(Source: The Infrastructurist)

The author make a convincing case for upping transit investments and transit-oriented development to make our systems efficient and suggests some drastic measures, which are considered often “basic” in the pro-transit world.  The summary goes like tihs: “The move toward a world where we need more alternatives to single-person auto travel is going to happen regardless of  US politicians. It would be better if we tried to get ahead of that curve. Lazrus is probably right to be gloomy about that–but wrong to be gloomy about the long-term prospects of transit and rail.”  If you are a transit nut, this is definitely worth a read.  Enjoy!

—————————————————————————————————————————-

Images Courtesy: Apture

Yesterday’s dispatch from LA Times business writer David Lazarus has a great lede: “It’s hard to appreciate how truly pitiful our public transportation system is until you spend some time with a system that works.” Many of us know that feeling.

Then he gushes about the consistently reliable, affordable and convenient transit systems in Japan. “I rode just about every form of public transit imaginable — bullet trains, express trains, commuter trains, subways, street cars, monorails and buses.” All fabulous, of course.

Then there’s that age old question of replicating it here in this place we call America. Lazarus argues that even if you build great transit and high speed rail networks people won’t use them in sufficient numbers unless you also strongly penalize car travel. Carrot and stick. But how to discourage auto use? Like this:

• Make driving more expensive with higher gas taxes and road fees
• Make parking much pricier and less convenient all over the country
• Redevelop our cities and suburbs to make them denser and more conducive to transit and rail travel

Pretty basic stuff, though Lazarus chooses to characterize this broader process as “making our cities less comfortable” and says he “simply can’t imagine political leaders at the local, state or federal level telling voters that they support a big increase in gas taxes, sky-high parking fees and high-density neighborhoods.”

That fact essentially seals the fate of transit and passenger rail, he argues.

Let’s assume for the sake of argument he’s right that politicians will never act to make driving meaningfully more expensive. Should we abandon hope for transit and passenger rail that doesn’t suck?

No. Potentially for two reasons, in fact.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: BBC)

A spate of car crashes across Russia has killed more than 100 people in one week – leading the government to blame the country’s “systemic” road problems.

Interior Minister Rashid Nurgaliev blamed criminal negligence and a road culture lacking basic driving skills.

He admitted Russian roads are bad, infrastructure is weak and drivers often chat on their mobile phones at high speed or drive while drunk.

Over 10,000 people died on Russian roads in 2009 – Europe’s highest toll.

In the last week a drunk driver in Perm hit a pregnant woman and child in a car-park, killing them both.

The Russian government has made earnest attempts to combat bad driving – including employing legions of traffic police with stop and search powers.

But Mr Nurgaliev admitted most drivers in Russia still think they can break the law and get away with it.

Click here to read the entire article.

The report evaluates incremental reductions in U.S. carbon emissions that could occur within the transportation sector as a result of a variety of transportation- and land use-related actions and strategies to minimize auto use. The report finds that land use strategies will produce the most emission reductions of all 50 strategies analyzed by the report.

Focusing solely on energy-efficient vehicles and cleaner fuels will not address the problem of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, according to this recent report. A key finding indicates that the U.S. could cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by as much as 24 percent by 2050, without road pricing strategies, through changes to current transportation systems and operations, travel behavior, land use patterns and regulatory strategies.

With pricing measures such as pay-as-you-go drive insurance, direct fees for vehicle miles traveled, carbon pricing or increased gasoline tax, GHG emissions reductions could be as high as 41 to 52 percent.

The research, prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc., focuses on strategies to reduce vehicle miles traveled and improve the efficiency of the transportation network. Land use is one of nine categories of strategies considered by Moving Cooler, along with transportation pricing and taxes, public transportation improvements, non-motorized transport such as walking and biking, regulations to moderate vehicle use and speed, intelligent systems, expanded highway capacity and more efficient freight movement. The effectiveness of each strategy in cutting greenhouse gas emissions is measured against a baseline that represents current trends.

Moving Cooler outlines a number of bundled strategies for discouraging travel in personal vehicles:

• create more transportation -efficient land use patterns
• encourage greater levels of walking and bicycling as alternatives to driving
• support ride-sharing, car-sharing, and other efficient commuting strategies
• subsidize public transportation fares, expanded routes and new infrastructure
• improve intelligent transportation systems to make better use of the existing capacity and encourage more efficient driving
• expand capacity and relieve bottlenecks to reduce congestion

But none of these steps will be as effective as establishing “strong economy-wide pricing measures.” For example, adding $0.60 to the price of a gallon of gasoline, starting in 2015 and increasing to $1.25 per gallon in 2050 could result in a 17 percent reduction of GHG in 2050, according to the study. If we introduced a fee similar to current European fuel taxes, starting at $2.40 a gallon in 2015 and jumping to $5.00 a gallon in 2050, we could see a 28 percent reduction in 2050. (These fees presumably would be added to the market price for gasoline.)

