Skip to main content

 About Transportation for America

For general inquiries about the campaign, email info [at] t4america [dot] org.

Trump’s budget will hurt local communities

President Trump’s first budget request for Congress is a direct assault on smart infrastructure investment that will do damage to cities and towns of all sizes — from the biggest coastal cities down to small rural towns.

After months of promises to invest a trillion dollars in infrastructure, the first official action taken by the Trump administration on the issue is a proposal to eliminate the popular TIGER competitive grant program, cut the funding that helps cities of all sizes build new transit lines, and terminate funding for the long-distance passenger rail lines that rural areas depend on.

Tell your representatives that this proposal is a non-starter and appropriators in Congress should start from scratch.

The competitive TIGER grant program is one of the only ways that local communities of all sizes can directly access federal funds. And unlike the old outdated practice of earmarking, to win this funding, project sponsors have to bring significant local funding to the table and provide evidence of how their project will accomplish numerous goals. The TIGER grant program has brought more than three non-federal dollars to the table for each federal dollar awarded.

Eliminating the funding to support the construction of new public transportation lines and service is a slap in face of the millions of local residents who have raised their own taxes to pay their share. Like the voters in Tempe, AZ, who approved a sales tax 13 years ago that’s been set aside to pair with a future federal grant to build a streetcar. Or the voters last November in Indianapolis, IN, who approved an income tax increase to pay their share of a new bus rapid transit project, and in Atlanta, GA, who approved a sales tax increase in part to add transit to their one-of-a-kind Beltline project.

These local communities and scores of others who are generating their own funds to invest in transit will be left high and dry by this proposal, threatening their ability to satisfy the booming demand from residents and employers alike for well-connected locations served by transit.

Terminating funding for long-distance passenger rail service will hit rural communities especially hard, like the communities along the Gulf Coast who are even now demonstrating their commitment to restoring service wiped out by Hurricane Katrina by stepping up and pledging their own dollars to match or exceed any federal dollars to make it happen.

Our nation’s infrastructure serves as the backbone for economic growth and prosperity. The Administration’s proposed budget falls short of prioritizing investment in the local communities that are the basic building block of the national economy, and we need you to help stand up and send that message loud and clear to Congress.

Stories You May Have Missed – Week of March 17th

Stories You May Have Missed

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you pertinent information. This includes news articles to inform your work. Check out a list of stories you may have missed last week.

  • President Trump’s proposed budget contains drastic cuts to transit, including the elimination of the TIGER program, long distance Amtrak train service and the essential air service program. (See T4A’s member summary of the budget and blog post about the budget)
  • “Trump has promised big spending on infrastructure. His budget cuts it”. (CNN)
  • The Trump White House continues to hold meetings on how to fund, and what projects should be included in President Trump’s $1 trillion dollar infrastructure proposal. (The Hill)
  • “Trump advisers see arbitration as way to speed infrastructure plans”. (Reuters)
  • Did Uber steal Google’s driverless car technology? That’s what Google is alleging. (Bloomberg)
  • The Tennessee State Senate Transportation Committee approved a modified version of Governor Haslem’s transportation proposal and Governor Haslem is okay with the changes. (Fox 17 Nashville)

President Trump’s budget request severely undercuts stated commitment to investing in infrastructure

press release

Earlier today, President Trump released his budget proposal for FY 2018 that cuts the U.S. Department of Transportation’s discretionary budget by 13 percent, ends the popular TIGER competitive grant program, eliminates the New & Small Starts transit construction program, and terminates funding for long-distance passenger rail funding, among other notable cuts.

In response, T4America Interim Director Beth Osborne offered this statement:

“This budget proposal severely undercuts the President’s stated commitment to infrastructure, and would leave behind many of the rural communities that supported him in November. After months of promises to invest $1 trillion in infrastructure, the first concrete action taken by the Trump administration on this issue is to propose drastic cuts to transportation programs that bring notable economic benefits to communities across the country, from small towns to large cities.

“Combined with the proposed elimination of the Community Development Block Grant program, this will put even more pressure on already overstretched local governments. This is a slap in face to the millions of local residents who have raised their own taxes — with the full expectation they would be combined with the limited pool of federal grants — to complete their priority transportation projects.

“The proposal completely eliminates the popular TIGER competitive grant program that has funded more than 400 transformational projects spanning all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The program leverages billions to accelerate key projects that drive local, regional and state economic development. Through the first five rounds of funding, TIGER projects brought 3.5 other dollars to the table for each federal dollar awarded. Despite the budget proposal’s recommendation for these communities to apply for funding from other freight programs, these programs are either not multimodal at all or have caps on the funding for non-highway projects.

“This budget also entirely eliminates funding for building new public transportation lines and service. While it will theoretically allow the small number of new transit construction projects with federal funding agreements already in hand to proceed, ending this program threatens the ability of local communities of all sizes to satisfy the booming demand for well-connected locations served by transit. Tempe, AZ, has set aside money from a voter-approved sales tax for 13 years to pair with a future federal grant to build a streetcar. In November, voters in Indianapolis, IN, approved an income tax increase in November to pay their share of a new bus rapid transit project and voters in Atlanta, GA, approved a sales tax increase to add transit to their one-of-a-kind Beltline project. These local communities and scores of others generating their own funds to invest in transit will be left high and dry by this proposal.”

“While preserving funds for the northeast rail corridor, it ‘terminates’ funding for long-distance passenger rail service. This will hit rural communities especially hard, like the Gulf Coast communities that have been working to restore passenger rail service between New Orleans and Orlando wiped out by Hurricane Katrina. These smaller communities are demonstrating their commitment to realizing the economic development that restored service will bring by stepping up and pledging their own dollars to match or exceed any federal dollars. Combined with the proposal to end the Essential Air Service program, rural communities could be more disconnected than ever before.

“Our nation’s infrastructure serves as the backbone for economic growth and prosperity. The Administration’s proposed budget falls short of prioritizing investment in the local communities that are the basic building block of the national economy. We urge leaders to uphold their promise to the American people and reinvest in our nation’s communities.

 

How are artists being trained to collaborate with civic leaders on transportation & planning projects?

In cities across the country, artists are helping to solve civic problems. But what sort of training is helping them and other cultural workers facilitate smoother collaborations and better projects? Our third webinar on creative placemaking will continue exploring how cities and artists are working together in transportation planning and community development.

Whether it’s bringing people to an empty plaza through performance, improving navigation options through better design, or connecting neighborhoods through interactive installations, artists bring a unique perspective to many municipal challenges.

But artists and civic professionals do not always speak the same language, however. These two groups often answer to different stakeholders and work along different timelines. With the proliferation of new programs integrating arts and culture into community development—like municipally sponsored artist-in-residence programs—artists and cultural producers need to be trained to work with government agencies and community members, and to inhabit interdisciplinary roles that extend beyond the traditional duties of an artist.

