Transportation 101

The Times They Are A-Changing

In the last 20 years, Washington’s population increased by 48% while vehicle miles increased 88%—almost twice as much. In 1980, Clark County had a population of 192,000; today, 363,000 people live in Clark County and they own over 200,000 cars. In other words, Clark County today has more cars than it had people in 1980. In the face of this tremendous growth in numbers of people and cars, the state capital outlay for road capacity per dollar of personal income dropped by 50%. Clark County is in a transportation crisis.

back to top

Why Should YOU Care?

What we decide about transportation and how to fund it will have a big impact on each of us. From how much time we spend driving—getting to work, dropping the kids off at school, and running errands—to the prices we pay, these all are affected.

• It takes longer today to get around town. Even if you only drive or travel outside rush hour, you feel the impact of having more cars on the road all day, every day. Morning and evening rush hour congestion start earlier and last longer.

• Things cost more because it takes freight haulers longer to get them to market. Maybe a few extra pennies per pound for apples don’t seem like much, but adding pennies onto the price of everything adds up.

• More cars equal more air pollution. Air quality is getting worse and it is becoming harder to meet state and federal requirements. (See Supplemental Information for the health effects resulting from car emissions.)

back to top

The TPP

The Transportation Priorities Project (TPP) has a simple message: Clark County is in a transportation crisis, and we need to step up to the plate and do something about it. The theme of the TPP is Dream It, Fund It, Build It. TPP is grassroots and citizen-driven—ordinary people working to find solutions to this crisis. The TPP gives citizens the opportunity to make informed choices about the direction of transportation improvements in Clark County over the next 20 years—what improvements should be made, how improvements will be funded, and how we will pay for it.

TPP volunteers are talking with friends, family, neighbors, and groups and organizations about Clark County’s transportation crisis. After holding more than 40 meetings and talking with over 500 people, so far they have heard that:

• You recognize the importance and value of transportation—good planning results in sound development and family wage jobs, less congestion, cleaner air—a better life for us and our children.

• You need straight talk—how it all works, who comes up with the plan, what the plan looks like, who pays for it, when will it happen.

back to top

TPP Background

In early summer 2002, some concerned citizens got together to talk about Clark County’s transportation system and its direction for the future, because local transportation agencies and experts can’t seem to come up with a workable solution that citizens will support. The TPP came up with a blueprint for a citizen-led community discussion. That blueprint became the Transportation Priorities Project: Dream It, Fund It, Build It. Two local not-for-profit organizations, Identity Clark County (ICC) and InterAct, took the project on.

TPP I
From August–November 2002, 500 individuals at 40 meetings were asked what they knew about the county’s transportation issues, what their preferences were, and what solutions they would suggest. A final all-day meeting produced a group of 113 people willing to work on the transportation project.

The first phase of TPP found out that 1) people care deeply about what happens in their neighborhood and see fixing travel around the county and to and from Oregon as a priority, 2) people can learn a lot from good information about transportation, and 3) if people know their money will be spent on local projects, they are willing to pay for them. The people who participated in TPP I said they were moderately concerned about getting from place to place. They were more concerned about finding solutions and funding for major needs for our transportation system for the near and distant future.

Government officials expressed a sincere desire to know what citizens wanted, what they were willing to pay for, and how they want to pay for it. Many talked about how hard it is to get people involved and give them good information about transportation choices and funding. Government officials get mixed messages from citizens—they want transportation improvements but don’t want to pay for them.

Citizens and government officials agreed that we need better communication, understanding, and information so we can work together to find solutions to the region’s transportation problems. People also told us in TPP I that we should

1. Continue with the same intense TPP grassroots participation.
2. Convince our elected officials to put a statewide program in place that provides dollars for local and state transportation projects.
3. Pull everyone together to talk the same talk about transportation so we have a better chance of receiving state and federal funding.
4. Look at the big picture for Clark County’s transportation needs, instead of a piece here and a piece there.
5. Reach out and spread the transportation word throughout Clark County—neighborhood to neighborhood, city to city.
6. Help citizens and local officials understand each other and work together as a team.