Moving Cooler points out that economy-wide pricing measures — such as an increase in the gasoline tax, carbon pricing, and pay-as-you-drive insurance – would produce the most significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, due to the likelihood of substantial shifts in driving behavior mandated by the high costs. However, outside of these pricing measures, the land use strategies produce the most emission reductions of any of the other strategies analyzed. Moreover, the costs of implementing such changes in development patterns are offset by the substantial savings in the cost of vehicle ownership and maintenance, the report adds.

The study’s authors say these pricing measures would have two effects: to cut back on vehicle miles traveled and to accelerate implementation and purchase of fuel-efficient vehicles—like hybrids, plug-in hybrids, and electric cars.

Moving Cooler cites multiple benefits derived from combining concentrated, mixed-use land development strategies and non-motorized transportation strategies to reduce auto dependency: “The combined effect of more compact land use, improved transit service and improved bicycle and pedestrian conditions would be to improve mobility by non-automobile modes…Increased opportunities for walking and biking will lead to improvements in public health, and exercise and activity levels increase. Finally, denser development can lead to energy and greenhouse gas savings through decreased building use, in addition to transportation efficiencies.”

Click here to read the Executive Summary or here to download the the entire report in PDF.

(Source: Washington Post & AASHTO)

Supporters garnered the necessary two-thirds support to push through the stop-gap measure intended to keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent through September 30, the end of the fiscal year. The vote was 363 to 68.

The government estimates the account could run dry within several weeks without an emergency infusion of cash. The fund provides states with about $40 billion per year in transportation construction funding.

Trust fund disbursements are separate from the billions in economic stimulus money dedicated to states for transportation projects.

The Senate is expected to act on the temporary trust fund measure before the end of next week, and lawmakers plan to address a longer-term remedy after their August recess.

During the 40 minutes of House floor debate this afternoon, supporters argued the Highway Trust Fund needs additional funding immediately to prevent the payment slowdown to states, which could cause states to then curtail their road construction activity. Opponents contended the transfer is not paid for by any new revenue source and that Congress needs to stop bailing out the Highway Trust Fund. Congress sent the fund an additional $8 billion last September when a similar funding crisis developed due to lower revenue in the trust fund than had been projected as a result of Americans driving less during the economic recession and thus paying less in gasoline and diesel taxes as well as in heavy-truck taxes.

The House bill approved today contains no extension of authority for federal surface transportation programs, which is scheduled to lapse Sept. 30 at the end of this fiscal year. While House leaders have been pushing a full six-year authorization measure, the Obama administration and the Senate have favored a temporary extension of current authority for 18 months. Today’s House vote means Congress will have to face the authorization question in September after returning from the summer recess.

House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James Oberstar, D-MN, said during today’s floor debate that he regrets Congress must take action to shore up the Highway Trust Fund. But the drop in vehicle miles traveled experienced over the past year and a half has left the trust fund short of its revenue projections, necessitating an infusion, he said. Oberstar’s six-year, $500 billion authorization measure has been approved by subcommittee but not been brought up before the full T&I Committee yet because there is no agreement with the House Ways and Means Committee on how to raise the extra revenue needed to pay for it.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Wikipedia, AOPA Blog, Hoax-Slayer.com)

For many of us, there exists on the world map a small state called Gibraltar, which is a self-governing British overseas territory located on the southern end of the Iberian Peninsula andEurope at the entrance of the Mediterranean overlooking the Strait of Gibraltar. The territory covers 6.843 square kilometres (2.642 sq mi) and shares a land border with Spain to the north. The Gibraltar Airport is 1,600 feet from the city, the shortest commute of any major airport in the world. One would naturally ask the question how difficult it is to operate and land aircrafts when the airport is so close to the city.  British Gibraltar has very little area, and the important airport runway takes up a major portion of land. To drive from Gibraltar to Spain, vehicles must cross the runway.The picture below (taken by a Cessna Pilot as he approached for landing) shows you what happens in Gibraltar where pedestrians and vehicles share the space with aircraft on the tarmac.

Image Courtesy: AOPA

(Source: Streetsblog, WATodau.au.com, Smart Growth America)

Image Courtesy: Smart Growth America

Within the $787 billion stimulus bill that became law in February, Congress provided states and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) with $26.6 billion in flexible funds for transportation projects. Today marks 120 days from the apportionment of the funds to the states.