Recognizing this need, several organizations have launched programs to train artists and cultural workers to facilitate smoother collaborations and better projects. Projects like the Regional Arts Commission Community Arts Training Institute in St. Louis, Intermedia Arts’ Creative Community Leadership Institute in Minneapolis, Nashville Metro Arts Commission’s Learning Lab, Creative Capital’s Community Engagement Workshop, and the Center for Performance and Civic Projects are all designed to help better integrate arts into civic and transportation projects.

Learn more about these training programs during Training programs for artist and civic/transportation collaboration, a webinar on Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 2:30 PM EDT. This is the third webinar in our series exploring the role of arts and culture in transportation planning and community development.

Register for the webinar

 

Register for the event to hear from experts who have trained, taught or worked alongside alumni of these innovative and exciting programs. We’ll also be taking your questions about how you can use these programs in your own community. We hope you’ll join us for this conversation next week.

Stories You May Have Missed – Week of March 10th

Stories You May Have Missed

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you pertinent information. This includes news articles to inform your work. Check out a list of stories you may have missed last week.

  • “President Trump is eyeing a plan that would require states to begin infrastructure projects within 90 days of receiving federal funding”. (The Hill, Wall Street Journal)
  • The Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Bill Shuster (Republican-Pennsylvania) “reiterated Thursday his commitment to moving President Trump’s infrastructure proposal through Congress this year”. (The Hill)
  • Our Senior Policy Advisor, Beth Osborne, testified before the Senate Commerce Committee on Wednesday and wrote an op-ed about her testimony. (The Hill)
  • The Senate passed a bill unanimously to repeal FHWA’s recent final rule on MPO Coordination and Planning. (ENO Transportation)
  • The American Society of Civil Engineers released their annual infrastructure report card and gave the U.S.’s infrastructure an overall grade of D+. (ASCE)
  • After Uber and Lyft pulled out of Austin, Texas, new forms of ride-sharing are popping up in Austin. (MIT Technology Review)
  • “Colorado Lawmakers Reach Agreement for Tax Hike, $3.5 Billion Bond in Transportation Deal.”(Denver Post)

 

Stories You May Have Missed – Week of March 3rd

Stories You May Have Missed

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you pertinent information. This includes news articles to inform your work. Check out a list of stories you may have missed last week.

  • President Trump in a speech to Congress on Tuesday called on Congress to approve a $1 trillion dollar infrastructure package but offered few additional details about his plan. (Huffington Post)
  • The Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Bill Shuster (Republican-Pennsylvania) told reporters on Wednesday that “President Trump’s $1 trillion infrastructure package won’t be entirely funded with public money and could include projects that are already in the works but have been stalled by the slow federal permitting process”. (The Hill)
  • In a Senate Commerce and Transportation Committee hearing on Wednesday on transportation needs in rural states, South Dakota Republican Governor Dennis Daugaard said that public private partnerships (P3’s) don’t work in rural states and federal investment is needed. (Kelo: Sioux Falls South Dakota Radio Station)
  • Governor Jerry Brown of California asked Secretary Elaine Chao of U.S. DOT to reverse her decision withholding a $647 million grant to Caltrans to electrify Caltrans tracks between San Jose and San Francisco. Secretary Chao withheld the money after all 14 California Congressional Republicans wrote Chao to request that the money be withheld until an audit was done of California’s high speed rail project. (LA Times)
  • The Indianapolis City Council approved the first ever income tax for public transportation that voters gave the thumbs up to in a referendum on the ballot during the November 2016 election. (Indy Star)
  • The City of Philadelphia has made tremendous progress toward raising the $225 million necessary for a transformative project to cap I-95 on the Philadelphia waterfront with a public park. The project only needs $35 million more in funding after The City and Pennsylvania DOT committed $90 million and $100 million respectively. (Plan Philly)
  • An LA Times investigation has found that Southern California civic officials have approved the building of homes near freeways even though California air quality officials warned against doing so because of severe health risks. (LA Times)
  • Austin Texas is in the process of overhauling their zoning code and may cut parking minimums by 50 percent. (Streetsblog USA)

Stories You May Have Missed – Week of February 24th

Stories You May Have Missed

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you pertinent information. This includes news articles to inform your work. Check out a list of stories you may have missed last week.

  • Consideration of any proposed infrastructure plan from President Trump may be pushed off to 2018 (Axios)
  • White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters Thursday to expect to hear more from the president on his infrastructure agenda during his speech to Congress next week (Politico Morning Transportation)
  • The American Public Transportation Association (APTA) says that commuter rail transportation authorities are making progress in installing positive train control (PTC) on their systems. (RT&S)
  • Wondering how self-driving trucks could affect employment? Self-driving trucks could have a significant effect on jobs in certain parts of the country (Axios)
  • The New York Times does a deep dive into Uber’s work culture. (NY Times)
  • Op-Ed: Joe Cortright says we should not demonize driving, just stop subsidizing it. (City Lab)

Stories You May Have Missed – Week of February 17th

Stories You May Have Missed

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you pertinent information. This includes news articles to inform your work. Check out a list of stories you may have missed last week.

  • Senate Commerce Chairman John Thune (Republican, South Dakota) and Michigan Senator Gary Peters (Democrat, Michigan) are planning to introduce legislation directing the National Highway Transit Safety Administration (NHTSA) to make vehicle safety standards more flexible for autonomous vehicles. (The Hill)
  • The surface transportation program and the inability of Congress to fund it makes the Government Accountability’s Office (GAO) “High Risk” list again for 2017. (Politico); (GAO, page 98)
  • Amtrak President Wick Moorman pushes for additional direct federal money to Amtrak in any infrastructure package. (Bloomberg)
  • The Federal Transit Administration is withholding money from the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) after Maryland, Virginia and Washington D.C failed to establish a state safety oversight program. (Progressive Railroading)
  • In response to FTA withholding the money from WMATA, Virginia, Maryland and DC’s Congressional delegation introduced legislation to give Congressional consent to the state safety oversight program as required by FTA in order for WMATA to obtain the withheld money. (Washington Post)
  • San Francisco officials push bill in California that would legalize automatic speed enforcement cameras. (Streetsblog)

Stories You May Have Missed – Week of February 10th

Stories You May Have Missed

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you pertinent information. This includes news articles to inform your work. Check out a list of stories you may have missed last week.