TPP II
In response to what we heard citizens say in TPP I, we moved on to TPP II and to working with all of the transportation agencies in the county to develop three regional transportation improvement scenarios—a big picture.

TPP II will gather feedback from the public and share it with transportation agencies on:

• Level of service of the regional transportation system—movement of people and freight through Clark County on highways and arterial roads

• How much the public is willing to pay

• How the public prefers to pay

TPP II closes the loop between the users and designers and funders of Clark County’s transportation network so that projects that receive a high level of support from citizens are put at the top of the list for implementation. The public will use TPP II to tell transportation agencies how much more they are willing to pay for transportation improvement.

Most of us don’t understand transportation lingo—charts, traffic modeling and analysis, and concurrency. We want to know what the problem is, how it will affect us, how it will be fixed, and what it’s going to cost. We want straightforward, understandable talk, and we want someone to listen to what we think should be done. So the TPP has come up with Transportation 101—Useful Information About Transportation. In one-on-one conversation, group presentations, printed materials, and an interactive web site, the TPP intends to get its message to as many people as possible. (Visit our web site at www.tppii.com for complete details about the TPP, and how you can make a difference.)

What you do with the message is up to you, but we encourage you to listen, learn about transportation, think about what you want for Clark County, and then take a few minutes to tell us. We’ll take your ideas, your recommendations, suggestions, and concerns, and tell the people who are responsible for developing, building, and maintaining our transportation system. Then we can all work together to address the transportation crisis. Citizens need to give their opinions about the following transportation questions:

1. What do citizens want?
2. What are they willing to pay for?
3. How do they want to pay for it?

What It Takes to Build a Road

Last year, the Washington legislature approved a 5¢ gas tax increase (Nickel Funding Package) for specific Clark County state road improvement projects. New construction was soon underway on I-5 and SR-500. People saw this quick work and thought that road projects could be planned and under construction in just months. These projects had been designed and "put on the shelf" awaiting funding.

Road construction projects have several phases: prioritizing, planning, funding, permitting (including compliance with the Endangered Species Act), design, and right-of-way acquisition. Once all of these have been completed, construction can finally begin. It can take as long as 10 years to complete a road widening or reconstruction.

back to top

Prioritizing

Continued growth means that our transportation needs change every day. Budget cuts mean that we must use our transportation funds wisely—what dollars go for regular maintenance and what dollars go for making improvements. Deciding what’s most important is a big challenge.

Generally, transportation improvement projects are rated in order of

importance. A project can move up or down the list depending on how it compares to others. Several factors can decide a project’s fate including:

• Identified deficiencies such as accidents, pavement and structure conditions, traffic congestion, drainage issues, and signal and roadway lighting problems.

• Impacts to the environment, including fish and wildlife.

• Cost benefit—which projects are of the greatest benefit to the public compared to the cost to make the improvements.

• Comments from the public.

• How much funding is available and when it is made available for use on a particular project(s). Many state and federal funds are awarded on a competitive basis. Let’s say we submit the top five most important projects on our list, but we receive money only for project #4. That project moves to the top of the list because we have the money to do something now. The order of importance changes.

Every two years, WSDOT recommends program funding and a proposed budget to the Washington Transportation Commission (WTC).

The WTC determines funding levels that will be assigned to each program and approves the list of projects to send to the legislature for funding approval. The legislature determines which projects will be funded.

Funding partnerships improve a project’s ranking. Local transportation jurisdictions frequently partner to improve their competitive position. For example, Camas and Vancouver partnered with Clark County on the 192nd Avenue project in requesting transportation dollars from the state. By sticking together, they improved the project's position on the list and got the needed state and federal money so the project could be constructed sooner rather than later.

back to top

Planning

A conceptual design is the first step in developing a possible solution to traffic congestion or a safety problem. At this stage, the design is detailed enough to estimate the benefits the project would provide the public, and the cost to build. Planning studies use this information to compare and evaluate alternatives. Would another design give better results? Would it be more cost effective?

back to top

Funding

State, city, and county governments construct and maintain transportation projects. Funding comes from tax dollars levied at the federal, state, and local levels.

