBELNET, AAA, CHICAGO SKYWAY, PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE, NEW JERSEY TURNPIKE

The Seattle region is blessed with a tremendous natural endowment which doubles as a crucial piece of transportation infrastructure - Puget Sound. State and Pierce County car ferries already ply the Sound, as do a mix of public and commercial, privately-operated passenger-only vessels in King, Snohomish, Whatcom and San Juan counties. For the Puget Sound region, passenger-only ferries on the namesake waterway and on sprawling Lake Washington could be an increasingly viable transportation choice given current road congestion. With sufficient foresight and political leadership, passenger-only ferries plus expanded bus rapid transit and commuter rail could really begin to deliver more and better choices for commuters, other local daytrippers, and visitors who wish to escape the tyranny of traffic.

To lay the groundwork for a new era of passenger-only ferries, the King County Ferry District was formed after the passage of enabling state legislation. Key goals were: 1) sustain the Vashon-Island to Seattle passenger-only ferry route which Washington State Ferries decided to no longer operate; 2) enhance and expand the county's popular Elliott Bay Water Taxi route between Seacrest Park in West Seattle and Pier 55 downtown; and 3) run several demonstration routes on Puget Sound and Lake Washington to see which ones draw enough ridership to become sustainable. The envisioned new routes - such as Kirkland-Seattle, Renton-Seattle and Des Moines-Seattle - would provide alternatives to congested road corridors such as SR 520 and I-5.

All that is now a big step closer to implementation. Yesterday, the county council - sitting as the ferry district - approved a property tax of just more than 5 cents per $1,000 assessed valuation, which will cost the owner of a $400,000 home another $22 annually. Combined with other funding sources already identified for boats and landside improvements, the newly-approved tax will pay for the county's passenger-only ferry plan. The Seattle Times and Seattle Post-Intelligencer report; likewise the West Seattle Herald.

Cascadia Center believes that the council's action is an important first step toward a comprehensive regional network of passenger-only ferries that must be carefully coordinated across county boundaries and supported by private as well as public investment. In written testimony we submitted to the county, we stated:

The first demonstration route will be on Lake Washington from Kirkland to Seattle (likely the University of Washington) and back, beginning in July, 2009. That would be followed by another demonstration route between Seattle and the South Puget Sound city and port of Des Moines, beginning in 2010. Additional demonstration routes, introduced one per year thereafter, would be: Kenmore-Seattle and Renton-Seattle on Lake Washington; and Shilshole Marina in northwest Seattle to downtown, via Puget Sound.

Meanwhile, beyond King County borders, there have been other recent and promising developments for passenger-only ferries.

It all spells a clear re-awakening among decision-makers to the mobility benefits of smaller, more nimble passenger-only ferries in Western Washington. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer editorial board is enthused; the Kitsap Sun's editorialists, too. Seattle Times associate editorial page editor Lee Moriwaki writes that passenger-only ferries need to be understood as part of the broader public infrastructure that binds together our community.

TECHNORATI TAGS: PASSENGER-ONLY FERRIES, FOOT FERRIES, KING COUNTY, SEATTLE, PUGET SOUND, KITSAP COUNTY, TRANSIT, ROAD CONGESTION, TRAFFIC

With the defeat by Puget Sound taxpayers of a multi-billion-dollar roads and transit ballot measure Nov. 6, momentum is growing for tolling and congestion pricing to help ease traffic congestion in the Seattle region, as this news and opinion round-up shows. In a Puget Sound Transportation Action Plan just unveiled, Cascadia Center also accents tolling and congestion pricing, along with centralized regional decision-making on transportation; more private investment in roads and transit; more bus rapid transit and commuter rail; an enhanced network of suburban park-and-ride lots; plus more government fleet purchases of - and fuel infrastructure development for - flexible-fuel plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.

Puget Sound hesitantly stands on the cusp of allocating more rationally its scarce road capacity. Tolling is a required condition for a federal grant of $138 million to help fund a $4.4 billion-plus replacement of the earthquake-and windstorm-prone State Route 520 Floating Bridge (a.k.a. the Evergreen Point Floating bridge). Tolling the 520 bridge intelligently will necessitate congestion pricing on that span plus enhanced transit options, and tolling the parallel I-90 to the south. The new tolled southbound lanes of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge are proving popular, and a four-year congestion pricing pilot project is coming on State Route 167.

