America 2050

Tell Congress to Support Amtrak

2013-04-30T23:05:12Z

Amtrak recovers more of its operating expenses from ticket revenue than any other railroad in the nation.

Amtrak recently sent its fiscal year 2014 budget to Congress, which outlined the incredible progress the railroad has made in recent years. Amtrak makes critical connections across the country, moving nearly one million people on commuter and intercity rail services each day, and breaking annual ridership records in nine out of the last ten years. In March 2013, Amtrak moved more passenger than any other month in its history and is on pace to break another all-time annual ridership record. Amtrak has also become more efficient and self-sufficient, covering 88% of its operating costs with ticket fares and other non-federal revenue. In 2012, ticket sales reached a record $2 billion. However, Amtrak continues to need financial support from the federal government, particularly for capital expenses to maintain aging infrastructure concentrated on the Northeast Corridor and upgrade its fleet of trains.

In 2014, Amtrak is requesting $373 million for operating support, more than 20% less than Congress appropriated last year and 34% less than was appropriated in 2010. On the capital side of the ledger, Amtrak is requesting just over $2 billion.

We need your help to send the message to Washington that Americans want a strong national passenger rail network. Please take a moment to call or write your representatives in Congress and ask them to fully fund Amtrak's budget request. Visit www.govtrack.us/congress/members to find contact information for your elected officials. Then, make a call or write an email asking them to sign on to a letter of support for Amtrak's budget request that is being circulated by Senator Frank Lautenberg.

GAO Report Validates California High-Speed Rail Project

2013-04-08T18:10:32Z

The independent, nonpartisan, federal watchdog agency, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), gave the California high-speed rail project passing marks in an audit released last Friday. The report found that the California High-Speed Rail Authority has produced "reasonable" ridership and revenue forecasts in its Revised 2012 Business Plan, while also pointing out that the project's cost estimates could be improved and that future funding for the project remains uncertain. Jeff Morales, CEO of the Authority, called the GAO's report, "an important validation from a highly respected government watchdog." "This is a very good, very strong, report card." Dan Richard, board chairman of the Authority said. "It's not straight A's, but we will aspire to improve in the areas where the GAO tells us we can do much better."

The Authority's business plan forecast that annual ridership will grow to between 16 million and 27 million by 2030, depending on various future conditions, such as the price of fuel. The plan's high ridership scenario assumes a fuel price of $6.11 and the low scenario assumes a price of $2.60 in 2030. Fares for high-speed rail are assumed to be 83% of San Francisco-Los Angeles airfare in 2009. The plan also projected that the high-speed rail system would generate annual revenues of between $1 billion and $1.8 billion in 2030 and proved that no public operating subsidies will be required under any scenario.

Read the GAO report.

]]> Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide, but that additional information could be provided to make them more comprehensive, credible and well documented. The latest cost estimate for the "blended" high-speed rail system between San Francisco and Los Angeles/Anaheim is $68.4 billion. The Authority's Revised 2012 Business Plan relies on the federal government to kick in $38.7 billion and the private-sector to pony up an additional $13.1 billion over the course of construction. The project has already secured $11.5 billion ($8.2 billion in state and $3.3 billion in federal funds) to begin building the the first phase of construction in the Central Valley this summer. According to the business plan, no additional funding will be needed until 2015 when it hopes to begin the second phase of construction.

The GAO report states that the project's funding "faces uncertainty, especially in a tight federal and state budget environment." However, it goes on to say, "the Authority's plan recognizes the uncertainty of the current funding environment and is building the project in phases" which "is typical for major transportation infrastructure projects."

More from the GAO report:

"Based on [the GAO's] past work on high-speed rail, successful projects require significant and sustained financial commitments from the public sector before private investors will participate, and the Authority's plan reflects this funding model. For example, in Japan, private investment is contingent on substantial government investment. Other federally-supported transportation programs--like those for highway and certain transit infrastructure--rely on a dedicated revenue source for their funding and allow for multi-year funding agreements for eligible projects. In contrast, the HSIPR program has not been funded with a dedicated revenue stream, but from the general fund, a process that means that the program has to compete for appropriations with other discretionary programs."

"Our past work on high-speed rail systems has shown that private sector investment is easier to attract only after the public sector has made a substantial capital investment in the system."

Read the full GAO report.