At the state level, gas taxes and licenses, permits, and fees fund transportation projects. Cities and counties receive approximately half of the gas tax to pay for local projects.

In the past, cities and counties got approximately 90% of project funding from the federal government. Today, federal funding amounts to about 50%, so state, county, and local governments have to make up the difference.

Until January 2000, some of the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (MVET) also funded transportation, but voters eliminated that source of money with the passage of Initiative 695. The loss of MVET plus the decrease in federal support created a statewide funding crisis for transportation. Many state and local transportation improvement projects came to a screeching halt. The state, cities, and counties scrambled to find money to maintain current services and worried whether that would even be possible.

In April 2003 the Washington State Senate passed a 10-year $4.1 billion transportation improvement package that took effect July 1, 2003. It includes:

• A one-time 5¢ increase in the state gas tax.

• A 15% gross-weight fee increase for commercial trucks.

• A 0.3% sales tax on motor vehicles.

The money raised by the gas tax is placed into a special Nickel Funding Package that will be used to pay for a list of needed highway projects throughout the state. The projects are funded from start to finish, and when the bonds are paid off for the projects, the tax increase will go away. The new revenue is being invested in the following areas:

• Highways: $3.38 billion, including $2.22 billion for projects in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties (Washington’s worst traffic choke points), and $928 million for projects elsewhere in Washington. Two Clark County projects totaling $57.3 million are already under construction:
  
  • Widen I-5 in each direction from Salmon Creek to I-205: Construct an additional through lane and an auxiliary lane in each direction on I-5 from NE 99th Street to NE 134th Street. This project will improve safety and relieve congestion along I-5. When this project is completed, the current 4 lanes will be expanded to 6 through lanes and two auxiliary lanes..
    
  • New SR-500 interchange and additional lanes: Construct a new interchange on SR-500 at NE 112th/Gher Road to reduce accidents.

• Ferries: $299 million, which will help construct one new auto ferry and upgrade two terminals.

• Rail: $239 million, which includes $165 million for track improvements between Bellingham and Vancouver (Clark County), and $45 million for capital projects to improve freight movement.

• Public transportation: $236 million, including commute-trip reduction grants and tax credits, rural mobility grants, special needs transportation grants and van pools.

To the average citizen, this transportation package seems like a lot of money and the solution to all our problems, but unfortunately, this is not the case. The nickel gas tax increase does not provide enough money to fund all significant high-cost projects in Clark County.

To help provide funding to meet these needs, the 2003 funding package also included authority for counties in the Puget Sound area to form Regional Transportation Improvement Districts (RTID) that could raise money for local projects. Voters in the RTID counties will need to approve any local funding and bonding proposals. While this option is not available now to Clark County, representatives from transportation agencies and the private sector are lobbying the legislature to extend this funding option to Clark County in 2004.

back to top

Competing for Revenues

Some transportation funds for local jurisdictions, such as state and federal grants, are restricted in their use, while other funding sources earmarked for transportation may be made available to fund other public services (i.e., parks, fire, and police services). Typically, these other funding sources are a part of city or county General Fund Revenues. Each year, local governments and agencies prepare a budget splitting available dollars between various departments. If the money allocated falls short of meeting a particular service demand, additional money may be taken from another area to make sure that the service can meet the needs of the public—especially for public safety and welfare. When a source of revenue can be used for more than one kind of public service, transportation projects must compete with other public services as well as with other transportation projects. The following revenues can be used to support transportation as well as other public services: bonds, business and occupation (B&O) tax, property tax, real estate excise tax (REET), and utility tax.

back to top

Keeping the Status Quo—Maintenance, Safety and Preservation

Transportation agencies spend money on maintaining and operating the existing road and public transportation systems. In 1980, 25% of the state’s transportation improvement and preservation budget went to preservation (maintaining our current system). However, in 2000, approximately 40% of this budget was spent on preservation. As our highway system ages, more dollars will go to preserve our current system, resulting in fewer dollars spent for improvements. Your preservation dollars go toward:

• Safety improvements: Repairing and replacing guardrails; fixing and calibrating traffic, school zone, and railroad crossing signals; maintaining roadway lighting; repairing and replacing traffic, directional, and safety signs.