The growing impetus for further tolling and congestion pricing in Puget Sound aligns with national trends.

A privately-financed 10-mile toll road which runs north-south at the eastern reaches of San Diego opens today, as the San Diego Union-Bulletin reports. The South Bay Expressway will be operated by a unit of Macquarie Infrastructure Group, which assumed responsibility for a $635 million private investment to fund the bulk of the construction (total costs were $843 million) and operate the road, an extension of State Route 125. Tolls will range from $2 to $3.75, and will be levied via overhead gantries (above, left) communicating electronicallly with windshield-installed FasTrak transponders (below, right); and also via toll booths.

Some 30,000 to 40,000 cars are expected to use the tollroad daily, and tolls are intended to allow the company to recoup its investment and make a profit. Elected officials say the road would never have been built without private investment. Under the current agreement, MacQuarie will turn the road over to the state transportation department in 35 years, though that could be renegotiated. The South Bay Expressway is expected to provide congestion relief for heavily-used I-805, a parallel north-south road to the west. The deal was inked in 1991, but environmental and legal challanges delayed a planned 1995 opening until today. Regional officials would like to renegotiate a so-called "no compete" clause, which requires them to pay MacQuarie if they open competing toll or HOV lanes; four HOV lanes are being eyed for I-805.

This is not metro San Diego's first experience with tolling in recent years. The more dynamic form of tolling known as congestion pricing has been in place for almost 10 years on a major east-west Interstate in San Diego. CNN reports:

San Diego has been charging commuters a toll on an eight-mile stretch of I-15 since 1998, which lets those who pay use special lanes during peak hours. The charge varies from 50 cents to $8, depending on demand. Since the toll was imposed, usage of express lanes has nearly doubled, and the number of carpools has gone up more than 70%.

Back east, the New York Times reports (free reg. req.) the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is proposing to eliminate peak-hour toll discounts for transponder users, so that they would pay $8 peak tolls versus the current $5 (and $6 off-peak) tolls to use the Lincoln and Holland tunnels, the George Washington Bridge, and other bridges on Staten Island. Vehicles which meet low-emissions standards would only pay $4 at peak. The toll hikes, combined with proposed PATH commuter fare hikes, would raise an estimated $300 million per year to help finance a second commuter rail tunnel under the Hudson River, to Penn Station. The port authority wouild spend $100 million to completely phase out tollbooths in five years, in favor of electronic transponders. Public hearings are planned on the entire proposal.

A Hudson Valley daily - the Times Herald-Record - reports that the New York State Thruway Authority is being strongly urged by regional officials to institute congestion pricing for cars on the Tappan Zee Bridge. Currently, there's a frequency discount discount for cars, although trucks pay a congestion-based toll. Congestion-pricing for cars would help raise needed repair funds, the paper reports.

The authority is being forced to adjust tolls again because volatile gas prices are slowing traffic growth, but it will need billions in new money regardless to fix the old bridge, the source of almost 20 percent of the revenue from the statewide system.

Puget Sound has tens of billions worth of projected road and transit project needs in coming decades, as our burgeoning population grows still more; an estimated 52 percent by 2040, according to the Puget Sound Regional Council's projections. Increases in the motor vehicle excise tax, sales and gas tax can help fund some of these needs. But taxpayers are making it increasingly clear these sources are not an infinitely deep well; and alone will far from provide the bulk of needed transportation funding. A study done by the University of Washington and Booz Allen Hamilton earlier this year for King County Executive Ron Sims projected that system-wide tolling in Puget Sound could raise $1.1 to $1.6 billion per year, and about $36 billion over 20 years.

That could fund a lot of new toll lanes, express buses, and commuter rail. IF Puget Sound and the state can muster the vision and accountability to make the investment.