Smart Growth America released a report today examining how well states have been spending these billions. As they say on the Smart Growth America blog today, not only did the money arrive in a time of economic recession, but “at a time of embarrassingly large backlogs of road and bridge repairs, inadequate and underfunded public transportation systems, and too-few convenient, affordable transportation options.”

So after 120 days, how have states done in addressing these pressing needs and investing in progress for their communities?

After analyzing project descriptions provided by states and MPOs, Smart Growth America found forward looking states and communities that used the stimulus money as flexibly as possible, repairing roads and bridges and making the kinds of smart, 21st century transportation investments that their communities need to support strong economic growth.

While some states proved excellent at investing wisely and making progress, most states failed to fulfill pressing transportation needs. Nearly one-third of the money, $6.6 billion, went towards building new road capacity. Only 2.8% was spent on public transportation, and 0.9% percent on non-motorized projects.

The Secretary of Transportation, Ray Lahood, in his daily blog noted that ARRA is working successfully across America. Some folks in the transportation community are not totally happy about how the money had been spent. Streetsblog points out that $6.6B in Stimulus Cash is spent on New Roads, Not Repair. It says:

Distressingly — but unsurprisingly — quite a lot is going to new roads rather than repair of existing ones. Of the $26.6 billion sent to states under a flexible transportation mandate, SGA found that $6.6 billion has gone towards building new highway capacity.

Only $185 million of the flexible stimulus aid has been used on transit and non-motorized transportation, which was given about $8 billionin separate funding as well.

One culprit behind this questionable use of taxpayer money, as SGA reports, is a theme at risk of repeating itself during the upcoming debate over broad transportation reform: the lack of accountability.

Most states and localities reported the projects they selected for stimulus aid only after the fact, allowing a privately run website to monitor the process much faster than the Obama administration.

But inconsistent reporting is just the beginning of the problem, as SGA points out in its report:

Most states failed to educate, engage, and seek input from the public before making decisions. … There is not a clear articulation of what project portfolios should accomplish, no methods identified for evaluating projects against these goals or against one another, and few repercussions for achieving or failing to achieve these goals.

SGA mined the stimulus itself, as well as comments by administration officials, to produce a list of nine goals that can be used to evaluate its transportation spending. But the lack of tangible consequences for not meeting those goals has left states free to spend at will, often focusing more on the report’s No. 1 objective (“create and save jobs”) than Nos. 5 (“improve public transportation”), 7 (“cut greenhouse gas emissions”), and 8 (“not contribute to additional sprawl”).

Interestingly enough, Senior White House adviser David Axelrod says the economic stimulus package has not yet “broken the back of the recession” but set aside calls for a second massive spending bill. Republicans, meanwhile, have called the spending under way a failure.

Some economists and business leaders have called for a second spending bill designed to help guide the economy through a downturn that has left millions without jobs. Axelrod said it’s too early to know if more spending would be needed or if the administration would seek more money from Congress.

“Most of the stimulus money – the economic recovery money – is yet to be spent. Let’s see what impact that has,” Axelrod said. “I’m not going to make any judgment as to whether we need more. We have confidence that the things we’re doing are going to help, but we’ve said repeatedly, it’s going to take time, and it will take time. It took years to get into the mess we’re in. It’s not going to take months to get out of it.”

Click here to download Smart Growth for America’s report:  The States and the Stimulus – Are they using it to create jobs and 21st century transportation?

(Source: AFP via Google, ITDP & Jakarta Post)

New laws requiring disabled pedestrians to wear traffic signs have met with frustration and derision in Indonesia, where in the eyes of the law cars have taken priority over people.

The laws will do nothing to improve road safety or ease the traffic that is choking the life out of the capital city of some 12 million people, and serve only to highlight official incompetence, analysts said.

Within five years, if nothing changes, experts predict Jakarta will reach total gridlock, with every main road and backstreet clogged with barely moving, pollution-spewing cars.

That’s too late for the long-awaited urban rail link known as the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT), which has only just entered the design stage and won’t be operational until 2016 at the earliest.

“Just like a big flood, Jakarta could be paralysed. The city’s mobility will die,” University of Indonesia researcher Nyoman Teguh Prasidha said.

Instead of requiring level footpaths and ramps, lawmakers voted unanimously this month to demand disabled people wear signs announcing their condition so motorists won’t run them down as they cross the street.

Experts say the new traffic law is sadly typical of a country which for decades has allowed cars and an obsession with car ownership to run rampant over basic imperatives of urban planning.