• Road preservation: Repairing pavement, including resurfacing and filling potholes; reconstructing the road base; striping and replacing pavement markers; repairing slides and slopes; repairing and painting bridges; permitting and enforcing weight limits.

• Environmental impact mitigation: Maintaining culverts and ditches (fish friendly); maintaining wetland banking and drainage (protecting wetland and habitat that provide a home to native plants, fish and wildlife).

• Neighborhood traffic management: Repairing and replacing pedestrian crossings and sidewalks; maintaining bike lanes; maintaining road connections for circulation improvements; and limited traffic calming (traffic circles, speed cushions).

• Street maintenance: Sweeping and cleaning; snow and ice control; grading and controlling dust on gravel roads; maintaining landscaped areas and controlling vegetation; stormwater management and system maintenance; litter control.

• Other: Traffic enforcement (paid to the Clark County Sheriff’s office); clean water fee; replacing C-TRAN buses.

This table reflects the total estimated cost for transportation agencies to continue basic transportation operations at today’s service levels over the next 20 years.

back to top

Environmental

Before a road can be built or improved, environmental issues and concerns have to be studied. The environmental process avoids or minimizes impacts or compensates for loss to the environment. The average time for this complex process is 2-4 years. Large projects can take up to 6 years. Depending on where the transportation project money comes from, more than one environmental report may be required.

Review for compliance with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is required regardless of the funding source. The ESA is a federal law designed to protect fish, wildlife, and plants and help them recover if they are threatened with, or are in danger of becoming, extinct. The law requires federal and state agencies to work in coordination with local jurisdictions to assist the recovery of listed species. Several species of salmon and steelhead in Clark County already have been listed as threatened under the ESA.

Federal transportation dollars require compliance with the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). NEPA is the basic national charter for protection of the environment and sets goals and provides means for carrying out the policy.

State transportation dollars require compliance with the Washington State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA). SEPA is a way to identify possible environmental impacts that may result from governmental decisions. Information provided during the SEPA review process helps agency decision-makers, applicants, and the public understand how a proposal will affect the environment. This information can be used to change a proposal to reduce likely impacts, or to condition or deny a proposal when adverse environmental impacts are identified.

Other laws and local ordinances also must be considered.

back to top

Design & Permitting

Throughout the process of developing a project, the public and local jurisdictions have many opportunities to review and comment on design issues. Following the environmental review, the design typically moves forward from the conceptual stage, becomes more detailed, and is developed to a level that allows the analysis of different alternatives. At this stage, final design and construction permits can be requested from local and state agencies and the project can acquire right-of-way if needed.

back to top

Acquiring Right-of-Way

After the project design is finalized, right-of-way is purchased. For road projects where private property is needed, the public agency is required to compensate property owners for the needed property. Independent property appraisers determine the value of the property and often negotiate the acquisition of the property. Depending on the amount of property to be acquired and the number of property owners, the cost of right-of-way acquisition and the time to complete the negotiations can be significant. Purchasing 2 to 3 parcels can take anywhere from 6 to 9 months; this includes appraisal time, offers, negotiations, and purchasing.

back to top

Construction

Once the project design is finalized and right-of-way is acquired, the project is contracted for construction. The magnitude of the construction project dictates the length of time construction will take. Weather conditions can also lengthen the construction period.

back to top

Funding Levels

For more information on funding levels, please visit our Funding Levels section.

back to top