UPDATE, 11/20/07: Austin Jenkins, veteran statehouse correspondent for public radio's Northwest News Network, writes today in the online daily news magazine Crosscut that following Prop. 1's defeat, key state legislators are dusting off an early '07 tolling bill and passage of some version is likely in the '08 "short session" starting in January. The current bill, Jenkins reports, gives the legislature sole authority to impose tolls unless it grants exceptions; would permit "variable," or peak/off-peak pricing; details guidelines for the state transportation commission to follow in setting toll rates; and mandates that all tolls be used for the facilities or corridors from which they were collected. Unresolved now is whether tolls could finance transit. Tolling of SR 520 will likely be coupled with tolling of I-90, Jenkins reports.

RELATED:

"Gas Tax Revenue Drop Will Hasten Tolling," Bruce Agnew, Cascadia Prospectus, 10/4/07.

"Tolling Goes Mainstream," Ken Orski, Cascadia Prospectus, 10/3/07.

"$6 Billion Columbia Crossing Bridge Project Will Require Tolling," Matt Rosenberg, Cascadia Prospectus, 9/17/07.

"New Grant For Bridge Rebuild Prods Regional Tolling Debate," Bruce Agnew, Cascadia Prospectus, 8/15/07.

"Viaduct Bypass, I-5 Expansion Should Be Linked," Bruce Agnew, Puget Sound Business Journal, 8/10/07.

"State Treasurer Urges More Tolling For SR 520 Bridge Rebuild Tab," Matt Rosenberg. Cascadia Prospectus, 4/9/07.

TECHNORATI TAGS: SEATTLE, PUGET SOUND, TOLLING, CONGESTION PRICING, STATE ROUTE 520, SAN DIEGO, SOUTH BAY EXPRESSWAY, I-15, NEW YORK

Forecasts predict a veritable tsunami of maritime cargo swamping U.S. port facilities in the years ahead. In the past 5 years container trade in North America has increased by 6.8%. It's projected to soar by 50% by 2015, from 48 million TEUs in 2005 to 72 million in 2015. (TEU stands for "twenty-foot equivalent unit," a standard measure of container capacity).

By 2020 North American ports and their associated intermodal systems will be severely congested, with demand exceeding current capacity by as much as 200% assuming current productivity and growth levels, predicts John Vickerman, an industry expert in planning and design of port, intermodal and freight logistics facilities.

How should U.S. ports respond to this challenge? Some observers suggest that the capacity problem would be solved if port authorities placed operations on a 24/7 basis, as many foreign ports are doing. But there are many good reasons why that would be impractical in the case of U.S. ports, claims Brooks Royster, former director of the Port of Baltimore. These constraints include local regulation and work rules limiting hours of operation, inadequate labor pool of longshoremen, and the need for some slack time to perform routine maintenance. Only Asian ports exceed the productivity of our own ports, Royster contends, and then only because many of them are transshipment ports that do not have to move containers "through a gate" as is the case with destination ports like ours.

In rare cases, large private shippers will take care of their growing needs for cargo processing by constructing their own marine terminals. The Maersk Terminal in Portsmouth, Virginia is the first such in the U.S. to be independently constructed and privately financed by a major shipping line. But in the great majority of cases, major improvements and expansion of physical port capacity and their intermodal connectors currently falls on the shoulders of local taxpayers.

For example, container fees have been used to fund construction of the Alameda Corridor freight rail expressway conecting the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach (above, left); while "availability payments" would be used to help finance the Miami Port Tunnel, and the Port of Savannah Connector. Private concessionaires will invest in the projects up front and assume construction and performance risks. The public authority will pay the concessionaires an annual fee based on the condition and performance of the facility and its availability for public use. If maintenance, congestion levels, incident response or other stipulated performance measures are not met, the payments will be reduced.

A relatively new trend that may profoundly affect the future of port expansion is the growing willingness of private equity markets to invest in port facilities.

For example, last February, the AIG Global Investment Group bought long term leases to the Port of Newark terminal. The investment division of Deutsche Bank has bought Maher Terminals, the company that runs operations at the Port of Elizabeth in New Jersey. And the Ontario Teachers Pension Fund has taken over the lease from a shipping conglomorate to operate a terminal on Staten Island, N.Y.