The FRA Narrows in on a Vision for the Northeast Corridor

2013-04-04T23:24:55Z

The Federal Railroad Administration is currently managing a comprehensive planning effort to define, evaluate and prioritize future levels of investment in the Northeast Corridor (NEC) through 2040. This effort, launched in February 2012, called NEC FUTURE, will produce a Service Development Plan that articulates the overall scope, alternatives and approach for proposed improvements, and a Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement that evaluates and identifies ways to address broad, corridor-wide environmental impacts due to these improvements. This process is a federally-required step before major construction to overhaul the corridor's aging, unreliable, and congested infrastructure can begin.

But, before the FRA could analyze the impacts of the multitude of visions for improved NEC rail service, first it needed to narrow down the alternative visions to a reasonable number by weeding out the alternatives that are clearly inferior to others. So far, they've winnowed the list down to 15 alternative visions. Earlier this week, the FRA published its new "Preliminary Alternatives" report, which contains descriptions of these 15 different visions of the NEC, ranging from mundane to ambitious. The FRA hopes to carry around 8 or 9 alternatives forward to the Tier 1 EIS process to be weighed against the "no action" alternative (essentially doing the bare minimum to keep the corridor operating safely). The FRA's goal is to have established a final preferred alternative by mid-2015.

]]> The 15 alternative visions presented in the report have been grouped into four different program levels that vary according to the level of investment it will take to achieve and the quantity and variety of rail service types that will be available. The FRA has not produced cost estimates, but in general, alternatives in level A are low cost options and alternatives in level D will require a significant increase in future investment.

Preliminary Alternative Visions for NEC Rail Service & Infrastructure

(click this image to view an enlarged version)

Alternatives in Level A would achieve a state of good repair and meet projected demand for rail travel through 2040 on the existing corridor by implementing projects that moderately increase service and capacity, but would not construct new routes or serve new markets.

Alternatives in Level B would achieve a state of good repair on the existing corridor and meet projected demand for rail travel through 2040 by expanding service to existing and connecting rail markets, but would not construct new routes. This program level assumes the rail mode share stays the same.

Alternatives in Level C would achieve a state of good repair on the existing corridor and create additional demand for rail service by serving new markets and growing existing markets by adding capacity and building new alignments in targeted locations, such as downtown Baltimore and Philadelphia. This program level assumes the rail mode share increases.

Alternatives in Level D would achieve a state of good repair on the corridor and create enough capacity to provide major increases in the quantity and types of rail services and significantly improve trip times to existing and new markets on and off the existing NEC. These alternatives all include building new main line tracks the entire length of the corridor and optimizing capacity on the existing NEC. This program level assumes the rail mode share increases significantly.

Download the NEC FUTURE Preliminary Alternatives Report

Amtrak Requests Less Federal Operating Support... Again

2013-04-02T19:30:44Z

Last week, Amtrak sent Congress its annual funding request, which asks for an increase in capital investment and a decrease in operating support. Amtrak's need for federal operating support has actually decreased significantly in recent years, meaning the railway is becoming more self-sufficient by covering more of its operating costs with ticket fares and other non-federal revenue. In 2013, high ridership (31.2 million) drove record ticket sales (more than $2 billion), which helped Amtrak cover about 88% of its operating costs "with funds generated by the company itself, rather than from the Federal Government." In 2014, Amtrak is requesting $373 million for operating support, more than 20% less than Congress appropriated last year and 34% less than was appropriated in 2010.

Highlights from Amtrak's federal funding request after the jump.

]]> Highlights:

Capital Investment

Amtrak is requesting just over $2 billion to maintain and upgrade its capital assets. This year's capital request continues to show Amtrak's long-term commitment to improving the Northeast Corridor, "one of America's most important transportation assets, [which] traverses the length of a region that is vital to the national economy," and where nearly 40% of Amtrak's capital budget is spent.

This year, Amtrak will be rolling out the first models from the recent order of 70 new electric locomotives for the Northeast Regional service and 130 coaches for long-distance routes. In addition to $1.2 billion for general capital needs, the request includes $356 million for more new trains. "In January, 2013, Amtrak released a request for information to the railcar supply industry, in partnership with the California High-Speed Rail Authority. This marked the beginning of a multi-year procurement process which will eventually provide us with the next generation of high speed trains to expand seating capacity and provide for more frequent high-speed service on the NEC.

Gateway Program

The Gateway Program is Amtrak's vision for improving the rail infrastructure between Newark Penn Station and New York Penn Station. The program is comprised of several different projects, including bridge and track work in New Jersey, new rail tunnels under the Hudson River, and an expansion of Penn Station to accommodate the increase in commuter and intercity rail traffic that is projected over the coming decades. Amtrak is seeking $167 million to advance critical components of the Gateway Program.

