Cascadia Prospectus

Car-sharing just got a one-up. Enter Velib, the Parisian bike-sharing program.

Zipcar (or should I say Flexcar?!) is so last year. The latest and greatest is bike-swapping -- better for your health, the environment, cheaper and vastly more flexible. With the expansion of the Burke-Gilman Trail and Bike Master Plan approval, maybe Seattle is the place to start the trend, State-side?

It works like car-sharing... you pay roughly $30 for a year membership, but unlike its carbon-depended cousin, you get 30 minutes free for every trip using Velib. It is then incrementally a dollar (roughly) an hour--$1 for the first hour, $2 for the second hour-- the idea is to avoid permanent "check-outs". Bikes are available every 300 meters (few hundred feet), and are interchangable. If you want to extend the time, you can swap it with one down the road, and the clock restarts. Clever, huh?

In Seattle, the idea would be to pair the bike system with public transit -- have many pick-up locations in urban neighborhoods and suburban developments, where people can grab and go (in this case a shared bike). They ride to the park and ride, and hop on transit. After work, they hop off transit, grab one of the many bikes waiting and ride it back to neighborhood or suburban bliss.

It's really quite dreamy, and a great addition to our current transit system. Instead of wondering about whether the park and ride will be full, or how you're going to walk the extra 2 miles to your friend's house, you just grab a bike at the Transit Center. Even better, the system in Paris was entirely self-funded through advertising contracts. Image: a huge boon to mobility and convenience, with no taxpayer money. What a steal!

In its election year "short session" concluded last week, the Washington state legislature took several important, albeit partial steps to advance tolling, commuter rail, passenger-only ferries and innovative transportation funding partnerships with non-government entities.

Let's review some key '08 transportation bills that made it through both legislative chambers, and now await the signature of Gov. Christine Gregoire.

ESHB 3096 (bill as passed - bill report - legislative history) has to do with the State Route 520 floating bridge connecting Seattle across Lake Washington to fast-growing Eastside business and residential centers such as Bellevue, Kirkland and Redmond. The bill report reminds us that the bridge carries 115,000 vehicles and about 150,000 people per day; it is 1.5 miles long and 44 years old. It's been widely noted the rickety span could suffer a catastrophic failure in a severe windstorm or earthquake. So 3096 firms up the intent of lawmakers to toll State Route 520 to help pay for replacement of the current bridge. It creates an SR 520 bridge tolling implementation committee to guide coming decisions by the state transportation department and state legislature.

The committee's charge includes making recommendations to avoid traffic diversion to other state and regional roads such as the parallel I-90. This could result in tolling on I-90 as well as 520. Tolling 520 and perhaps also I-90 would be a crucial second step toward regional tolling for Puget Sound - following on tolling which began last year on the new Tacoma Narrows Bridge, and the four-year SR 167 congestion pricing pilot project starting next month (SR 167 time-variable tolling sign, below right). While politically sensitive, regional highway tolling, and in particular congestion pricing to control peak hour flows, are crucial if we are to handle a projected 52 percent increase in population by 2040.

The committee must consider technology, too. That means, in accordance with the current industry standard and tolling on SR 167 and the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, that electronic transponders and overhead gantries will be prioritized over tollbooths. Additionally, the bill requires that the SR 520 tolling committee consider "partnership opportunities." This is a clear reference to possible alliances limiting taxpayer exposure if costs will ultimately exceed available public monies. Partners would be non-government entities, perhaps labor or public employee union pension funds. Private transportation investment funds also enter into a variety of partnership agreements with willing government sponsors, but it's best if the public entity retains ownership of the asset and toll rates.

The 520 tolling committee must also consider input from the public and local elected officials, and report back to the governor and legislature by January of 2009. Then, the bill says, the state department of transportation may seek legislative approval for tolling the existing 520 bridge, and work with the feds to get around a generic prohibition of tolling on Interstates, barring a special agreement tailored to a facility. This is considered eminently do-able; and tolling on I-90 to limit traffic diversions is essential if tolling 520 is to work.

As noted in this Washington Post story yesterday, Seattle is one of five regions nationwide to receive a special federal "Urban Partnerships" grant for innovative solutions to road congestion. Here, it is $139 million, to help pay for implementation of congestion pricing on the new SR 520 bridge and various transit projects including $3.5 million to help launch a new passenger-only ferry in the metro region's western reaches, between Kingston in Kitsap County, and downtown Seattle. But for Puget Sound to get this federal largesse, there's a hook: the grant requires that "variable" tolling, levied at different rates depending on time of day or road congestion level, be approved by the state by September 30, 2009 for the 520 corridor.