In each case, the private investors are expected to inject new capital to improve the facilities and make them more productive. Even larger initiatives are in the offing. The Port of New Orleans is preparing a request for proposals (to be issued in 2008) inviting the private sector to participate in a one billion dollar program of facilities expansion including a new container terminal and a new cruise ship terminal.

Just as in the case of toll roads, the global capital markets have come to recognize that ports are a sound investment. Institutional investors with long-term investment horizons, such as pension funds, look upon these assets as a safe investment that offers future returns comparable to those from fixed income and real estate.

The growing scarcity of deep water port capacity and environmental obstacles to building new "greenfield" ports gives existing port facilities a large "revaluation" potential and more future pricing power -- and thus makes them more attractive to private investors, speculates Robert Flanagan, Senior Vice President of First Southwest Company and former Secretary of Transportation in Maryland.

Three recent announcements underscore the interest of global capital markets in transportation infrastructure: Australia's Macquarie Bank is planning to raise up to $8 billion to invest in European infrastructure assets as it continues its aggressive expansion in Europe, Middle East and North America. Called "European Infrastructure Fund III," it will be Macquarie's biggest single fundraising move in Europe, as it seeks to take advantage of plans by governments across Europe to privatize roads, airports and utilities. The Carlyle Group, one of the largest U.S. private equity funds, has announced that its Infrastructure Partners fund has raised $1.15 billion for investments in U.S. and Canadian transportation infrastructure projects. CalPERS, the largest public pension fund in the US ($245 billion in assets), has announced that it plans to shift up to $2.5 billion to a new infrastructure program focused on investments in new roads, bridges, ports, and water systems.

In announcing their decision, Charles Valdes, Investment Committee Chair, said CalPERS could become a major player in solving some pressing capacity problems related to transportation infrastructure.

CalPERS' action, which is the first such initiative by a major U.S. public pension fund, may augur similar moves by other pension funds.

Private investment in ports will be highlighted on the agenda of the North American Port and Intermodal Finance Investment Summit December 3-5 in Coral Gables, Florida. The Port of Tacoma's Jeannie Beckett, Senior Director, Inland Transportation, will be among panelists discussing new financing techniques in a Dec. 5 segment titled, "The Road Ahead."

TECHNORATI TAGS: PRIVATE INVESTMENT, INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDS, PORTS, NEW JERSEY, NEWARK, ELIZABETH, LOUISIANA, NEW ORLEANS, PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA, ALAMEDA CORRDIDOR, MIAMI PORT TUNNEL, AIG, DEUTSCHE BANK, ONTARIO TEACHERS PENSION FUND, MAERSK, ROBERT FLANAGAN, TOLL ROADS, MACQUARIE, CARYLYLE GROUP, CALPERS

State Auditor Brian Sonntag - whose office recently issued a performance audit of state and regional transportation management - is now urging the legislature to take stock after defeat of the big roads and transit ballot measure, Proposition 1. In a Tacoma News Tribune op-ed, Sonntag urges lawmakers to ensure the state re-establish congestion relief as a top transportation priority; and implement coordinated regional decision-making on transportation in Puget Sound. Sonntag writes:

Clearly, Proposition 1 was not what the public wanted. The first step in moving forward should be to ask citizens about their needs and what they are willing to support......the recent performance audit on traffic congestion in the region should serve as a good starting point for any discussions.....We learned from our extensive citizen outreach that congestion clearly is the primary focus of the public.

...The audit recommends a single agency to oversee transportation planning in the region. It identifies 128 public entities with responsibilities for transportation planning and spending in Puget Sound. This complex mix of agencies is awkward at best. Quite understandably, their interests are narrowly focused. At the same time, congestion knows no boundaries. One organization needs to coordinate the myriad of transportation planning activities and be positioned to decide what is best for the Puget Sound region. Planning for public transit and new lane capacity must be done together instead of independently.

That's one reason that while Cascadia Center supports the King County Council's recent and somewhat controversial move to levy a small property tax increase to help fund several passenger-only ferry routes, we also recommended in our written testimony to the council that a regional interlocal agreement be executed. It would stress pooled resources among different regional foot ferry stakeholders; route coordination; private sector partnerships; and next-generation, low-wake, high-speed foot ferries. The same principle of greater coordination and cooperation applies to the broader roads and transit choices facing the Puget Sound region.

