Monday, July 10, 2017

At the MPO: Starting to Plan for the CMAQ Bonus Funds

The Technical Advisory Committee for our local Metropolitan Planning Organization meets tomorrow, Tuesday the 11th, and they will be talking about the schedule for project selection to be funded by the new "Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality" funding.

From "Narrowed List of Eligible CMAQ Projects"
In the minutes from last month, there was also an interesting note about complications on the project to move the Doaks Ferry/Highway 22 intersection farther east west! in the old townsite of Eola.
[ODOT member, Dan] Fricke announced that due to unanticipated concerns, ODOT intends to pause work on two construction projects related to Hwy. 22 and Doaks Ferry Rd. in order to monitor conditions in the area for another year. The additional data will help with the evaluation of slide conditions in that area. Financial considerations related to the projects were discussed. It is unknown at this point if there will be any financial issues, how they would be resolved if there are, or when. [italics added]
From the Options Map, Summer 2015
(comments in white added; this also is a little old,
and it might be superseded - but you get the idea)
Fricke is also one of the project leads for the Salem River Crossing. And that project too has a problem with unstable soils.

The Preferred Alternative is still in a liquefaction zone
(via N3B, adapted from chapt 3.18 of the DEIS)
There is, in fact, an institutional bias at ODOT towards minimizing that kind of problem. We have seen it most egregiously in the US20  Pioneer Mountain to Eddyville debacle, whose final budget more than doubled the initial budget and which came in several years late. Some finished work had to be blown up and done twice over.

This delay on a smaller project is another data point and more evidence for skepticism about cost estimates on the SRC and is something to file away.

On the current agenda is the CMAQ bonus money! (The way these became available is complicated - basically we've been eligible for several years, but only now are getting an allocation. It was a little, maybe more than a little, contentious. They aren't really a "bonus," but as they arrive as somewhat unanticipated funds, from our perspective here they are a bonus source of funding.)
The addition of CMAQ funds for SKATS in FY 2019 to FY 2021 provides an opportunity to review projects in the FY 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and add projects using federal STBGP-U funds that were not programmed in the TIP. Approximately $5 million will be available for projects for obligation in FY 2019 through 2021. Staff and TAC members need to discuss the project identification and application process that should start this summer.
As "Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality" funds, these should mostly be walk/bike/bus projects, projects that reduce drive-alone trips, rather than auto capacity and speed projects that ultimately induce more trips. Taking cars off the road and improving other mobility, rather than speeding up the cars, should be the dominant paradigm for "congestion relief." We need to shift away from "paving" and "congestion reduction and traffic flow" projects as if they actually solved the problems of air quality and congestion. In the chart at top you can see that 19% of funds have gone to "paving" projects, and that sounds like slipping CMAQ funds into maintenance projects - plugging the gap on deferred maintenance. That's probably not the best use for this funding source.

Applications will be due sometime in September or October, depending on how quickly the MPO wants to move. There are two proposed schedules from which the MPO could select one.

Look for the historic sign
next to the entry
You can download the agenda and meeting packet here.

SKATS Technical Advisory Committee meets Tuesday the 11th, at 1:30pm. SKATS is at 100 High St. SE, Suite 200, above Andaluz Kitchen and Table Five 08.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

From above: We need to shift away from "paving" and "congestion reduction and traffic flow" projects as if they actually solved the problems of air quality and congestion. In the chart at top you can see that 19% of funds have gone to "paving" projects, and that sounds like slipping CMAQ funds into maintenance projects - plugging the gap on deferred maintenance. That's probably not the best use for this funding source.

The paving projects were in the Rogue Valley area that had elevated PM10 air quality issues: paving is a cost effective measure to reduce road dust. From FHWA's cost effectiveness guide: "Dust mitigation projects were clearly the most cost-effective alternative for reducing PM10, which is the only pollutant that these projects are expected to affect. This relationship held for both street sweeping and dirt road paving projects, the two types of dust mitigation projects evaluated in the analysis."

Mike Jaffe
Mid-Willamette Valley Council of Governments

Salem Breakfast on Bikes said...

Thanks for the clarification! Hopefully there aren't many opportunities for "dust mitigation" within the Salem-Keizer MPO boundaries.

But that misses the larger point: "[T]hese should mostly be walk/bike/bus projects, projects that reduce drive-alone trips, rather than auto capacity and speed projects that ultimately induce more trips."

Paving a gravel road adds auto capacity, induces higher auto speeds, and ultimately induces more trips because the road is more pleasant for driving. It also creates a future maintenance obligation. In a note last summer, "The Un-paving of American Roads," Strong Towns observes that maintaining a gravel road is much cheaper than maintaining a paved road, and some governments are choosing to depave for this reason.

Over at City Observatory, they cite a paper by PSU transportation researchers Miguel–Alex Bigazzi and Miguel Figliozzi:

"Induced or suppressed travel demand . . . are critical considerations when assessing the emissions effects of capacity-based congestion mitigation strategies. Capacity expansions that reduce marginal emissions rates by increasing travel speeds are likely to increase total emissions in the long run through induced demand."

For these reasons, walk/bike/bus projects should be the primary, perhaps even the only, beneficiary of CMAQ funds!

Anonymous said...

Salem was never non-attainment for PM10 (or PM2.5), so we wouldn't be using CMAQ for paving projects to reduce dust.

I can't say where all SKATS' CMAQ funds will be spent in the future, but the CMAQ funds will likely go to primarily fund transit, bike/ped projects, and transportation options (Rideshare, Demand Management, etc.). Some could also go to projects that help relieve congestion (such as improvements to signal timing or other ITS [Intelligent Transportation System] projects). Every project must demonstrate (and have an quantified estimate) of the air quality benefit. Hope that helps clarify things some more.

Mike