"The Hudson Yards mixed-use development project will create a substantial overbuild atop the existing Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) yard in Manhattan west of Penn Station. This overbuild will require a substantial foundation structure to be built astride the most direct line from New Jersey to the terminal area. If that structure does not incorporate a segment for a future rail tunnel into its design, it will be cost-prohibitive and very likely technically infeasible to subsequently revise the structure so that a tunnel can reach the station on that optimal alignment. Amtrak is currently working in cooperation with the developers and other affected partners, like the LIRR, to address this by completing design of an 800-ft tunnel segment through the site, and is seeking funding to begin construction in FY 2013 of this segment to protect the alignment into Penn Station, and ensure that our system retains sufficient flexibility to accommodate projected future growth at a reasonable cost."

Download Amtrak's press release here.

Creative Infrastructure Solutions

2013-03-15T19:15:13Z

An article in the latest edition of the Economist entitled, "A Time for Renewal" describes several different ways that governors around the country are getting creative about raising funds to pay for their states' critical infrastructure needs.

The article shows how federal funding is increasingly tapped as the Highway Trust Fund, the source for most of the federal government's transportation infrastructure spending, is running dry. The Congressional Budget Office's most recent projections for the Highway Trust Fund show that the gas tax is not generating nearly enough to cover all of our highway and transit expenses, and this scenario will only get worse as Americans continue to drive less and buy more efficient cars. As the graph above shows, starting in 2015, the Highway Trust Fund will end the year with a negative balance, accruing larger and larger shortfalls as time goes on. Even this bleak situation will still require transferring tax dollars from the U.S. Treasury to cover shortfalls in 2013 and 2014.

Many states are not waiting around for policy makers in Washington, D.C. to figure out a solution to this federal funding problem. Many states are coming up with their own creative ways of raising new revenues within their own borders. Some states are increasing fees on users of the transportation system, either by increasing highway tolls or transit fares. Some are increasing their states' sales taxes or taxing specific things like sweets, alcohol or gambling. Others are turning to public-private partnerships.

In Chicago, Mayor Rahm Emanuel has created the Chicago Infrastructure Trust (CIT) to help attract private capital to pay for public infrastructure improvements. PBS recently published a great video primer on the CIT with Rahm Emanuel and his top aides describing it in their own words. View it here.

Read the article in the Economist.

California High-Speed Rail - Construction Set for 2013

2012-10-15T20:35:45Z

Last month, the Federal Railroad Administration issued a Record of Decision for one of the initial construction segments of the California High-Speed Rail Project, between Merced and Fresno in the Central Valley. This approval was the last major hurdle before construction can begin, which is now on target to break ground in 2013. Completion of the project's initial operating segment is slated for 2021.

Construction phasing for this project is complicated. The initial operating segment, 130 miles between Merced and Bakersfield, is comprised of four construction phases, two of which are between Merced and Fresno. These two construction phases are what are now cleared for construction. This work will entail constructing the spine, of what will ultimately be the statewide high-speed rail system, linking San Francisco and Los Angeles through the Central Valley in under two hours.

]]> "It is a very big step and a very important milestone," Jeff Morales, chief executive of the rail authority, said. "It allows us to move forward in earnest." This approval grants the California High-Speed Rail Authority permission to move ahead with property acquisition, construction, and other related activities. The initial operating segment will allow Caltrans to extend San Joaquin service between Merced and Bakersfield, reducing travel times in this corridor by about 45 minutes. According to the Authority, over the course of construction, the project will create 100,000 job years of employment, or the equivalent of 20,000 full-time jobs.

In approving the project, the FRA selected the "Hybrid Alternative," which the Authority preferred, and the Downtown Merced Station and Downtown Fresno Mariposa Street Station alternatives. The Authority has said that the selected alternatives are the least expensive options and will have fewer environmental impacts than the other options.

Governor Brown signed into law the bill that will provide the funding for construction in July. The bill allowed the state to begin selling $2.6 billion in bonds, which unlocked an additional $3.2 billion in matching federal funds for the construction of the dedicated, high-speed rail tracks. The bill also invests over $1.9 billion in local transit and commuter rail projects around the state, including light rail transit systems in Los Angeles and San Diego, the electrification of the Caltrain system in the San Francisco Bay Area, new rolling stock on the BART system, and the implementation of positive train control technology. This money also leverages an additional $7.9 billion in federal and local funding for projects that aim to connect transit to the high-speed rail system.