In Cascadia Center's Transportation Action Plan for Puget Sound, we take up tolling, funding partnerships with public employee and labor union pension funds, and more - including regional decision-making on transportation in Western Washington. On that topic, Cascadia recommends in its plan that......

A regional transportation board of directors should:

1) Consolidate current regional transportation agencies;
2) Consist of elected and appointed members;
3) Include an advisory council;
4) Propose transportation projects and funding voters will approve
5) Maintain oversight and accountability on current projects, while continuing to plan for the future.

County borders are increasingly irrelevant. Alter (state) statutes to establish regional transportation decision-making bodies for Central Puget Sound (King, Pierce, Snohomish, Kitsap, Thurston), North Puget Sound (Snohomish, Skagit, Whatcom, Island, San Juan), and Southwest Washington - for the purpose of multi-county transportation project planning and funding. Snohomish could be part of two different regional groups, if it so chooses.

The three regional transportation decision-making bodies would be tasked to coordinate and pool resources with WSDOT for these programs: I-5 enhancements (including cross-Columbia River bridge), freight and passenger rail improvements (coordinated with British Columbia and Oregon), multi-county and special needs transit, and corridor-based technology improvements (i.e. truck parking, diesel emission reduction and alternative fuel/plug-in stations at I-5 highway rest areas).

There should be little lingering doubt about the need for bold steps to fund and manage Puget Sound transportation. Witness the current funding and decision-making stalemates on urgent safety replacements for the State Route 520 floating bridge, and the Alaskan Way Viaduct on State Route 99. Look also at the lack of funding for vital safety improvements to U.S Route 2 in Snohomish County, the crumbling South Park Bridge in Seattle and the Murray Morgan Bridge in Tacoma.

Any new regional transportation ballot measure must start to get the transit part right (preferred modes is a whole 'nother conversation) and focus on completing key road and bridge projects to improve safety and reduce congestion. Knowing that there will be future spending needs beyond any next ballot measure, a long-term financial plan must be produced at the same time, so there's a road map that wary voters can see.

This means that regional tolling - and specifically, congestion pricing - plus innovative financial partnerships with pension fund investors will be essential.

What entity can really pull all the big pieces together, other than a regional transportation board?

TECHNORATI TAGS: BRIAN SONNTAG, PERFORMANCE AUDIT, TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC CONGESTION, REGIONAL GOVERNANCE, PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS, CASCADIA CENTER, WASHINGTON STATE LEGISLATURE, U.S. ROUTE 2, SOUTH PARK BRIDGE, MURRAY MORGAN BRIDGE, ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT, STATE ROUTE 520 FLOATING BRIDGE

The regional transportation authority in Vancouver, B.C., Translink, today launched the operational Beta version of a new Web site called iMove that it says will integrate real-time traffic, construction and event data from across the region with transit routes and schedules, allowing motorists, commercial drivers and visitors to avoid roadway congestion, reduce stop-and-go traffic, save time and help cut greenhouse gas emissions.

Future improvements will include adding more content, and making this "advanced traveller information system for the Lower Mainland" accessible on cell phones, other Internet-connected handheld devices, and via on-board vehicle information systems. These delivery modes are a necessity if iMove is to become broadly utilized and really make a difference.

According to a Translink announcement issued today:

iMove consolidates information on construction zones, motor vehicle crash sites, ferry and public transit schedules, cycling networks and conditions at airports and the Port of Vancouver on a single, real-time web site....iMove users are able to search particular routes, regions, and modes of transportation to get an up-to-the-minute picture of the traffic situation.

"An integrated transportation system is key to the entire functionality of Metro Vancouver," says TransLink chair Malcolm Brodie. "Developing a system to provide integrated transportation information is a principal element, and we're proud of our ITS professionals for the years of hard work they have put in to make this a reality." More than a tool for commuters, iMove addresses the longstanding need for transportation-dependent businesses to have up-to-the-minute information.