  • President Trump lamented the lack of high-speed rail service in the U.S. during a meeting he had with top airline executives on Thursday. (The Hill)
  • In anticipation of a major infrastructure initiative promised by President Trump, the National Governors Association forwarded a list of 428 “shovel-ready” projects to the new administration, representing projects from 49 U.S. states and territories. (Washington Post)
  • Tensions rise between Pittsburgh and Uber as Uber refuses Pittsburgh’s requests. (Quartz)
  • The Rocky Mountain Institute releases a road map on how private car ownership could decline as soon as 2020. (Curbed)
  • As jobs grow in downtown Seattle, workers are turning more to transit. (Seattle Times)
  • Kansas City has just shared the first compilation of data from its “Smart City” pilot project with other cities, as well as with federal agencies. (TechCrunch)

New technical assistance opportunity for MPOs interested in performance measures

Today T4America is launching a new technical assistance program to help metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) go further with measuring and quantifying the multiple benefits of transportation spending decisions to help ensure that every dollar is aligned with the public’s goals and brings the greatest return possible for citizens.

Similar to the Transportation Leadership Academy we did in partnership with FHWA last year, this new technical assistance program is geared toward helping a handful of metro areas implement a data-driven approach to assessing the costs and benefits of transportation spending — a process known as performance measurement.

MAP-21, the federal surface transportation law passed in 2012, created new requirements for metro regions to start using performance measures that are largely focused on the highway network on conventional things like safety, condition of roads & bridges, etc. (Though the included measures for traffic congestion, as we’ve shown, have a huge impact on how we choose to “solve” that particular problem.)

USDOT finalized the requirements for all of the new measures on January 18, 2017 and will require all 400-plus MPOs and 50 state departments of transportation (DOTs) to develop transportation performance measure frameworks.

Our team has designed a suite of tools to help MPOs not only satisfy the modest new federal requirements, but also go beyond them into other areas such as public health, access to opportunity, social equity; and to help them translate their big picture targets and goals into specific criteria for choosing and prioritizing what transportation projects to build and where.

Find out more and apply today.

Apply Here

 

New national survey on performance measures

Some metro areas have already been going far beyond the federal government’s modest new requirements to assess their transportation investments in terms of more ambitious goals like return on investment, public health and access to jobs. To establish a clear state of the practice and answer some key questions, T4America conducted this national survey of 104 MPOs from 42 states in 2016, also being released today.

How metro planning agencies are promoting physical activity and health

Join us for the release of a new paper showing how regional transportation planning agencies are promoting physical activity and health while improving mobility and access to opportunity.

Register for the launch of Measuring what we value: Policies to prioritize public health and build prosperous regions on February 21st at 12:00 p.m EDT.

REGISTER NOW

 

How we get around each day shapes our quality of life, especially our health. People who walk or bicycle more for transportation are shown to have lower rates of heart disease, diabetes and other conditions that can complicate or shorten lives. And the demand for more opportunities to safely walk and bicycle is at an all-time high in cities and towns of all sizes across the country.

And communities are responding by planning, funding, and fast-tracking projects to make bicycling, walking, and riding transit safer, more convenient, and more realistic as travel options.

But getting these projects planned, designed and built can be a challenge. How can regions bring more of these projects to fruition? How can they integrate them into the processes of choosing what to build? How can they upend perhaps decades of radically different priorities to make these types of projects the norm?

This new paper, produced by T4America and the American Public Health Association, outlines four policy levers MPOs have at their disposal to help increase and improve active transportation projects to meet the demand, decrease health disparities, increase access to opportunities, and strengthen local economies — with specific short real-life stories to go with each. On this launch webinar, we’ll be joined by staff from a number of metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to hear how they’re successfully prioritizing bicycling and walking projects. We’ll explore the specific policies these MPOs have adopted, and how they’ve implemented them.

REGISTER NOW

 

Register today and we’ll also send you a short four-page preview of the full paper to be released on February 21st, a doc summarizing the specific strategies that MPOs are using to make more of these projects a reality.

Already joining us on February 21? Spread the word!

(Note: We profiled four of these MPOs at length in this package of related short case studies, released late in 2016.)

Stories You May Have Missed-Week of January 30th

Stories You May Have Missed

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you pertinent information. This includes news articles to inform your work. Check out a list of stories you may have missed last week.

  • The U.S. Senate on Tuesday January 31st voted to confirm Elaine Chao to be the U.S. Secretary of Transportation. (CNN)
  • On Wednesday, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee held its first hearing of the new Congress to host a broad discussion on the need to invest in infrastructure. (T4A member summary here)
  • New York City instituted a requirement that ridesharing companies like Uber and Lyft have to report detailed data about where they’re picking up and dropping off their passengers. (Wired Magazine)
  • Tennessee Governor Bill Haslem’s plan to raise the gas tax in Tennessee to fund transportation needs faces skepticism in the Tennessee state legislature. (Chattanooga Times Free Press)
  • Transportation for America/Smart Growth America released a new report, “Empty Spaces” highlighting that too much parking is being built near transit stations. (Transportation for America; Washington Post)
  • Nearly $6.8 billion dollars in development has occurred around Minneapolis’s current and planned light rail lines. (Minneapolis Metro Council)
  • The Congress for a New Urbanism released their 2017 list of “Freeways without Futures”. (CNU)

Recapping our discussion about states making transportation a key driver of their economic development agendas [video]

States are changing how they select transportation projects in order to save money and boost economic development. Catch up on our webinar explaining how states are attempting to focus state funds on more cost-effective investments in transportation.

We’d like to offer a hearty thanks to our two featured speakers, Kate Fichter, Assistant Secretary for Policy Coordination for the Massachusetts Department of Transportation and Charles Knutson, Executive Policy Advisor for Transportation and Economic Development to Washington Governor Jay Inslee.

Kate and Charles shared how each of their states have reformed how transportation projects are selected and built to ensure every state investment delivers the greatest bang for the buck and to reduce to overall cost of megaprojects. In the Q&A in the second half of the program, we talked about balancing local and state priorities, balancing needs across different regions of diverse states, as well as how each state is preparing for new automated vehicle technology.

Catch up with the full recording above.

Briefing book for governors

This webinar follows our recent guidebook for governors and their administrations explaining how a fresh approach to transportation is fundamental to creating quality jobs and shared prosperity while running an efficient government that gets the greatest benefit from every taxpayer dollar.

Download it today.

State policy network

State legislatures around the country are beginning new sessions as we speak, and this means a renewed focus on raising new state funding for transportation and also reforming the policies for spending those dollars. As legislators take a hard look at transportation programs, the policies and strategies in this new guidebook above — and in our previous resources — show how states can save money, improve projects, and make a stronger case to transportation spending through smart policy reforms. These resources are part of our State Transportation Advocacy, Research, & Training network. We provide policy information and connect a diverse group of state policy makers and advocates through this network.

Sign up for updates and more information here.