The third and fourth construction phases, which are between Fresno and Bakersfield and still in the process of completing the federal environmental review process, have also made headlines recently. Last month, President Obama decided to fast-track this segment of the project, potentially shaving up to six months of of the approval process.

Read the FRA's Record of Decision

Amtrak Breaks Ridership Record

2012-10-15T15:52:24Z

Amtrak recently announced that the railroad broke their all-time annual ridership record for the ninth time in 10 years in fiscal year 2012, carrying 31.2 million passengers, surpassing the previous record, set last year, by one million trips. More people rode Amtrak trains in July 2012 than during any other month in the company's history. Since 2000, Amtrak ridership has grown by nearly 50%, as people seek out alternatives to highway traffic congestion, and hassles and delays at airports. However, these are not the only milestones that Amtrak has achieved of late.

]]> Aside from increasing ridership, the average on-time performance of Amtrak trains also reached a new, all-time high. As rail ridership continues to rise across the country, it is now more important than ever to improve the reliability of Amtrak's trains. Amtrak also has been steadily expanding and upgrading the nation's rail infrastructure and services. Last month, they opened the new Niantic River Bridge in East Lyme, Conn., on schedule after three years of work replacing the 105-year-old span. Amtrak also recently announced the long-awaited extension of Northeast Regional service to Norfolk, Va., where service was eliminated way back in 1977. When the service begins in December, riders in Norfolk will have a one-seat ride as far north as Boston.

Furthermore, Amtrak has made all of this progress while requesting less operating support from Congress each year. Amtrak is requesting 44% less federal funding for rail operations than it did in 2004 and now says that it covers 85% of its costs using ticket revenue. This is an impressive feat given that the average farebox recovery ratio for public transit agencies in the U.S. is less than 30%.

Linking California's Economic Engines with High-Speed Rail

2012-08-06T16:44:56Z

In the most recent edition of the San Francisco Urban Planning and Research Association's publication, The Urbanist, two articles strengthen the already solid case for high-speed rail in California. The articles were written initially for an America 2050 research seminar sponsored by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and Regional Plan Association this spring. Not only can the state afford to fund the project, argues SPUR Regional Planning Director Egon Terplan in "Getting High-Speed Rail On Track," but two of the state's most influential industries - the Hollywood media and entertainment industry and Silicon Valley technology sector - would be knit more tightly than ever before by a high-speed rail system that would realize "the economic potential of enhanced access and exchange across the state," a benefit discussed detailed in Executive Director Gabriel Metcalf's "Hollywood Vs. Silicon Valley."

]]> In "Getting High-Speed Rail On Track," SPUR argues that California has a large enough economy and sufficient wealth to foot the bill for high-speed rail through a mix of road tolls, vehicle license fees, gas taxes, regional general obligation bonds, value capture mechanisms, and state carbon cap-and-trade auction revenue, which currently generate around $2.7 billion annually across the state. According to SPUR, these state revenues could over time yield $43 billion or more for high-speed rail, more than enough to cover the $38 billion currently pegged in the budget to come from federal sources of the project's $68 billion total estimated cost.

SPUR's analysis estimates revenues based on relatively conservative increases in taxes, tolls, and land value capture models, but concedes that fiscally small increases can have disproportionately high political price tags. The central point of the analysis, however, is to demonstrate that California can fund its high-speed rail program, regardless of whether or not the current political mood will allow it.

"Hollywood vs.Silicon Valley" assesses the ways the ascent of the Internet and digital culture have necessitated a sometimes-uneasy alliance between the technology sector and entertainment industry -- the latter's century-old profit model and cultural dominance having been shaken by the revolutionary technologies developed by the former in recent years. These industries, Metcalf argues, are experiencing a dynamic of increasing convergence, as Hollywood adapts to the new landscape of users in the place of consumers and Silicon Valley continuously works among new regulatory and legal frameworks protecting the intellectual property of media and entertainment titans.

Metcalf concludes his article by implying that new synergies between California's homegrown culture and technology giants could potentially be forged by shortening the physical distance between their bases with a new high-speed rail link from Los Angeles to the Bay Area. The Urbanist article offers just one example of the integrative possibilities of high-speed rail for California's Northern and Southern megaregions, both from a cultural and economic vantage point -- one more benefit on the already extensive list of opportunities presented by high-speed rail.

