Copyright 2002 eMediaMillWorks, Inc.
(f/k/a Federal
Document Clearing House, Inc.)
Federal Document Clearing House
Congressional Testimony
May 15, 2002 Wednesday
SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 3138 words
COMMITTEE:
SENATE ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
HEADLINE: TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
TESTIMONY-BY: CYNTHIA BURBANK, PROGRAM MANAGER
AFFILIATION: PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT CORE BUSINESS
UNIT
BODY: STATEMENT OF CYNTHIA BURBANK, PROGRAM
MANAGER PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT CORE BUSINESS UNIT FEDERAL HIGHWAY
ADMINISTRATION
BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON SENATE ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC
WORKS
MAY 15, 2002
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, thank
you for this opportunity to provide testimony on the important subject of
transportation planning. Today, I would like to report to you
on the status of
transportation planning, and what FHWA is
doing to assist States and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) in
fulfilling the planning goals of the Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) and the
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21).
OVERVIEW: THE ESSENTIAL ROLE OF PLANNING
Transportation planning is the process of identifying
transportation problems and looking for solutions that fulfill
multiple national, State, and local goals. Statewide and metropolitan
transportation planning processes, governed by Federal law (23
United States Code (USC) sections 134 and 135; 49 USC sections 5303-5305) and
applicable State and local laws, are required if Federal highway or transit
funds are to be used for
transportation investments in the
State or metropolitan area. The planning process must do more than merely list
highway and transit capital investments. It must provide strategies for
operating, managing, maintaining, and financing an area's
transportation system in such a way as to best advance that
area's long-term goals. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) rely on the
transportation
planning process as the primary mechanism for cooperative decision making at the
State and local level. This means that local officials and others who anticipate
using Federal
transportation funds must be involved in
planning.
Transportation planning must be attentive to the
public's needs and include sufficient opportunities for public input.
The planning process produces the information on which elected officials
and policy makers will base their decisions regarding
transportation improvements, and helps ensure better, more
informed decision making.
Transportation planners undertake
comprehensive analyses and evaluation of the potential impact of
transportation plans and programs and, at the same time,
address the aspirations and concerns of the community that these plans and
programs serve. Planners examine past, present, and prospective trends, and
issues associated with the demand for the movement of people and goods at local,
rural, metropolitan, statewide, national, and international levels. Public
officials equipped with this information can make decisions that address key
community objectives and tradeoffs, while reducing unanticipated consequences.
Transportation planning must reflect the desires of
communities and take into account the impacts on both the natural and human
environments.
Transportation plans should help regions and
communities set and achieve their goals. A comprehensive planning process that
considers land use, development, safety, and security, also helps ensure that
transportation decisions will be made in an environmentally
sensitive way. The States, MPOs, and transit operators choose which projects
will advance. The Federal role is to provide funds, standards, technical
assistance, and planning models so that State and local decision makers are able
to make the best
transportation choices for their area within
the funding available.
PLANNING UNDER ISTEA AND TEA-21
ISTEA
made significant changes in the metropolitan and statewide planning requirements
for highways and transit, requiring greater attention to public involvement,
fiscal prudence, and multimodal
transportation systems
planning. In addition, ISTEA provided State and local governments more
flexibility in determining
transportation solutions, whether
transit or highways. ISTEA instituted statewide planning and continued the
metropolitan planning processes as the framework for making these decisions. As
a result, much of the past 10 years has been devoted to adjusting to these
changes and applying the new requirements. In most cases, the MPOs, State
Departments of
Transportation (DOTs), and transit operators
have worked together in a cooperative way to implement the changes. The ISTEA
reforms have resulted in more attention to developing financially sound
transportation plans and programs and to involving the public
and stakeholder interest groups in developing the plans and programs. The
changes have enhanced and improved the integrity and effectiveness of the
transportation decision-making process, but continued progress
is needed.
To assist the MPOs, State DOTs, and transit operators in
implementing the ISTEA changes, FHWA and FTA have focused on conducting training
courses, providing technical assistance, supporting peer exchanges, identifying
best practices, and preparing case studies.
The changes initiated by
ISTEA were carried forward by TEA-21 with some further refinements. The
financial discipline in the development of plans and programs introduced in
ISTEA was continued, with an added requirement that financial estimates be
developed cooperatively between the State and MPO.
By statute,
metropolitan
transportation plans must address a minimum of a
twenty-year planning horizon and be updated on a schedule identified by the
Secretary (currently three years in non-attainment areas and five years in
attainment areas). By statute,
Transportation Improvement
Programs (TIPs) address a three-year horizon and must be updated at least every
two years at the State and metropolitan level. State plans are updated on a
cycle identified by the State. In non-attainment areas, under the Clean Air Act,
FHWA and FTA have sought, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), to develop approaches to more effectively integrate air quality
and
transportation planning timeframes and processes. This is a
continuing challenge, which will arise in
reauthorization.