House T&I Committee Hearing: “Building a 21st Century Infrastructure for America”

Link to hearing page: here.

On February 1st the House Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) Committee held its first hearing of the new Congress to host a broad discussion on the need to invest in infrastructure.

The hearing panelists were:

  • Fred Smith, Chairman, President, and CEO of the FedEx Corporation
  • David MacLennan, Chairman and CEO of Cargill, Inc.
  • Ludwig Willisch, President and CEO of BMW of North America
  • Mary Andringa, Chair of the Board of the Vermeer Corporation
  • Richard Trumka, President of the AFL-CIO

Chairman Bill Shuster (R-PA) called the hearing to discuss the need for investment in infrastructure. Rep. Shuster began the hearing by noting two new additions to the committee room: quotations from Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations and from the U.S. Constitution which emphasize infrastructure development as an important function of the federal government.

In contrast to Rep. Shuster’s general endorsement of infrastructure spending, Ranking Member Peter DeFazio (D-OR) came out with several specific financing proposals, including increasing and indexing fuel taxes, reassigning fees collected at ports to fund harbor maintenance, and raising the cap on passenger facility fees used to finance airport improvements.

The panelists all strongly supported, in principle, additional investment in this area and the business leaders each spoke of how predictable travel on highways, waterways and through ports and airports was critical to their businesses.

Comments from the panel

FedEx Chairman Fred Smith noted, and frequently repeated through the hearing, that his company and nearly all others in the transportation sector support an increase in user fees to support additional spending on infrastructure. He specifically endorsed an increase in motor fuel taxes as well as new congestion charges assessed through EZ-pass-type electronic tolling. Smith repeatedly referred to a list of twenty Interstate highway projects that were designed and ready to build if funding were available and said these projects would reduce congestion and help his business.

Cargill CEO David MacLennan urged the committee to focus not just on the new technology and “shiny objects,” but to continue to maintain existing infrastructure, noting how important highways, freight rail and, especially, inland waterways are to the agriculture industry.

BMW America CEO Ludwig Willisch noted the intermodal global supply chains that the company’s U.S. manufacturing depends on and also that well-maintained infrastructure would help automated vehicle development.

Vermeer Chair Mary Andringa thanked the committee for new projects funded by the FASTLANE grant program.

AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka urged the committee to include existing worker protections and seek the lowest cost of capital in any transportation financing arrangement, including public-private partnerships. He also noted that private financing would be unlikely to cover needs in rural areas. He argued a big investment – on the order of $1 trillion – would be needed to repair the existing infrastructure and build new infrastructure to replace that which is becoming technologically obsolete.

Summary of questions and comments from members

In his opening remarks, Rep. DeFazio stated that he hoped Congress would bring back some earmarking for critical projects, stating that representatives best know the needs and priorities of their districts. Rep. DeFazio separately noted a provision he worked to include in the FAST Act that would allow new funding made available to flow out directly though existing formula programs. Further, Rep. DeFazio encouraged the committee to focus on repair of existing infrastructure, noting that President Trump has made the same appeal to “fix-it-first.”

Rep. Lou Barletta (R-PA) noted that spending on infrastructure is the best economic stimulus and said of new revenue, “The American people ok paying it as long as they know every penny is used to the best that it could.”

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) lamented that we are now letting fall into disrepair what earlier generations had the courage to build and asked about possible alternative funding sources to replace or supplement the fuel tax.

Rep. Bob Gibbs (R-OH) asked if BMW would consider using the automated vehicle testing facility in Ohio.

Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) expressed concerns that increasing automation in manufacturing logistics, and construction sectors would displace workers and said that while many expect new infrastructure spending would create many new jobs, that may not be the case. FedEx’s Smith noted support for a new law in Tennessee to provide worker training and skills development.

Rep. Daniel Webster (R-FL) asked if the federal government should get involved directly in toll roads or congestion pricing and if the committee should be considering truck-only tollways. FedEx’s Smith responded that such lanes would be a possibility but are not necessary.

Rep. Rick Larsen (WA) asked about the potential of NextGen air traffic control and asked Richard Trumka how labor is supporting workforce development in the transportation industry.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) addressed Ranking Member DeFazio’s proposals, saying that he supported a user fee funding source for transportation, but thought it would be difficult to raise such fees as long as funds were, in his words, “leaking out” to bike paths and beautification projects.

Rep. Michael Capuano (D-MA) noted the need to invest in transit and the importance of moving people as well as freight. He noted that the committee had already considered P3 financing and found that only approximately 10% of projects could be appropriate for such financing.

Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC) asked whether BMW would make the same decision as it had 20 years ago to move to South Carolina given current infrastructure. BMW’s Willisch said it would and noted that the company had just invested another $1 billion in their operations there

Rep. Grace Napolitano (D-CA) asked about electrifying vehicle fleets, specifically at FedEx.

Rep. Rob Woodall (R-GA) expressed surprised agreement with AFL-CIO’s Trumka on the importance in investing in new, transformative technologies.

Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV) expressed frustration that the committee continued to discuss the importance of infrastructure investment but that the majority had not offered a concrete plan for funding infrastructure. She asked Trumka is repatriation of profits or P3s would be a solution; he responded that they would not.

Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA) noted that families are already paying for infrastructure through fuel taxes and the cost of products delivered. He asked what the committee could do to help the panelists’ companies without new funding. Only Cargill’s MacLennan answered, noting existing funding already available.

Rep. Frederica Wilson (D-FL) stated that her priority was creating jobs and asked what investments would best support poverty reduction.

Rep. Jason Lewis (R-MN) noted that residents in his suburban district are reliant on cars. He asked whether congestion pricing could peak congestion and noted that opponents say there is no way to build out of congestion. FedEx’s Smith said congestion pricing would work, as slow-downs are created at the margin so moving a few trips would have an effect. However he also argued that building new highways and adding capacity was the only way to eliminate congestion.

Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) hoped for a user fee for transportation to be exempted from the no taxes pledge.

Rep. Lloyd Smucker (R-PA), who previously served in the Pennsylvania State Senate, noted how the industry-led public education effort built the support necessary to pass new transportation funding at the state level in 2013 [see more on that effort here]. He asked panelists what they are doing to build that public support now at the federal level.

Rep. Daniel Lipinski (D-IL) announced he would introduce legislation to close loopholes in the Buy America provisions and require that Buy America waivers be published in the Federal Register. He also asked the panelists what the federal government could do to support the development of automated vehicles.

Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA) asked panelists how private companies or P3s could better construct infrastructure. He offered an example from his district where businesses are interested in financing an interchange to access their sites. He challenged Trumka on Davis-Bacon requirements.

Rep. Brenda Lawrence (D-MI) spoke of the importance of workforce development and asked about workforce training at a time of changing technology.