“It is strange when handicapped people are asked to carry extra burdens and obligations,” Institute of Transportation Studies (Instran) chairman Darmaningtyas said.

A 2004 study by the Japan International Cooperation Agency found that traffic jams cost Jakarta some 8.3 trillion rupiah (822 million dollars) a year in extra fuel consumption, lost productivity and health impact.

Paralyzing traffic jams and severe air pollution are the most frequent answers when people are asked what they know about Jakarta. Motorized vehicle ownerships increase in line with a rise in income per capita.

An Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) study notes that motorized vehicle ownership is growing at 9 percent every year, with more than 1,500 new registrations being filed a day for motorcycles and 500 a day for cars.  The study discusses various options including BRT, incentives for biking, etc to manage the growing congestion problem that is now threatening to cripple the growth of the country’s economy and adversely affect the quality of life of its citizens.

Now, growth of the vehicle population is not the only problem.  The drivers behind the wheel are adding to the chaos on the roads.  An article that recently appeared in the online edition of Jakarta Post, says the following: Driving in Jakarta is nothing short of chaotic, thanks to the huge quantity of people using the roads, the often terrible condition of the roads and the vast variety of vehicles there are. All of this chaos is only made worse by drivers who are reckless and dismissive of other road users.

There are drivers that seem utterly oblivious to there being anybody else on the roads except themselves. Perhaps they are too comfortable in the enclosed air-conditioned capsule that is their vehicle, as they listen to pumped-up stereophonic music or even watch small video screens, to pay any attention or care about anyone else on the roads.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: GAO)

The Highway Account within the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) is the principal means for funding federal highway programs. Administered by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) within the Department of Transportation (DOT), it channels about $33 billion in highway user excise taxes annually to states for highway and related spending.

Estimated outlays from the Highway Account under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act—A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) exceeded estimated receipts throughout the authorization period—fiscal years 2005 through 2009. Furthermore, actual account receipts were lower than had been estimated and the account balance dropped more rapidly than anticipated, approaching zero in August, 2008. Congress subsequently approved legislation in September 2008 to appropriate $8 billion from the General Fund of the Treasury to replenish the account. Agency officials anticipate the account will reach a critical stage again before the end of fiscal year 2009, and estimate that about $15 billion will be needed to ensure account solvency through the end of fiscal year 2010.

This report summarizes GAO’s past work on:

• The collection and distribution process for the Highway Account of the HTF,
• Options for improving long-term sustainability of the HTF, and
• Mechanisms to help manage Highway Account solvency.

Image Courtesy: GAO

The collection and distribution of funds through the Highway Account is a complex process. Collection involves Treasury receiving excise taxes from business entities, estimating how much should be allocated to the Highway Account, and adjusting the estimated allocation several months later after actual tax receipts are certified. Distribution begins with a multi-year authorization act that provides contract authority and establishes annual funding levels.

DOT apportions the contract authority to the states and divides the funding level among federal highway programs and states. DOT then obligates funds for projects and reimburses states as projects are completed. Improving long-term sustainability is one of GAO’s key principles for restructuring existing transportation programs, and GAO has reported on options for improving sustainability:

• Improve the efficiency of current facilities,
• Alter existing sources of revenue,
• Ensure users are paying fully for benefits, and
• Supplement existing revenue sources, such as through enhanced private-sector participation.

Each of these options has different merits and challenges, and will likely involve trade-offs among different policy goals. Improving existing mechanisms intended to help maintain Highway Account solvency could help DOT better manage the account balance. For example, statutory mechanisms designed to make annual adjustments to the Highway Account have been so modified over time–particularly through changes in SAFETEA-LU–that they either are no longer relevant or are limited in effectiveness. Furthermore, monitoring indicators that could signal sudden changes in revenues could help DOT better anticipate changes in the account balance and communicate with stakeholders on the account’s status.

DOT is acting on recommendations GAO made in February, 2009 to help improve solvency mechanisms and communication with stakeholders.

Click here to download the entire report.

(Source:  Minnesota Public Radio, The Hill, The Trucker, Detroit Free Press, Transportation for America)

Image Courtesy:USDOT Secretary Ray LaHood's Blog - Fast Lane

Legislative Journey Begins:

Congressman Jim Oberstar’s transportation bill starts its legislative journey today with a draft session scheduled in a House of Representatives subcommittee.

It’s the one of the first steps toward a vote for the bill, which would nearly double current spending. The Obama administration has proposed postponing reform, but Oberstar says waiting dooms the country to years of delay on transportation projects.