Study Critical of California High-Speed Rail Benefits is Flawed

2012-07-25T19:05:50Z

A much cited essay by the UCLA Anderson Forecast, which concludes that the high-speed rail corridor connecting Tokyo and Osaka did not generate discernible economic benefits to the region it serves, from its opening in 1964 to 1990, is flawed. Based on the findings, the study's authors argue that California's high-speed rail system will not generate the significant economic benefits that the California High Speed Rail Authority's business plan predicts. However, the methodology adopted in the Anderson study is questionable and the comparability of Japan in the 1960s to California in the future is doubtful.

Read Regional Plan Association's critique of Anderson Forecast.

]]> RPA found five problems with the study, which are detailed in this critique.

First, the comparison of economic growth rates is based on a biased selection of the reference group. The study compares the growth rates of major economic centers to small cities, suburbs and rural areas, which would have had very different growth paths even without high-speed rail.

Second, while not having a high-speed rail station in their territories, Japanese prefectures may still have benefited due to their connectivity to high-speed rail via conventional rail and roads.

Third, the economic benefits of HSR would be reaped through an extended period of time, not just in the first year of opening as the authors expect. The authors' expectation to see a spike in GDP growth in the first year of high-speed rail operation is not reasonable.

Fourth, Japan in the 1960s was still an export-led industrial economy, which is very different from California today. Though Shinkansen may not have directly contributed to the freight transport and industrial production, it has played a much more important role in Japan's transition into a knowledge and service economy in the later years of its operation.

Lastly, the urban geography of Japan is fundamentally different than that of California. There is potential in California for high-speed rail to attract commuters from automobiles and denser development around its stations. Unlike in Japan which is already densely populated, high-speed rail could increase densities by bringing transit-oriented communities to California.

Survey Shows Americans Ready to Embrace High-Speed Rail

2012-07-17T17:53:48Z

A recent survey conducted by the American Public Transportation Association reveals that a majority of people surveyed would be willing to choose high-speed rail over air or car travel if it were available. These results come at a time when the opportunity to expand mobility in the nation through investing in high-speed rail systems has never been greater, and confirms that many Americans understand the potential benefits and convenience of fast intercity train travel.

]]> The telephone survey of 1,007 randomly-selected home and cell phone numbers concludes that a 62% majority of respondents would be "likely" or "very likely" to ride high-speed trains, versus just 38% who were "not very likely" or "not at all likely" to use fast intercity rail. Likely riders were most prevalent in the West and, somewhat surprisingly, the South, and people aged 18-24 years were more likely than any other age group to expect they would use the systems. This is in keeping with the ongoing trends of decreasing automobile use and higher preferences for alternative modes of transportation and urban dwelling among that ascendant generation.

The survey also assessed the factors that would affect respondents' mobility choices were high-speed rail available in addition to flying and driving. Most (59%) said it was "very important" that the cost of riding high-speed rail be more affordable than flying, and 52% said the same for rail versus driving. Time savings offered by fast trains compared to air and car travel were also important factors to a majority of respondents. Finally, respondents also prioritized the reduced security hassles, greater environmental friendliness, and the opportunity to more easily visit other cities offered by high-speed rail travel as compared other modes of travel. Once at their destinations, 49% of respondents indicated that integration with local transportation options would be important in informing their choice to ride fast trains.

Interestingly, 39% also indicated that they were attracted to the novelty of a new travel experience, reflecting that the paucity of travel choices available to most Americans was not lost on survey respondents.

The results of the APTA survey reflect the growing momentum and reinforce the strong case for high-speed rail in the U.S. In addition to the economic, environmental, and social benefits that have already been enumerated again and again, the survey demonstrates that there is also a popular will to transition to new kinds of mobility more suited for the conditions of life in this new century. Americans realize that the future of the country is in its major cities, and it turns out they also realize that modern, fast intercity rail is the most promising option for the future of how we move between them.

Amtrak Unveils Updated Plan for the Northeast Corridor

2012-07-11T13:20:05Z

On Monday, Amtrak released an updated report on improving the Northeast Corridor that builds on several years of planning work. The report, The Amtrak Vision for the Northeast Corridor (PDF), summarizes Amtrak's plans to upgrade the existing corridor and build a new high-speed rail alignment - concepts that were outlined in two previous reports published by Amtrak in 2010, The Northeast Corridor Infrastructure Master Plan and A Vision for High-Speed Rail in the Northeast Corridor. This new, updated report revises and integrates these two plans into a single, comprehensive investment program.]]>

Revisions to Amtrak's conceptual high-speed rail alignment based on feedback from stakeholders along the corridor that improved ridership and revenue projections, as well as revisions to their capital cost estimates and plans for service and rolling stock,

A phased implementation strategy that achieves critical near-term improvements to existing infrastructure that expand capacity, increase reliability, and reduce trip times, and advances the long-term vision for a true high-speed rail system in the corridor,

A series of "stair-step" milestones that measure the improvement of service conditions over the next 30 years due to the completion of the various infrastructure projects,

A detailed look at the components and cost of the Gateway Program, a series of projects that will relieve congestion into New York from New Jersey - the biggest bottleneck on the corridor, and

Highlights from the recently completed Northeast Corridor Business and Financial Plan, which looked at how to fund and deliver this vision, finding potential for significant financial return and revising ridership and revenue forecasts upwards.