Rep. Garret Graves (R-LA) asked for the panelists’ business advice on how to better prioritize projects, noting examples of four-lane highways with very few vehicles on them. He also asked whether water transport of freight could reduce highway congestion.

Rep. Donald Payne, Jr. (D-NJ) noted that investments in the Port of Newark, Newark Airport, and the Gateway Tunnel were important.

Rep. Brian Babin (R-TX) asked whether panelists would support dedicating royalties collected on from mineral resources to fund transportation.

Rep. Rodney Davis (R-IL) spoke of the importance of locks on the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers.

Introducing “Empty Spaces,” new research about parking requirements for transit-oriented developments

The oversupply of parking around transit — usually at the direction of outdated engineering guidelines — takes up valuable land, raises the cost of development, and misses key opportunities. This new research from Smart Growth America analyzes the amount of parking actually used in five transit-oriented development areas and how it compares to the guidelines that many planners, engineers or developers follow.

The land near transit stations is a valuable commodity. Hundreds or thousands of people travel to and through these places each day, and decisions about what to do with this land have implications for local economies, transit ridership, residents’ access to opportunity, and overall quality of life for everyone in a community.

Many communities choose to dedicate at least some of that land for parking. The question is, how much? Standard engineering guidelines are designed for mostly isolated suburban land uses—not walkable, urban places served by transit. But few alternative guidelines for engineers exist.

Empty Spaces: Real parking needs at five TODs, released today by Smart Growth America, set out to determine how much less parking is required at transit-oriented developments (TODs) and how many fewer vehicle trips are generated than standard industry estimates.

Professor Reid Ewing and his research team at the University of Utah College of Architecture + Planning selected five TODs across the country, each with a slightly different approach to development and parking: Englewood, CO; Wilshire/Vermont in Los Angeles, CA; Fruitvale Transit Village in Oakland, CA; Redmond, WA; and Rhode Island Row in Washington, DC. The research team counted the number of people entering and exiting the TOD buildings, and conducted brief intercept surveys of a sample of them. The team also counted parking inventory and occupancy.

The study found that all five TODs generated fewer vehicle trips than standard guidelines estimate, and used less parking than many regulations require for similar land uses. Most of the TODs included in this study also built less parking than recommended by engineering guides, yet even this reduced amount of parking was not used to capacity: the ratio of demand to actual supply was between 58 and 84 percent. Fewer vehicle trips is one likely reason why parking occupancy rates were lower than expected. Another possible reason is that standard engineering guidelines do not fully account for other travel modes that are available and actively encouraged at TODs.

This was crossposted from Smart Growth America

Join us for the kickoff webinar, today at 1 pm

If you’re reading this before 1 p.m. Eastern on 1/31, join us for a kickoff webinar. You are invited to join us:

Register now

 

Register for the event to to learn more about the findings and to hear from the report’s author, national policy experts, and planners from two of the cities included in this survey. Developers, regulators, and practitioners are already rethinking how much parking is needed at TOD. This new information can help them make better informed decisions, and ultimately create the development needed most at these in-demand locations.

NOTICE OF FINAL RULEMAKING: Assessing performance on the NHS, freight movement on the interstate system, and the CMAQ program

DATE EFFECTIVE: FEBRUARY 17, 2017

[FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE, HERE]

Overview

Less than one year after the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) first proposed outdated measures of congestion (see T4America’s blog post here) and after thousands of our members and partners provided comments, FHWA is now finalizing this rule. Published on January 18, the final rule rolls back some of the redundant, vehicle-focused measures initially proposed in the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) and incorporates some significant changes, many of which we advocated for.

In response to comments from T4A and others, the final rule adds two new measures – a carbon dioxide emissions measure and a multimodal measure. To better reflect the number of people traveling on the system, two of the other proposed measures were modified so they are based on person-travel instead of vehicle travel.

In addition, the faulty measures for percentage of the interstate freight mileage uncongested and Peak Hour Travel Time Reliability (PHTTR) included in the NPRM were both deleted from the final rule. The final rule also simplifies the required data processing and calculation of metrics.

While the final rule is much improved, changes to the speed thresholds for the congestion measure may have some negative impacts on signalized downtown roads with low speed limits.

Background

On the same day that FHWA released this final rule on system performance and congestion, FHWA also released its final rule establishing regulations to assess pavement and bridge conditions. (See T4America summary here). These final rules are the last of several regulations issued to implement the performance management framework established by the recent national transportation authorizations bills, known as MAP-21 and the FAST Act.

In addition to these two rules, FHWA published rules on safety performance measures and the integration of performance management into the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) in March 2016 and published a rule on asset management plans in October 2016. In May 2016, both FHWA and FTA published a joint rule implementing changes to the planning process.

Together these rulemakings establish regulations for state DOTs and MPOs to evaluate and report on surface transportation performance across the nation.

Final measures

In the draft rule, 7 of the 8 proposed measures were based on vehicle travel time data. Now, only four of the final measures are derived from vehicle travel times, three of which are weighted to reflect all people traveling on the system.

The seven measures established in the final rule include:

  • Three measures of system performance
    • Percentage of reliable person-miles traveled on the Interstate
    • Percentage of reliable person-miles traveled on the non-Interstate NHS
    • Percent change in CO2 emissions from 2017, generated by on-road mobile sources on the NHS
  • A measure for freight movement on the Interstate system
    • Average truck travel time reliability index (TTTR)
  • Three measures to assess the CMAQ program, including two measures on traffic congestion
    • Total emission reductions for applicable criteria pollutants, for non-attainment and maintenance areas
    • Annual hours of peak hour excessive delay per capita
    • Percent of non-single occupancy vehicle (SOV) travel, including travel avoided by telecommuting

Timeline and enforcement

State DOTs will establish their first statewide targets one year after the effective date of this rule, February 17, 2017. MPOs have up to 180 days after state DOTs establish their targets to establish their own targets.

State DOTs must establish both 2-year and 4-year targets. The MPOs are subject only to a 4-year target-setting requirement. MPOs must either: (a) agree to plan and program projects so that the projects contribute toward the accomplishment of the relevant state DOT target for the performance measure, or (b) commit to a quantifiable 4-year target for the performance measure for the MPA. FHWA will assess every 2 years to determine if a state DOT has made significant progress toward achieving their targets.

If States/MPOs fail to meet their targets after 4 years, they have to set new ones for the next 2- and 4-year performance period. If they fail again, there is no real consequence.

Under the new administration, the White House ordered a freeze on the regulatory process. For regulations that have been finished but have not taken effect, the order calls for temporarily postponing their effective date for 60 days or possibly longer. This order could delay the effective date of this rule.