A wholly-owned Translink subsidiary, Intelligent Transportation Systems Corporation, developed iMove. It was built by Toronto-based Delcan. Funding of just more than $1 million (C$) came from Transport Canada, the British Columbia Ministry of Transportation, Western Economic Diversification Canada and the Port of Vancouver. Translink has committed another $210,000 for marketing, content development and operations. iMove draws on a Regional Condition Reporting System comprised of traffic, construction and event data coming initially from 15 different cities in the Vancouver region, plus Translink, the Port of Vancouver and the University of British Columbia. Information is displayed via Google Maps.

Site users will have access to 125 webcams in the Vancouver region and northwest Washington, showing traffic conditions at ferry terminals, the Port of Vancouver, major roadway chokepoints, highway interchanges and border crossings. Users are encouraged to give feedback to Translink on iMove here.

Here's my loonie's worth. I took the site for a quick test drive today, and it shows definite promise. What's most impressive, off the bat, is the regional scope and the possibilities for customizing the information you need.

Using pull-down menus from icons atop the map - labelled "events," "cameras," "roads," "transit," "commerical," "marine," "air," "rail," and "cycling" - you can customize your map display with locations of park and ride lots, light rail routes, car and foot ferry terminals, congestion hot spots, current traffic incidents, current construction, truck weigh stations, no haz-mat zones and more. Then you can click on the individual icons on your customized map for more information, such as incident details, the exact location of a park-and-ride lot, a foot ferry route and schedule or bicycle trails.

Based on my initial impressions, a few improvements are needed. For instance, to get a full mapping of current traffic incidents in a sub-section of the region, I had to hack about a bit, first clicking on "full screen map," then eventually hazarding a click on the body of that map, after which nine incident reports east of Surrey helpfully appeared. These were small brown triangular icons with an exclamation point, upon which you click for more details. However, most lacked any information on alternative routes, under "advice." I'm sure Translink plans on addressing this last part, it's quite early and they've noted there's still much content to be added. It will be important to prominently feature accurate and timely alternative vehicle route information across the site, or the congestion-busting premise is significantly weakened.

Additionally, though there's a minimally useful site map, iMove really needs a User Guide so site newbies and and the Web-fluent non-geeks can more quickly grasp navigation tools and get the value proposition. I'm not about to be jiggering a cell phone or PDA in my car to look at a traffic site - even before pulling out of my parking space - unless the navigation is a snap and the right data comes quickly.

But all told, it's a promising start. Congratulations to Translink for launching iMove. The trick now will be to bring the site to more users through savvy marketing, and upgrade it by listening carefully to feedback. Ensuring smooth data delivery to mobile and on-board devices will also be key.

Related:

"One Stop For Transport Info," Peace Arch News.

"TransLink To Launch New Web Site To Help Commuters Navigate," News 1130

"TransLink Now On The iMove," 24 Hours Vancouver.

TECHNORATI TAGS: iMOVE, TRANSLINK, VANCOUVER, TRAFFIC CONGESTION, TRANSIT, WEB SITE, REAL-TIME TRAFFIC DATA

Under a planned deal between the Burlington Northern Sante Fe railroad, the Port of Seattle and King County, a key 31-mile stretch of the Eastside BNSF rail line could be ripped out for scrap, and soon, to make way for a recreational trail. A recreational trail is a great asset, bring it on! But road congestion is a growing problem in Central Puget Sound; population is projected by regional planners to swell 52 percent by 2040; and current transit options are limited. The full Eastside rail corridor should be not only preserved, but utilized for commuter rail and a trail. The Seattle Times reports today on Cascadia Center's proposal for an Eastside commuter rail line on the existing, 42-mile BNSF tracks from Renton to Snohomish, and a report we released last week from former BNSF executive Read Fay highlighting its feasibility.

Fay, who worked for BNSF for 35 years, rising to the post of Northwest operations chief, gave a presentation Monday night during a Cascadia-sponsored forum at Columbia Winery in Woodinville. Along with providing an overview of his report for us, he described existing machinery that can take up old track, and replace the wood ties with new concrete ones which will last 60 years. The cost is $800,000 per mile and it lays new track at a mile a day! What a relief for suffering Puget Sound commuters who wait for years for simple highway expansions.