Oberstar’s Surface Transportation Authorization Act would provide $337 billion in funding for highway construction, $100 billion for public transit and $50 billion to build a nationwide high-speed rail system–a grand total of nearly $500 billion over six years.

Funding for the bill remains sketchy, though Oberstar promises details as it progresses. There’s been no talk of increasing the federal gasoline tax which hasn’t been raised for 16 years.

Oberstar rails against the Obama administration position, saying an 18-month delay, given how Congress does its work, translates into a four-year wait for federal money from a new federal transportation bill. Oberstar’s timeline for finishing work on a new federal transportation bill is ambitious. He wants a vote no later than just after Labor Day.

LaHood told a Senate Appropriations transportation panel last week that he wants to work in the 18-month extension for the kinds of program changes that lawmakers seek.

“Our number one priority is to fix the Highway Trust Fund, to pay for it, to find money, and along the way here if we can have the discussions about these other things, I think we should,” LaHood said.

But Sen. Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat and the committee’s chairman, said: “Conversations are great; passing legislation is hard.” She said she was “concerned about some of the lack of details … You’re offering a general framework for us, but we can’t wait very long for a proposal.”

Unlikely Ally – K Street:

Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.) has a powerful ally in his battle with the White House over the highway bill: K Street.

Trade associations, unions and business coalitions are getting behind the House Transportation Committee chairman in his push to complete the $450 billion measure before the fiscal year ends on Sept. 30. The Obama administration has argued the transportation reauthorization bill is a bridge too far for an already jam-packed legislative agenda and wants to extend the current law at least 18 months before Capitol Hill can take on new reforms.

But lobbyists are arguing that the debate over how best to pay the increased transportation funding Oberstar is proposing — whether it is through raising the tax on gasoline or taxing vehicle mileage — cannot wait any longer.

But the administration has opposed lawmakers who wish to raise the gas tax to pay for the new transportation bill. LaHood and others argue the new tax hike would be overly burdensome on the pocketbooks of ordinary Americans during the recession.

Lobbyists believe the legislation, which will help fund repairs not only to highways but to transit systems and railroads, will provide a boost to the nation’s economy, much like the stimulus package was designed to do.

For his push to finish the bill before the end of the fiscal year, Oberstar can expect to find support among many of the trade associations that have been lobbying the transportation reauthorization this year. Like AAPA and LIUNA, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and the Associated General Contractors of America are also supportive of the Minnesota Democrat’s desire to complete the bill in 2009, according to statements they released last week.

Many praised several reforms that were included in Oberstar’s blueprint released last week, including creating a Transportation Department Office of Intermodalism to better organize the nation’s transportation system and a national infrastructure bank to fund transportation projects.

Strong provisions for monitoring drug and alcohol abuse by truckers

The draft of the new highway reauthorization bill authored primarily by Rep. James Oberstar, chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee contains strong language requiring the Secretary of Transportation to establish a clearinghouse for records relating to alcohol and controlled substances testing of commercial motor vehicle operators.

It’s a clearinghouse long desired by federal officials and trucking executives and would be designed to keep repeat substance abuse offenders from jumping from company to company.

The clearinghouse would be a repository of records relating to violations of the testing program by individuals submitted to the DOT.

The bill requires the clearinghouse to be in operation not later than one year after the enactment of the new highway bill.

Under the present system, a CDL holder can fail a drug test and be fired from his or her present employer, but is not required to tell a prospective new employer about the failed test.

D.C. Metro Crash Spurs Transit Funding Debate

Public transit advocates seized on Monday’s commuter rail crash in Washington to make the case for overhauling the country’s transportation system.  Authorities were still searching the wreckage Tuesday when Transportation for America, a coalition of interest groups and local officials, cited the deadliest crash in the Metro’s 33-year history to make the case for advancing a new transit authorization bill on Capitol Hill this year.

“In the big picture, what we can say is that we have underinvested in taking care of our infrastructure, roads, bridges and public transportation,” said James Corless, director of Transportation for America.

Lawmakers from around the Washington area also spoke of the need to pay for rail projects in the wake of the crash, which killed nine people and injured 76, although some cautioned not to draw conclusions before investigators determine what led the two trains on the red line to collide.

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) called for a congressional hearing Tuesday to help determine how the crash occurred.

Norton, after meeting with officials of the National Transportation Safety Board, expressed outrage that the older car in the crash wasn’t retired, as those officials had recommended years ago. She noted that Congress once heard safety officials testify for more funding to maintain the Metrorail system, and that appropriators have failed to fully fund their request.

“Congress had the ultimate wake-up call yesterday,” she said. “The only appropriate response is to begin to eliminate the crash-unworthy cars with this year’s appropriations.”