System performance

In the NPRM, FHWA proposed calculating performance on the interstate and non-interstate system by using two metrics: (1) Level of travel time reliability (LOTTR), and (2) Peak hour travel time ratio (PHTTR).

T4America and others expressed concern about the PHTTR measure as a poor measure of performance because it assumes the goal is for roadways to operate in free flow conditions at all times of day – a prohibitively expensive and infeasible goal that can undermine local economic development and multimodal travel. There was already another congestion measure under the CMAQ program and a different reliability measure looking at how consistent travel was from one day to the next. Due to this, we recommended that this measure be vacated, which FHWA did in the final rule..

The final rule also changes the weighting of the travel time reliability measures from system miles to person-miles traveled using overall occupancy factors from national surveys. This prioritizes roadways that move more people through carpooling and transit over roads that only move SOVs.

New CO2 emissions measure

The final rule adds a new emissions measure – percent change in tailpipe CO2 emissions on the NHS from calendar year 2017. This measure applies to the NHS in all states and metropolitan planning areas. All state DOTs and MPOs that have NHS mileage in their state geographic boundaries and MPAs will be required to establish targets and report on progress.

State DOTs will calculate the measure by multiplying motor fuel sales volumes by the FHWA-supplied emissions factors of CO2 per gallon of fuel and percentage VMT on the NHS.

Freight movement on the interstate

The draft rule proposed two measures of freight movement on the interstate: (1) Truck Travel Time Reliability (TTTR), and (2) percent of the interstate system mileage uncongested. T4A and our partners were concerned that the TTTR measure would prioritize freight movement over the movement of people. In response, FHWA removed the TTTR measure from the final rule.

FHWA also changed the form of this measure from one based on the percent of the system providing for reliable travel to an overall average truck reliability index for the Interstate. This change removes the hard threshold in the definition of reliable travel for trucks and recognizes incremental improvements that could be made to improve reliability.

CMAQ program

Three measures are established for the CMAQ program, including total emissions reduction measure and two traffic congestion measures.

Traffic congestion

The NPRM proposed measuring traffic congestion under the CMAQ program by looking at annual hours of excessive delay per capita. As mentioned above, a separate peak hour travel time reliability (PHTTR) measure was also proposed for measuring system performance on the interstate and non-interstate systems. The PHTTR measured percent of the interstate system in large urbanized areas over 1 million in population where peak hour travel times meet expectations. These two measures merge in the final rule creating the Peak Hour Excessive Delay (PHED) measure.

In response to comments, a new multimodal measure – percent of non-SOV travel – was also added in the final rule.

APPLICABILITY

Both the PHED and the multimodal measure adhere to the same applicability requirements. As proposed, the CMAQ congestion measure applied to areas in nonattainment with a population over 1 million. The final rule expands applicability to also include areas with a population over 200,000.

The applicability of both CMAQ traffic congestion measures will be phased in, beginning with urbanized areas with a population over 1 million that contain any part of nonattainment or maintenance areas for one or more air pollutants in the first performance period (2018). It will be expanded to urbanized areas with a population over 200,000 that contain any part of nonattainment or maintenance areas for one or more air pollutants beginning in the second performance period (2022).

The final rule also moves up the date of measure applicability determination to one year earlier than initially proposed. FHWA will determine measure applicability based on the most recent available data on October 1, 2017.

PHED – SPEED THRESHOLD

As proposed in the NPRM, the traffic congestion measure would have established a 35 mph threshold for freeways and a 15 mph threshold for other NHS roadways. In the final rule, FHWA responded to concerns about these static speed thresholds by setting the excessive delay threshold to 60 percent of posted speed limit, with a minimum limit of 20 mph. This may be a slight improvement for measuring excessive delay for expressways, but this same threshold will also apply to non-expressway facilities. Particularly when applied to signalize urban roads marked at 25mph, vehicle speeds might fall below 60% of the speed limit even during free-flow conditions.

In the final rule, FHWA encourages state DOTs and MPOs to share their strategies using volume limiting techniques to address concern when extremely slow speeds exist. FHWA plans to make provisions within HPMS to capture posted speed limit data by adding a field that can be populated for the full extent of the NHS.

PHED – PEOPLE-CENTRIC CHANGES

FHWA agreed with comments that the measure should represent the cumulative delay of all people using the NHS and not just the delay experienced by vehicles. As a result, the PHED measure requires the use of average vehicle occupancy (AVO) factors for cars, buses, and trucks and hourly traffic volumes to calculate person-hours of excessive delay. To support this approach, FHWA will establish AVO factors for applicable urbanized areas using the National Transit Database for buses and national surveys, such as the American Community Survey, for cars. State DOTs and MPOs have the flexibility of choosing to use these AVO factors or substituting more specific AVO data that they may have.

In response to comments, including comments from T4A, the final rule requires the use of annual population estimates using U.S. Census estimates (i.e. most recent ACS 5-year estimates) as opposed to the decennial census populations to normalize the excessive delay measure. The most recent annual population estimate will be used each time the PHED per capita measure is calculated.

PERCENT OF NON-SOV TRAVEL 

This measure includes modes that are in the ACS Journey to Work data, which includes travel avoided by teleworking. State DOTs and MPOs have three options for calculating modal share:

  1. use the ACS Journey to Work mode share data
  2. use locally specific surveys, or
  3. use volume counts for each mode.

FHWA encourages state DOTs and MPOs to report data not currently available in national sources, such as pedestrian or bicycle counts. For state DOTs and MPOs that chose to use count data, FHWA encourages this data to be voluntarily submitted to FHWA via national sources or databases (such as TMAS, NTD, or GTFS-RT).

On-road mobile source emissions

APPLICABILITY

While FHWA acknowledged T4A’s comments, FHWA did not agree that this emissions measure should apply more broadly to include all states or regions that receive CMAQ funds, or to consider all capital and operational opportunities to reduce emissions, not just those that receive CMAQ funding.

The measure is applicable to all states and MPOs with projects financed with funds from the CMAQ program, apportioned to state DOTs for areas designated as non-attainment or maintenance for ozone, carbon monoxide, or particulate matter. FHWA clarified in the final rule that the baseline non-attainment and maintenance area designations should be based on area status as of October 1, 2017.

FHWA narrowed the definition of ‘maintenance area’ to exclude any areas that have completed their 20-year maintenance plan for an applicable pollutant. States and MPOs can also request exclusion from this requirement at the midpoint of the performance period, if their designation changes (i.e. the 20-year maintenance plan is achieved, or the area is no longer designated as non-attainment or maintenance).

While state DOTs and MPOs can still use CMAQ dollars to fund projects where is it not possible or easy to quantify the emissions benefit, these projects will not be accounted for in this performance measure.