Fay walked the entire line (Seattle Times graphic here) and estimated that track, tie and bridge work needed to permit 40 mph commuter line service would cost $37 million. Our estimate for getting the line fully operational, including state-of-the-art, bio-diesel burning, bike-toting Deisel Multiple Unit train cars, is about $125 million. The cost for creating a similar system on 32 miles of track in Austin, Texas is $92 million. DMU commuter rail has been operational for six years in the West Palm Beach region and is coming on line between Oceanside and Escondido, California; in Washington County, Oregon; in Alaska; and on Amtrak's Vermonter line.

One question is who will pay for an Eastside rail line. A possibility, though not the only one, is that Sound Transit, which already operates commuter rail on other lines in the region, could step in. From the Seattle Times story today:

If Sound Transit decided to pay for diesel service, (King County Executive Ron Sims' Chief of Staff Kurt) Triplett said, "we would be delighted with that. We would have them do that tomorrow. It's not that King County is not trying to have a transportation system on the corridor. We want one. It's that no one is coming with money on the table."

Here's an idea worth considering, one Cascadia and North Sound allies are already discussing in connection with an envisioned Everett to Bellingham DMU commuter rail line: a community rail partnership involving transit agencies and developers. Up north, that could involve (Snohomish County's) Community Transit, Sound Transit (which runs "Sounder" commuter rail from Seattle to Everett already), plus transit agencies in Skagit, Island and Whatcom counties, and private developers who help pay for station improvements in return for enhanced local economic benefits.

For an Eastside community rail partnership, Sound Transit and Community Transit could be joined by (King County) Metro, plus private developers who pay for station improvements through Local Improvement Districts such as the one formed along the new South Lake Union street car line in Seattle. (A preliminary conceptual sketch of the Eastside line's South Kirkland station, by J. Craig Thorpe for Cascadia Center, is above, right).

The flexibility of DMUs enhances their potential economic impact in Eastside communities. DMU coaches can travel not only on conventional rail, but also on track embedded in concrete, accessing downtown areas adjacent to the line, like Bellevue's.

Another way to help pay for developing DMU commuter train service on the BNSF line is through tolling on the parallel highway, I-405. The Washington Department of Transportation is already implementing a new approach to tolling just south of I-405 on another north-south artery, State Route 167, with a High Occupancy and Toll (HOT) lane for carpoolers and solo drivers who will pay a premium for access, via electronic transponder tolls. That's a good start, but there's more needed. The new general purpose lanes being added to I-405 in each direction should instead become HOT lanes, and each of those twinned with the one existing carpool (HOV) lane in each directuion, which would also be converted to HOT lanes. Dual HOT lanes in each direction should be added to SR 167 for continuity, and - here's the kicker - a portion of the I-405 tolls used to help fund the Eastside commuter rail line parallel to I-405. Another small portion of the tolls could help finance the planned recreational trail, for which current funding prospects are actually far less than assured.

We need to think big, but act practical. Voters firmly rejected the roads and transit ballot measure, Proposition 1, earlier this month, including an extension of Sound Transit's light rail system east from Seattle across Lake Washington into Bellevue and north to Redmond. Given the election outcome, it seems smart to shift away from tax increases to pay for tens of billions of dollars worth of new light rail before the first leg (UW to Sea-Tac airport) is completed and operational. We should find a way instead to upgrade the existing BNSF track and run DMUs every 30 minutes at 40 mph between Renton and Snohomish, for a cost in the very low hundreds of millions.

Related:

"Transportation Action Plan for Puget Sound," Cascadia Center;

"Eastside BNSF Rail Line Inspection Report," Read Fay, for Cascadia Center;

"Cascadia: Eastside Corridor Can Support Interurban Rail," KUOW-FM;

KOMO 1000 story;

"Preserve Eastside Rail Line for Snohomiish Transit Link," Bruce Agnew, Seattle Times;

"Rails And Trails Could Co-Exist Easily On Eastside," Bruce Agnew, Puget Sound Business Journal.

TECHNORATI TAGS: BNSF, SEATTLE, PUGET SOUND, COMMUTER RAIL, EASTSIDE COMMUTER RAIL, CASCADIA CENTER, I-405, TOLLS, TOLLING