To set the stage for that '09 legislation, state lawmakers in the recent session also approved E2SHB 1773, which sets a broader state policy framework for tolling (bill as passed - final bill report - legislative history). The bill states that the legislature must authorize any specific tolls; that tolls can be applied to bridges, highways, transportation corridors, approaches and bi-state facilities; and that the aims of tolling in Washington state will be to improve transportation system efficiency and provide funding, not only for construction but also for maintenance, operations and management. This last part represents an important acknowledgement that tolling is not just for getting things built; it is also now necessary for a big share of life-cycle costs. That's because federal and state gas tax revenues are in an irreversible decline as sources for construction and maintenance.

Without specificly mentioning the word, the bill leaves open the possibility that with legislative approval some future tolling revenues could be used to help fund transit. This is something Cascadia Center supports, as our director Bruce Agnew tells the Seattle Post-Intelligencer this morning.

HB 2730 (bill as passed - bill report - legislative history) advances regional passenger-only ferries, rescinding a state prohibition against their operations by port districts on Puget Sound. This bill is tailored to the above-noted Kingston-Seattle foot ferry route for which the Port of Kingston has received federal grant funding contingent on tolling of SR 520.

The Eastside commuter rail line which Cascadia Center has championed as part of a rails and trails partnership will get a closer look, under HB 3324 (bill as approved - bill report - legislative history). It directs Sound Transit and the Puget Sound Regional Council to examine existing reports and possibly commission a new analysis of the proposed north-south commuter rail between residence-rich east Snohomish County and the booming Eastside business centers of King County, along the abandoned BNSF freight rail line. In any event, under the bill, Sound Transit and PSRC would report to the legislature by February 1, 2009 on the line's estimated ridership, potential station sites, best routing options, track condition, regional benefits including tourism, and adjacent trail costs. The legislature has appropriated $100,000 for the study effort, in the conference committee supplemental transportation budget bill, 2878--S.E. AMC S6122.3 (p. 29, line 34). And as the HB 3224 bill report immediately above notes, Sound Transit has indicated it is willing to contribute up to double that amount. As part of this larger effort, Cascadia Center has also discussed contributing an amount in the range of $20,000 to $25,000 for a ridership survey.

Supplemental transportation appropriations via HB 2878, which cleared both chambers, provides an additional peek into the legislature's thinking on metro-region roads and transit (bill as passed - bill report - legislative history).

Included in the bill are provisions which:

The state is getting out of operating passenger-only ferries, and local operators including King County, the Port of Kingston, Kitsap Transit and others are filling the void. Cascadia Center continues to advocate a voluntary interlocal agreement between ports, cities, counties, private boat operators, tribes, labor and others - coupled with combined funding for foot ferries and Puget Sound cleanup - to help establish a coordinated regional foot ferry system on Puget Sound.

As a non-profit think tank, Cascadia Center does not lobby the legislature or advocate passage or rejection of any bill. However, we do try to advance solutions to a range of transportation problems via op-eds, papers, studies, conferences and this blog. So we're pleased that although possibilities for conclusive action were constrained in this year's session, significant progress continued on a number of issues important to us.

TECHNORATI TAGS: TOLLING, CONGESTION PRICING, SEATTLE, PUGET SOUND, WASHINGTON STATE, SR 520, I-90, PENSION FUNDS, PASSENGER-ONLY FERRIES, COMMUTER RAIL

We talked here recently about Velib, the Parisian bike-sharing service, and how excellent it would be to have something similar in Seattle environs. Apparently I'm not the only person to think of this... Michele, at the Washington State Department of Transportation, informed me that the University of Washington is launching a similar on-campus program with automated rentals of electric bikes, in partnership with Scootabella Incorporated and Intrago Mobility Corp. of Boulder, Colorado. First in the nation. We are so cutting-edge.

AND it's electric.

Sure, you can strap your own bike to the Metro bus, or just ride it hither and yon. But while some Huskies may not mind getting all fragrantly sweaty, many cubicle dwellers may. And that's where the "electric" part hits the jackpot. As "Dr. Go" explains in this Intrago "Last Mile" video.