Section 1308 of TEA-21 directed the Secretary to eliminate the separate
requirement for a Major Investment Study (MIS) and integrate the remainder of
the process into the environment and planning processes. Although regulatory
changes have not been completed, FHWA and FTA have fostered and supported
experimentation with alternative approaches, as mutually developed at the State
and local level.
While ISTEA and TEA-21 strengthened the role of MPOs
and local governments in
transportation planning and
programming, States continue to have the primary role, responsibility, and
authority- -albeit in a framework of consultation and cooperation with MPOs,
local governments, and transit operators.
Since the passage of ISTEA and
TEA-21, States have become more involved in comprehensive
transportation planning, including the development of
multi-modal
transportation plans. As a result, many States are
now engaged in activities, such as rural freight issues, which previously
received little attention. Because the statewide planning process is continuing
to evolve, many States are looking at ways to restructure their
transportation planning and programming processes. They are
determining which decisions should be made at the State level and which can be
decided at the rural or metropolitan level.
INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY
BUILDING
FHWA and FTA have jointly developed specialized training
courses and new tools and procedures that address the emerging needs. Also, FHWA
and FTA have sponsored peer exchanges that have allowed States, MPOs, and
transit operators to share best practices.
FHWA and FTA, in a
collaborative effort with the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the American Public
Transportation Association (APTA), the Association of
Metropolitan Planning Organizations (AMPO), and the National Association of
Regional Councils (NARC), have launched the Metropolitan Capacity Building (MCB)
Program--an initiative to strengthen MPOs. The program is targeted not only for
transportation professionals, but also the elected officials
who make
transportation decisions. Collecting, synthesizing,
and disseminating examples of successful innovations by States, MPOs, and
transit operators, the Capacity Building initiative provides multiple mechanisms
for getting critical information to decisionmakers. Moreover, it helps spread
innovation in decisionmaking by publicizing the new techniques and strategies
developed by State and local officials. This initiative has supported peer
exchanges focusing on
transportation modeling and fiscal
constraint. A new course on metropolitan planning has been developed to provide
public officials and staff with an overview of planning process expectations and
options. A public officials briefing book has been prepared, directed
specifically to helping elected officials understand their role and
responsibilities, as well as the overall planning process. Additional activities
are in development and will be disseminated over the coming year.
In
addition to the involvement of the MPO, State DOT, and transit operators, TEA-21
made it very clear that new parties should be coming to the planning table at
both the metropolitan and statewide levels. TEA-21 added a requirement that
freight shippers and users of public transit be provided a reasonable
opportunity to comment on
transportation plans and programs.
Among the most important parties to come to the planning table are local
officials, and TEA-21 emphasized the importance of bringing non-metropolitan
officials into the process. Most states have procedures for engaging local
officials throughout their planning and programming processes. FHWA and FTA are
working hard with States and MPOs to improve or otherwise enhance their efforts
to bring non-metropolitan local officials, freight shippers, and users of public
transit to the table and involve them in planning and programming.
FHWA
and FTA have advanced several initiatives, including safety conscious planning,
implementation of the Intelligent
Transportation Systems (ITS)
Architecture requirements, freight planning, work zone safety, and operational
improvements. These efforts have contributed to congestion mitigation and
enhanced safety consideration.
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
AND SMART GROWTH
Today, we frequently hear the term "smart growth"--a
term that means different things to different people. FHWA views "smart growth"
as a set of State and local policies and programs designed to protect and
preserve valuable natural and cultural resources and make efficient use of
existing infrastructure, while accommodating economic development and population
growth. "Smart growth" policies link
transportation projects
with desired land use patterns in order to make more efficient use of
infrastructure and reduce environmental impact. Land use and
transportation have a symbiotic relationship. How development
occurs can greatly influence regional travel patterns and, in turn, the degree
of access provided by the
transportation system can influence
land use distribution.
Transportation affects land use just as
do affordable housing, good schools, and low crime rates.
State and
local governments have the responsibility for establishing growth policies.
