At CNU, Former Rep of Texas Legislature says “No Road Pays for Itself”

Over the past two days at the Congress for the New Urbanism Project for Transportation Reform conference, attendees have called for transportation reform at local, regional, and
national levels. In a panel debate about the future of transportation funding and the
role of regional planning through MPOs, several speakers argued that
the foundation of transportation and development funding had to be
systematically overhauled.

Mike Krusee, former chairman of the Texas House of Representatives Transportation Committee, said that financial problems
were more significant than environmental, though they should be tied
together in the same discussion. "The reason there’s not a new
transportation bill is because there is no money. We’ve hit the wall of
unsustainability on how we finance the transportation system," he said.

Krusee asserted it was urgent and necessary to understand
the nature of this broken financial apparatus and to develop solutions
to fix it. In Texas, he
said that, on average, it cost the state 20-30 cents per person per
mile to build and maintain a road to the suburbs, yet drivers only pay
on average 2-3 cents per mile through the gas tax, vehicles fees, etc.
"What we found was that no road that we built in Texas paid for
itself," said Krusee. "None."

The expense to build roads and
utilities further and further from the urban cores was not only driving
costs to unsustainable levels, it created an imbalance in who paid for
growth. Over the past 50 years, Krusee argued, the federal government was
using tax money that came by and large from cities to subsidize roads
to areas without access otherwise. "City dwellers have subsidized the
land purchases and the development costs out in the suburbs," said
Krusee. What’s more, the gas tax, which city dwellers pay when driving
on city roads, but which goes to freeways largely outside of urban
cores, is "a huge transfer of wealth from the cities to the suburbs to
build these rings."

Krusee said
building the Interstate system was initially a good thing,
because it facilitated interstate commerce and increased the
productivity of cities.  Now however, because of congestion caused by
ever longer commute patterns, system productivity is in peril. "What’s
happened is the federal government has basically reneged on the deal.
By subsidizing highways out to the suburbs, it’s no longer efficient
for truck traffic, for goods and services and people to move between
cities in the United States because those roads have been hijacked by
all the commuters."

Gateway Planning Group’s Scott Polikov lamented not
only the current funding situation — "bankruptcy" — but the reform
proposals made by Transportation for America (T4A) and other
advocates for only tinkering
with the traditional 80 percent highway, 20 percent transit levels, not fundamentally changing
the federal funding mechanism to support cites.

"If
the blueprint plans, the regional plans, are not specifically tied to
the funding, then as far as I’m concerned, there’s no point in doing
the planning because what it ends up doing is creating expectations
that are unrealistic," said Polikov.  " If all we focus on is TOD and
Regional planning, but we don’t restructure the entire policy basis for
the highway funding… then I fear that we’re really just still in the
margins and we’ve reinvented the same system and we’ve declared victory
when in fact it’s not going to be victory."

Reforming the Transportation Bible

Another topic that has long been on CNU’s radar for reform is
AASHTO’s "Green Book," the bible for traffic engineers. As we reported, CNU Chief John Norquist has been working with the Institute for Transportation Engineers (ITE) to add urban street concerns to the comprehensive roadway guidelines. Rick Hall, of Hall Planning
and Engineering
, in a plenary session yesterday elaborated on changes that would benefit pedestrians.

"There’s not a single mention of pedestrians in the
entire first
chapter of the AASHTO’s green book," said Hall. "It’s all about cars." He argued that AASHTO’s street classifications (arterials,
collectors, locals) do not account for walkability inputs that make
urban streets comfortable and livable. 

In
Hall’s opinion, MPOs and traffic engineers should start by indentifying
cities that work for pedestrians, then use computer modeling and
simulations to simulate urban forms in those cities, not just the
travel and movement of motor vehicles.  For Hall, the most important
walkability design parameters are, in order of importance:

  • Small block size
  • Buildings fronting the street
  • Mixed-land uses
  • Lower traffic speeds
  • On-street parking (pedestrian buffer)
  • Interconnected streets
  • Narrow streets
  • Quality Sidewalks
  • Lower traffic volumes
  • Street Trees

Hall called for a change to AASHTO’s guidelines, including the creation of a new classification he called "compact urban," where speed limits would be lower and a number of pedestrian factors would be considered in conjunction to road characteristics.  In compact urban areas, he said, road design should not allow for speeds greater than 25 mph, versus AASHTO’s current urban low-speed of 45 mph. MPOs
could determine that they want to alter development patterns to add
compact urban areas to suburbs and re-design streets accordingly.

CNU President Norquist told the audience he anticipated positive additions to the Green Book by 2010.

Throughout the
day Friday, CNU participants have broken out into working groups to
discuss the various proposals put forth in the conference and bring
them together into the working document, Sustainable Transportation
Network Principles [PDF], which the organization will take to policy makers in Washington D.C.

  • It’s great to hear this coming from someone in the “know.” A couple years ago I was driving back in Wisconsin listening to AM talk radio (I like to torture myself sometimes) and the jockey was arguing that highways paid for themselves by opening up new locations for commerce and housing. But this just proves that all the cost putting in the infrastructure dwarfs the amount received from taxes, etc.

    Also, I’d argue that small block size and lower traffic speeds negate the need for on-street parking to be used as pedestrian buffer. I’ll go back to Upper Grant in North Beach as my example. There is on-street parking on both sides, which is nice, but the traffic is moving so slow (due to short blocks) that the buffer is only really taking away from space that should be sidewalk. You have created a “safe” pedestrian environment but in the process have made that environment so small that it is practically unusable.

  • pat

    I need to get some sort of aggregator started for these little facts in articles about driving and suburbs and such. Things like “it cost the state 20-30 cents per person per mile to build and maintain a road to the suburbs, yet drivers only pay on average 2-3 cents per mile through the gas tax, vehicles fees, etc” and wear on roads is axle weight cubed. It would be nice to be able to reference all those sort of facts and ideas because it is obvious that the majority of data is on the side of the proponent of density and walkability.

  • pat

    I am pretty lazy though

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Streetsblog Capitol Hill Q&A: Four Questions For Rob Puentes

|
America’s transportation and infrastructure policies affect literally everyone who moves from place to place in the country, but often they are under-discussed and over-simplified by the mainstream media. To help broaden the debate, Streetsblog Capitol Hill is kicking off a new Q&A series called "The Four Questions." Robert Puentes, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution’s […]
STREETSBLOG USA

Would Romney Build Roads or Rail?

|
All eyes are on Texas Gov. Rick Perry these days, the faraway frontrunner in the Republican race. But as the primary goes on (and on and on) more Republicans might take note of the fact that in a matchup with President Obama, only one candidate stands a chance of winning: former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. […]

Big Transit News: Bush-Era Rule Tossed, Enviro Benefits on the Table

|
Transportation reformers and members of Congress have long clamored for changes to the federal government’s major transit grant program, otherwise known as "New Starts," and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood answered today with an announcement of sweeping changes in the works. LaHood made his announcement today at the Transportation Research Board conference. (Photo: AP) The first […]