Federal Transportation Funding Reform CNU Transportation Summit Scott Polikov November 5, 2009
Former Chairman of the House Transportation Committee, Texas Legislature, Mike Krusee oversaw TxDOT and supported big road building for the Governor… He now believes that the urbanists have always had the answer.
The failing design and economic assumptions of the current system are pulling the current transportation system down onto its last leg. Bankruptcy
<ul><li>Why is the system failing? </li></ul><ul><li>The article of faith always has been that gas demand is inelastic to price </li></ul>
The challenge- Connecting regional/local practice on (i) transportation design, (ii) development patterns and (iii) local financing with federal funding policy Verano Plan by Gateway Planning Group and Pate Engineering Campus Plan courtesy of Marmon Mok/Sasaki
Durability of value- lifecycle analysis Return on investment from sustainable development patterns
The institutional players are talking about land use and transportation. But it’s development patterns, not “land use,” with which we should be concerned.
Regional Planning is coming of age Kent County and Dover MPO joint Regional Plan
We are developing good implementation tools at the regional level.
But there is still a disconnect in terms of the context into which the funding flows.
HUD, USDOT and EPA have agreed on 6 Livability Principles for federal cooperation and local funding <ul><li>Provide for transportation choice </li></ul><ul><li>Promote equitable, affordable housing </li></ul><ul><li>Enhance economic competitiveness </li></ul><ul><li>Support existing communities </li></ul><ul><li>Coordinate policies and leverage investment </li></ul><ul><li>Value communities and neighborhoods </li></ul>
Title 23 U.S. Code § 134 establishes Metropolitan Transportation Planning <ul><li>MPO’s responsible for efficient management, operation and development </li></ul><ul><li>of surface transportation system </li></ul><ul><li>Develop long-range plan and TIPs to facilitate efficient mobility and </li></ul><ul><li>reduction of congestion (model, model, model!!) </li></ul><ul><li>But sustainable ( i.e., compact urban ) development patterns not an outcome </li></ul><ul><li>(no tie to Livability Principles) </li></ul>
Some states and MPOs are focusing on development patterns voluntarily.
Solutions for allocating federal transportation funding? <ul><li>T4 America – Blue Print Plans (but not fundamentally tied to funding outcomes) </li></ul><ul><li>ULI - “Base, Bonus, Bank” (good start, but missing structural tie to urbanism) </li></ul>
Competition based on Livability and Return on Investment CNU’s proposal for allocation of federal transportation funds? Increase competitive funding based on livability outcomes, “ off-system” infrastructure and sustainable development patterns in the context of regionalism