Transportation agencies respect those policies and work with
the State and local requirements. Smart growth can mean State and local land use
strategies to increase population and housing densities and make transit more
viable, and it can also mean managing and operating existing highway, transit,
and other
transportation modes to maintain or improve
performance for each mode without adversely affecting neighborhoods or urban
centers. The goals for smart growth include knitting
transportation improvement projects and public/private
investments so that they merge as seamlessly as possible into the community;
supporting the provision of mixed use development, where feasible, so that
transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and ferry boats are viable options
to driving; and accommodating the flow of freight and passengers throughout the
country so that the economy can continue to grow. Smart growth does not mean
pitting transit or any other mode against highways. We recognize that it is
impractical to completely build our way out of congestion in our most congested
metropolitan areas. But that does not mean that we think that new roads and
improvements to the existing road network should be eliminated. It is not an
issue of highways versus transit. It is an issue of expanding
transportation choices and providing a balanced intermodal
transportation system that allows for the efficient and
economical movement of people and goods. In some areas that may mean more
transit and in other areas it may entail significant roadway improvements, and
in most areas it probably means both. It is up to State and local officials to
decide how best to address their unique set of circumstances, and it is the
Department of
Transportation's role to help them best implement
their decision. While FHWA and FTA strongly believe that land use decisions are
State and local decisions, and should remain that way, we do believe that there
is much to be gained from more coordination among State and local planning,
zoning, and housing authorities, and environmental and
transportation officials, in reaching those decisions. We also
believe that there should be more dialogue between local decision makers and
transportation professionals on the connections between land
use and surface
transportation--including, for example, more
dialogue between airport sponsors and metropolitan planning organizations. Such
dialogues would allow us to learn from each other and produce better
transportation outcomes. FHWA's role in promoting "smart
growth" is to provide technical assistance and training to our State and local
customers concerning the linkages between
transportation and
land use. Along with FTA, we will work cooperatively with other Federal agencies
such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the EPA, to
assist us with
transportation-related issues, such as
affordable housing or brownfields, to provide as much assistance as possible in
the form of research, technical expertise, and training to local and State
governments. At the same time, we will be mindful that the people of this
country hold freedom of mobility as a cherished individual right. In addition to
the Metropolitan and Statewide Capacity Building Program mentioned above, our
efforts to help State and local governments make smart decisions about growth
include support for the
Transportation Enhancements Program,
the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ), the
Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot
Program (TCSP), and research in areas such as value pricing, modeling, and land
use.
TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNITY AND SYSTEM
PRESERVATION PILOT PROGRAM (TCSP)
The TCSP program was created by
section 1221 of TEA-21, as a competitive discretionary program to stimulate
innovative strategies for using
transportation investments to
achieve economic growth, while simultaneously protecting the environment and
ensuring a high quality of life. TCSP projects funded in fiscal year (FY) 1999
and FY 2000 are demonstrating results that include: developing new analytical
tools to assess the impacts of
transportation and land use
alternatives on mobility and economic development; expanding the range of
partners involved in
transportation and land use planning; and
demonstrating design practices that increase travel options and improve the
character of local communities. For example, TCSP grants are being used in Mono
County, California; Centreville, Delaware; and Cleveland, Ohio to investigate
design changes that can improve safety and pedestrian access, while still
maintaining traffic flow, where high-traffic roads run through community
centers. A TCSP project in Oregon will survey the impact on travel patterns of
telecommuting centers being developed in rural Oregon by the Oregon Department
of Energy. TCSP was authorized in TEA-21 at $
25 million per
year. The response to the program has been positive-- between FY 1999 and FY
2002, we received approximately 1,332 applications totaling
$
906 million in response to Federal Register Notices. With the
pending announcement of FY 2002 TCSP awards, there will be a total of 420 TCSP
grant awards. A significant number of TCSP projects in FY 2001 and 2002 were
designated in Congressional committee reports. While many of these projects
might not have been selected in a competitive process similar to the one used to
recommend the FY 1999 and 2000 TCSP discretionary awards, we can state that all
projects that have received funds are statutorily eligible. Although FHWA
believes that a truly discretionary program, administered through a competitive
merit-based process, would allow us to better maximize the benefits of the TCSP
program, we are working aggressively to ensure that the funds provided for TCSP
projects are used to advance the program's goals as established in TEA-21. TCSP
outreach efforts by FHWA, including a comprehensive report on the first three
years of implementation based in part on interviews with grantees, have elicited
suggestions for improving TCSP in
reauthorization. Suggestions
include: award future TCSP grants through a competitive process; continue to
emphasize learning and knowledge transfer; and maintain a focus on both planning
and implementation.
CONCLUSION
ISTEA and TEA-21 have provided us
a solid and balanced structure around which to shape
reauthorization legislation and we will build on the
programmatic and financial initiatives of these two historic surface
transportation acts. To this end, we will apply the core
principles enunciated by Secretary Mineta in testimony before this Committee in
January, including:
Building on the intermodal approaches of ISTEA and
TEA-21; Preserving funding flexibility to allow the broadest application of
funds to
transportation solutions, as identified by State and
local governments; and
Simplifying Federal
transportation programs and continuing efforts to streamline
project approval and implementation.
In
reauthorization, we want to work with this Committee and with
our partners in the
transportation community to find additional
means of assisting States to strengthen and improve their
transportation planning processes to better achieve not only
their
transportation goals but their other societal goals as
well. Mr. Chairman, thank you again for the opportunity to testify. I look
forward to responding to any questions you may have.
LOAD-DATE: August 22, 2002