Intrago CEO Larry Blankenship confirms that the UW pilot program is set to launch this coming fall. Many kudos to UW Director of Transportation Services Josh Cavanaugh, who was instrumental in advancing the pilot progam, according to Blankenship. UW's U-Pass program already provides a variety of incentives for commuters to cut single-vehicle travel.

Eventually, says Blankenship, the idea is to expand automated electric bike rentals to a range of metro locations within test markets such as Seattle. Like Velib, this would make intra-city walking a more attractive proposition, as well as transit.

Sign me up!

TECHNORATI TAGS: VEHICLE TRIP REDUCTION, ELECTRIC BICYCLES, UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, INTRAGO, WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Clinton, Obama Co-sponsors

The problem of infrastructure deficit received prominent attention from the governors and state officials meeting in Washington during the month of February. But aside from agreeing that the needs for infrastructure funding are great, that present resources are inadequate, and that earmarks are a poor way to deal with the problem, few solutions were offered as to how to meet the revenue shortfalls. That's why a March 11 hearing by the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs took on special significance. The hearing focused on a bill sponsored by Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd (D-CT) and Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) to create a National Infrastructure Bank (S. 1926).

Described by Sen Dodd as a "unique and powerful public-private partnership," the proposed Bank could potentially offer a fresh solution to the challenge of infrastructure financing.

The bill proposes to create an independent national bank financed with a $60 billion bond issue. Using the bonds to leverage private capital, the bank would supplement public spending and finance large capacity-building infrastructure projects "of substantial regional and national significance." Candidate projects would be brought to the Bank's attention by state and local sponsors. Eligible projects would include roads, bridges, mass transit systems, wastewater treatment facilities and public housing.

"The federal government does not and will not have the resources to meet our future national infrastructure needs," said Sen. Hagel in his opening statement. "While the proposed legislation is not the entire solution, it can be part of the solution." The intent of the legislation is to create "an architecture," in Sen Dodds' words, that would make it possible to address the challenge of modernizing the nation's public infrastructure in a concerted and systematic manner.

Although the bill is not entirely clear on this point, we assume that preference would be given to income producing assets such as toll roads and bridges. Principal and interest on "project-based infrastructure bonds" issued for such assets could be repaid with revenue generated by user fees and make the projects self-financing. The tax-free bonds, backed by the full faith and credit of the federal government, would offer an attractive investment to institutional investors such as pension funds, whose liabilities and payout requirements would match the bonds' long-term maturities.

The Dodd-Hagel proposal should appeal to the large majority of congressional lawmakers who are reluctant to vote for higher gasoline taxes but who nevertheless believe that the nation's growing infrastructure deficit must not be left unattended.

The idea of separating capital spending from normal operating expenses and the concept of a national capital budget that would be immune from the vagaries of annual congressional appropriations, has a number of influential  proponents. They include Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, and Felix Rohatyn and Warren Rudman, co-chairs of the Commission on Public Infrastructure of the Center for Strategic International Studies.

But the idea of a national capital budget is not without its critics. The Treasury Department might be opposed to the bonds if they became a new encumbrance on the U.S. treasury.  The congressional appropriators might object to the Bank as usurping their prerogative to be the sole dispensers of the federal largesse. There might also be objections from those who believe that the answer lies in relying more heavily on market forces to direct private investment into the needed infrastructure rather than creating a new centrally directed bureaucracy.

Lastly, the sum of $60 billion in the proposed bond issue may appear as insignificant when contrasted with the $1.6 trillion national infrastructure deficit estimated by the American Society of Civil Engineers.

However, the bill's endorsement by both Democratic presidential candidates, Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York and Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, should add considerable weight to the notion of a national capital budget and ensure its continued visibility in the policy debate.

What's more, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's support may earn the bill an early place on the House legislative agenda. At a news conference on March 12, Pelosi said she favors a national infrastructure plan and wants the House to take up legislation such as the Dodd-Hagel bill that seeks to leverage public funding with private capital to finance critical infrastructure.   

RELATED: March 11, 2008 senate committee hearing testimony on the bill from Sen. Dodd, Sen. Hagel, and Mr. Rohatyn.

TECHNORATI TAGS: ROADS, BRIDGES, TRANSPORTATION, FUNDING, PENSION FUNDS, NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE BANK, S. 1926, U.S. SENATE, CHRISTOPHER DOD, CHUCK HAGEL, HILLARY CLINTON, BARACK OBAMA, FELIX ROHATYN, NANCY PELOSI