METRIC & TARGET ADJUSTMENT

The final rule removes the conversion from kilograms per day emissions data to tons per year data. The final rule calculates total emission reduction as cumulative reductions in emissions over 2 and 4 federal fiscal years.

As in the proposed rule, the final rule allows states or MPOs that believe they would not be able to meet a target due to a change in models to adjust the target at the performance period’s mid-point or explain in their final performance report why they were unable to meet their targets due to model-based emissions estimate.

TIMELINE

Consistent with CMAQ Program Guidance, state DOTs must enter their CMAQ project information for the previous fiscal year into the CMAQ Public Access System by the March 1 deadline. In this rule, FHWA adds a new July 1 deadline, for when all information must be in the CMAQ Public Access System. This due date will apply on July 1 after the final rule is effective.

States and MPOs must use projects in the 4 years prior to the first performance year as a basis for establishing a target for the first performance period. The projects entered into the CMAQ Public Access System during the 2-year and 4-year performance period will be taken as is to calculate the measure.

Additional measures

FHWA notes that state DOTs and MPOs may voluntarily report additional measures beyond their baseline requirement. Additional measures, or variations, could include metrics for per capita emissions, VMT-based estimates, or other useful indicators. Some of the priority outcomes not addressed by the Congressionally mandated measures promulgated by this rule are jobs access, freight movement off the Interstate, public health, stormwater runoff, and household transportation cost.

Review & analysis

FHWA will review this rule after the first performance period to assess effectiveness of the requirements and identify any necessary changes. FHWA also plans to revisit the reliability and congestion measures after the completion of its multimodal research study in Fall 2018.

USDOT made significant improvements in this final rule. However, the ability to set negative targets (e.g., a target of more fatalities) remains an area of concern as does the lack of real accountability for failing to meet any of the self-set targets. This is a flaw in the underlying legislation and not anything FHWA could have addressed in the rulemaking.

Furthermore, the progress made under this rule could be rolled back, if the new Congress overturns this rule under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). At a minimum, the effective date of this rule may be delayed for 60 days. T4America continues to monitor this rule and will provide updates as necessary.

NOTICE OF FINAL RULEMAKING: Assessing pavement and bridge condition for the national highway performance program

DATE EFFECTIVE: FEBRUARY 17, 2017

[FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE, HERE]

Overview

This rule establishes measures for state departments of transportation (DOTs) to evaluate bridge and pavement condition. These measures are intended to direct states to spend federal-aid funds from the National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) to achieve the performance targets in states’ asset management plans.

Background

On the same day that FHWA released this final rule regarding pavement and bridge conditions, FHWA also released its final rule establishing regulations to assess performance of the NHS and Interstate System, freight movement on the Interstate System, and congestion and mobile source emissions. (See T4America summary here). These final rules are the last of several regulations issued to implement the performance management framework established by the recent national transportation authorizations bills, known as MAP-21 and the FAST Act.

In addition to these two rules, FHWA published rules on safety performance measures and the integration of performance management into the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) in March 2016 and published a rule on asset management plans in October 2016. In May 2016, both FHWA and FTA published a joint rule implementing changes to the planning process.

Together these rulemakings establish regulations for state DOTs and MPOs to evaluate and report on surface transportation performance across the nation.

Summary of Requirements

State DOTs and MPOs must establish targets for each of the following performance measures:

  • Percentage of pavements on the Interstate System in good condition;
  • Percentage of pavements on the Interstate System in poor condition;
  • Percentage of pavements on the NHS (excluding the Interstate System) in good condition;
  • Percentage of pavements on the NHS (excluding the Interstate System) in poor condition;
  • Percentage of NHS bridges classified as in good condition; and
  • Percentage of NHS bridges classified as in poor condition.

“Good” and “poor” pavement ratings are based on quantitative measures of roughness, cracking, rutting and misalignment of pavement surfaces. Since 2010, most state DOTs have reported roughness, cracking, rutting, and faulting data annually to FHWA through the Highway Performance Monitoring System. Ratings for bridge conditions are based on measures submitted to the National Bridge Inventory (NBI). State DOTs have been required to submit NBI reports to FHWA since 1978. Bridge ratings are based on the lowest component (e.g. deck, superstructure, substructure) rating.

Process

State DOTs must set 2- and 4-year targets for a 4-year performance period for the condition of highways and bridges. State DOTs will establish their first statewide targets in 2018. Each state DOT will submit its established targets in a baseline report at the beginning of the performance period and report progress at the midpoint and end of the performance period. DOTs will be allowed to adjust their 4-year target at the midpoint of the performance period.

MPOs will establish targets by either supporting a state DOT’s statewide target, or defining a target unique to the metropolitan area each time state DOTs establish a target. The MPOs have up to 180 days after state DOTs establish their pavement and bridge condition targets to establish their own targets. MPOs are not required to provide separate reporting to FHWA. However, state DOTs and MPOs must develop a process for coordinating their targets, which will be included in the MPOs’ metropolitan planning agreements or documented in another, mutually determined manner.

Targets and measurement apply to all highways and bridges on the NHS, regardless of ownership. MPO targets will apply to the extent of the metropolitan planning area; state targets apply to the entire state.

State DOTs and MPOs set their own targets; there is no provision in statute for FHWA to review or approve the targets these agencies set.

State DOTs may set additional targets for portions (e.g. urbanized or non-urbanized areas) of the state.

State DOTs must submit the following reports to FHWA:

  • Baseline performance reports, due October 1, 2018 and every four years thereafter, will include baseline conditions and 2- and 4-year performance targets.
  • Mid performance period progress reports must be submitted three years into the four-year performance period (to address the first two years of the period). This report will include the actual condition, progress toward performance targets, target adjustments, any extenuating circumstances that prevent the state from achieving its targets, and a description of the actions to be taken to meet the targets.
  • Full performance period progress reports, due one year following the end of the referenced period, will include actual condition, four-year progress toward targets, any extenuating circumstances that prevent the state from achieving its targets, and a description of the actions to be taken to meet the targets

The report timeline is summarized in the Figure 1 below.

MPOs must report their targets, baseline conditions, and progress toward targets to their states’ DOTs in a mutually agreed upon manner.

FHWA will determine states’ progress toward their targets after receipt of the mid- and full-performance period progress reports. FHWA will determine that a State DOT has made significant progress toward the achievement of each 2-year or 4-year NHPP target if either:

  • The actual condition/performance level is better than the baseline condition/performance; or
  • The actual condition/performance level is equal to or better than the established target.

State DOTs that fail to meet or make significant progress toward meeting pavement and bridge condition performance targets in a biennial performance reporting period will be required to document the actions they will undertake to achieve their targets in their next biennial performance report.

