Posted on 12/16/2007 10:07:55 PM PST by Lorianne
Traffic congestion will get far worse over the next three decades unless the region comes up with billions more in spending for highways, roads, light rail and trails, a transportation panel said Thursday.
With Portland-area population projected to grow by 1 million by 2030, the region would need to spend at least $22 billion to keep up with increasing traffic, the Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation said.
The committee approved a regional transportation plan that forecasts $9.07 billion in spending through 2035. "We're in big trouble," said Rex Burkholder, a Metro councilor who is committee chairman. "We have a lot to do."
Four mayors, three members of the Metro Council, Portland City Commissioner Sam Adams and Multnomah County Chairman Ted Wheeler serve on the 17-member panel, which controls spending of federal transportation money in the region.
Many members said they were frustrated that years of traffic analysis have yielded few results. Several faulted the state Legislature and federal government for failing to raise gas taxes or find other money to address an aging, inadequate transportation infrastructure.
Some committee members said they would stake their careers on an effort to educate the public and raise taxes and fees for transportation. The 2009 Legislature will consider new transportation taxes, as will Metro and the city of Portland.
"The public doesn't care," Milwaukie Mayor Jim Bernard said. "I don't care if I lose my job over this; we need to do this once and for all."
Adams said congestion could triple under the plan, and others agreed. A detailed analysis of trips throughout the region was unavailable Thursday but could be completed by next month.
Committee members also talked about endorsing congestion pricing: tolls on roads and bridges that would vary by time of day. Higher tolls during rush hour would encourage motorists to drive during off-peak hours, perhaps reducing the need for wider roads.
Beaverton Mayor Rob Drake said the panel should aggressively endorse pricing and promote the idea for future road projects. "If we're going to get to the reality that we're never going to have enough money for road projects and other kinds of projects, it would seem that the users should be taxed for the use of specific projects."
Wheeler suggested that the group "consider and selectively promote where appropriate" such pricing strategies.
"I've proposed some fairly radical solutions to problems, but I've only been physically threatened once," he said. "That's when I suggested that in the next 50 years there might be tolls on the Willamette River bridges, and what I heard from this table was a resounding silence on that subject."
Wheeler's amendment passed, placing the Portland area on one side of a hotly contested topic in national politics -- and opposite U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio, the Democrat from Springfield who will help write the next big piece of transportation funding in 2009.
In interviews this fall, DeFazio has called congestion pricing a scheme by the Bush administration to avoid raising money for transportation. It would unfairly tax workers who have no choice but to commute during rush hour, he said.
DeFazio also has said some environmentalists have formed an "unholy alliance" with the administration in arguing that such pricing would curb greenhouse gas emissions.
"Instead of admitting to some federal responsibility and need to raise more money, they said we can do it by pricing some people off the road," he said. "It's a view shared by hardly anyone on Capitol Hill, only the Heritage Foundation and a few deluded liberals."
The 2035 plan meets a requirement that metro areas tell the federal government the construction projects they expect to undertake with the transportation money they can "reasonably expect" in coming decades. Maintenance and operations spending are mostly left out, but local money for construction is included. Proposed tax increases not already approved were also left out.
The Oregon Department of Transportation haggled with Metro for months, urging it to give more importance to economic development and to traditional rankings for roads.
Numerical road ratings give more clarity than the "narrative" measures Metro proposed, said Janice Wilson, an Oregon Transportation Commission member. "If you don't have that, then it becomes a philosophical discussion on whether you have congestion."
The Transportation Commission has pledged to scrutinize the Portland-area plan, though its authority may be limited to advising the governor.
Metro's Burkholder said the agency was trying to get away from traditional highway planning that rates roads by traffic flow and calls for more lanes as the only solution. It might cost $500 million to widen Oregon 217, but perhaps much less to build smaller alternate routes. "It's a classic example of saying that you're in a bind."
Dylan Rivera: 503-221-8532; dylanrivera@news.oregonian.com For environment news, go to http://blog.oregonlive.com/pdxgreen
But but .....Al Gore told me we would all be riding around on wooden bicycles in 2030.....
He's right.
Mybe if they booted out all the illegals the traffic problem would go away......after all the dims are hot for abortions...so the increase in population is from illegals...(and very few legal mimmigrants as the DHS is so completely screwed up ....they can’t even keep up with new passports for citizens)
Oregon is sanctuary land.
But to propose New a new tax to fix a transportation problem this large is asking quite a bit.. Especially when the state would rather spend money on getting health care to 125,000 kids and to “punish” drivers for climate change etc.
ODOT and Metro has advocated “smart” living and tried to push MAX to advocate living standards to that model. Heck you even have a future rail corridor to extend to the south of Beaverton. Also.. why dosn’t the voters of Oregon hold the powers to be responsible for NOT maintaining the bridges over the Willamette?
The article also points out to only the Portland Metro area and the Willamette valley. There is a whole bunch more Transportation problems to be funded out side of the Portland corridor...
For the last 40-years there has existed a plan to build an interstate bridge near Kalama-Woodland (in Washington State) on I-5, run it south right across the hills to the west of Portland, then between Hillsboro (the Silicon Forest) and Beaverton and on south until it would connect with interchange north of the Willamette River where I-205 meets I-5.
Much of the congestion in Portland is caused by Portland traffic trying to get onto a very heavily packed I-5. Much of that through traffic would be diverted if this new bridge was built downriver from Portland. But the state-level planners won’t allow it because it threatens the urban growth boundaries.
These fools wanted populations to stay in the cities. Well, now they have what they wanted and having it isn’t pleasurable but rather a nightmare.
The traffic is only the beginning of the problem. Wait until you see what happens if we are still importing most of our energy in 20 years.
True. Our overlords have decreed that they want central planning and "smart growth". Which translates into "pack 'em in like sardines and take away their cars".
You only need to look as far as Southern California to see the "future" they have planned. High density housing, a Starbucks on every corner, etc........
So why is this a Federal problem?
If Owlwhore and his acolytes have their way you WILL be riding wooden bicycles in 2030
Rather than complain about revenue problems, let’s try this:
Eliminate the unionized highway department so roads can be maintained and improved at 1/2 the current hourly salary (which is more in-line with the real market).
But no, we have to support our union brethern with artificially infalated payrolls that suck the money out of transportation bills.
Oh, if you think using private contractors would solve the problem, most states have clauses that when you are awarded a state contract you must pay “prevailing wages”.....meaning union wages to your people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.