Additionally, this rule sets minimum standards for Interstate highway pavement condition and bridge condition. These thresholds are not more than 5 percent of Interstate pavement in poor condition and not more than 10 percent of bridge deck area rated structurally deficient. FHWA will annually determine if these conditions are met.

If a minimum pavement condition on the Interstate is not met the state DOT must set aside an amount equal to the state’s 2009 federal apportionment for the pre-MAP-21 Interstate Maintenance program. However, in some cases this amount of funding may be less than the state is already spending on Interstate maintenance and less that is necessary to fix the problem.

If the minimum bridge condition is found to have not been met for the previous three year period the state DOT must set aside and amount equal to the state’s 2009 federal apportionment for the pre-MAP-21 bridge maintenance program. This set-aside requirement remains in effect for each subsequent year until less than 10 percent of the total deck area of bridges in the state on the NHS is classified as structurally deficient. However, in some cases this amount of funding may be less than the state is already spending on bridge repairs and less that is necessary to fix the problem.

Changes from the proposed rule

Two changes were made to comport with new statutory provisions from the FAST Act.

The proposed rule required a state DOT to document how it would meet its performance targets if it failed to meet these targets over two, consecutive biennial reports. The final rule requires a report on corrective action if a state DOT does not make significant progress in a single biennial performance report.

Similarly, under the final rule, FHWA will impose a requirement for additional repair spending if the state’s Interstate pavement condition has fallen below the minimum condition level for the most recent year (instead of most recent 2 years).

The final rule makes several technical adjustments to the way particular measures are calculated and revises certain thresholds.

T4America critiqued the provision of this rule that allows state DOTs to adjust their 4-year performance targets when they submit their two-year, mid-period progress report. Especially considering that states already set their own targets, allowing states to change their targets halfway through the performance period when they see their results lagging undermines the accountability of performance management system. However, several DOTs commented requesting more flexibility to revise their targets. In the final rule FHWA did not change the provision and allows for state DOTs to reset their targets in the mid-period report. The final rule additionally adds a provision that state DOTs must coordinate with MPOs before adjusting performance targets.

T4America also urged changes to the rule to assign state DOTs and MPOs equal responsibilities in setting targets. This final rule, however, makes requirements primarily of states while encouraging coordination with MPOs.

Review

FHWA will review this rule after the first performance period to assess the effectiveness of the requirements to identify any necessary changes.

Stories You May Have Missed – Week of January 23rd

Stories You May Have Missed

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you pertinent information. This includes news articles to inform your work. Check out a list of stories you may have missed last week.

  • Senate Commerce Committee approves Elaine Chao’s nomination for U.S. DOT Secretary. Senate floor vote expected Tuesday, January 31st. (Politico)
  • Senate Democrats propose a $1 trillion infrastructure plan in a move to start negotiations with President Trump over an infrastructure bill. (Washington Post)
  • Transportation for America releases a statement on Wednesday about the introduction of the Senate Democrats infrastructure plan. (Transportation for America)
  • Business travelers now use Uber more than taxis and rental cars, a stark change from just a year ago. (Bloomberg)
  • PeopleforBikes launch a new initiative to help 10 cities double bike ridership over three years. (PeopleforBikes)

 

Unpacking the final suite of new USDOT performance measures [video]

The new requirements released last week by USDOT for how states and metro areas will have to measure traffic congestion were just part of a larger package of all-new performance measures. Catch up on what you need to know about them with our detailed webinar unpacking all of it.

Many thanks to our Beth Osborne for sharing her knowledge and wisdom about performance measures with us on this helpful session. FHWA was unable to participate due to the regulatory freeze now in place preventing federal agencies from communicating further about any new regulations in process or not yet completely finalized, but we were able to roll on ahead. (2:20)

The 2012 transportation law (MAP-21) required transportation agencies to begin using a new system of performance measures to govern how federal dollars are spent. USDOT’s final rule for measuring traffic congestion was just one part of a much larger package of new performance measures, including measures for safety, the state of repair, congestion, air emissions and other aspects of our transportation system. (4:00)

On this webinar, we walked through the last of three final rules that cover road, bridge and pavement condition, and overall system performance. We discussed what’s missing in the new measures (8:00), what changes we asked for along the way (10:30), what comprises the final package of rules (15:20), the changes made to the final package (18:05), the dates that states and metro areas will need to be aware of over the next year (18:50), some other helpful resources from T4America and others (20:20) and answered a handful of really smart questions from those who participated (24:00).

More about performance measures

Greater federal investment in infrastructure welcomed, but must be paired with increases in accountability and transparency

press release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

After the release of the Senate Democrats’ $1 trillion infrastructure proposal, Beth Osborne, Senior Policy Advisor for Transportation for America, released this statement:

“It’s encouraging to see the Democrats in the Senate respond to President Trump’s charge to beef up America’s investment in infrastructure spending by advancing their own proposal that is multimodal, increases competitive funding, and provides more money for main streets across the country.

“But funding alone will not truly solve the complex problems facing our country’s transportation networks. We increased federal transportation spending year-over-year for at least two decades, yet we still ended up in this situation today with growing backlogs of repair needs, increasing fatalities on our roads, and residents with fewer access to jobs and opportunities than before.

“We do need more infrastructure investment, but we also need that investment to be transparent, accountable and bring the greatest benefits for each dollar spent. This proposal does not specify how the funding would be distributed or how transportation agencies would be held accountable for actually bringing their roads, bridges or transit systems into a state of good repair. How can taxpayers be certain that we wouldn’t just continue a long pattern of neglecting our growing repair needs while building yet more things that come with additional years of maintenance costs?

“That said there are some notable positives worth highlighting in the proposal.

“This proposal directs more than $100 billion directly into the hands of local governments to invest in their priority projects — a move worth applauding. Local leaders in cities and towns of all sizes are the ones who know their specific needs best, but they’re often not even at the table when decisions are made in state offices about where and how to invest. The innovative competitive TIGER grant program — one of the few sources that locals can access directly — doubles to at least $1 billion per year.

“Allocating $200 billion to ‘Vital Infrastructure Projects’ correctly recognizes that we have scores of large projects that are often mega-regional in scope, with significant benefits for the national economy. But it also raises several important questions: who determines which projects to fund? Is this a return of congressional earmarking? Will the most cost-effective large projects be selected, or the projects with the greatest political heft?

“The elephant in the room is the funding source for this ambitious package. Congressional leaders used every accounting maneuver in the book to avoid dealing with our nation’s bankrupt highway trust fund in order to pass a five-year transportation authorization that didn’t cut spending back in 2015. How do they propose to pay for this ambitious investment package?

“Without addressing that difficult question head-on, it’s challenging to fully assess this proposal.”