Download the full report here.

What is the Cost of NOT Investing in High-Speed Rail?

2012-07-10T23:31:05Z

A new report released this week by the American Public Transportation Association entitled, "Opportunity Cost of Inaction: High-Speed Rail and High Performance Passenger Rail Service," addresses just that question: what does the U.S. stand to lose, both in terms of costs incurred and benefits forgone, by not investing in high-speed rail between its largest metropolitan areas? APTA's report concludes that the stakes are indeed high - on the order of tens of billions of dollars.

]]> The report analyzes the amount of money that would need to be spent in order to increase the capacity of existing air and highway infrastructure if high-performance passenger rail investments are not made. High-performance passenger rail, the report says, is "intercity passenger rail that is highly integrated with other transportation services" so that travel times are competitive with other intercity modes. This includes, but is not limited to fully-dedicated high-speed rail.

Looking at four of the nation's largest megaregions - the Northeast, Pacific Northwest, California, and Chicago Hub Cities - the report assesses the savings that investing in high performance rail would provide in expanding air and highway capacities, as well as the potential benefits to economic development and public transportation over the next 40 years. Establishing that full investment in high performance rail in these megaregions, including high-speed rail in the Northeast and California, can provide annual economic benefits of around $661 million in today's dollars, the report concludes that inaction, or sitting on our haunches as our highways and air space become increasingly congested, would cost the nation at least $26.4 billion over the next 40 years in foregone savings and foregone economic benefits.

The report also discusses social and environmental costs of inaction on rail issues, but does not quantify the cost of foregone savings in those realms; thus, the report's figure of $26.4 billion is a conservative estimate.

At the heart of the report's findings is a powerful rebuttal to the accusations that the nation cannot afford high-speed rail. On the contrary, this new report shows that failing to invest in high-speed rail in our rapidly-growing megaregions will prove very costly as time goes on.

Watch Video from the "Getting Infrastructure Going" Conference

2012-07-10T19:43:46Z

Watch America 2050 director Petra Todorovich present RPA's report, "Getting Infrastructure Going: Expediting the Environmental Review Process," followed by a panel discussion moderated by Newsweek's Megan McArdle, featuring Will Kempton, Diana Mendes, Dr. Peter Ruane, and Jim Tripp. The event was co-hosted by the Bipartisan Policy Center, Regional Plan Association, and the Eno Center for Transportation. Video after the jump.

]]>
Video: Bipartisan Policy Center

"Getting Infrastructure Going" was the outcome of extensive discussion between RPA and environmental and legal experts to address the issue of increasingly lengthy and complex environmental review processes for critical infrastructure projects. The report recommends streamlining and reorganizing the process at local, state and federal levels in order to realize needed infrastructure projects - and the jobs and other benefits they produce - more rapidly, while preserving the beneficial environmental protections of the National Environmental Policy Act.

California Takes Major Step Toward Realizing High-Speed Rail

2012-07-09T16:34:48Z

The California State Senate narrowly approved the release of voter-approved bond funds to begin work on the state's anticipated high-speed rail system, passing a bill this past Friday that authorizes $2.7 billion for the high-speed project and nearly $2 billion for local rail improvements in Los Angeles and the Bay Area - and, crucially, unlocking a $3.3 billion Federal Railroad Administration matching grant for the projects. The State Legislature's actions signal the beginning of what could become sweeping transformations for mobility and direly-needed economic stimulus in the economically beleaguered Western state.

]]> President of the Democratically-led State Senate Darrell Steinberg lauded the initial investment in the $68 billion project as an opportunity to "inject a colossal stimulus in today's economy," adding that the appropriation is more than just an investment in the high-speed system but a major benefit for infrastructure in multiple areas of the state. The monies approved include funds intended to jump-start long-sought upgrades to the Caltrain and Metrolink commuter rail networks in the Bay Area and Greater Los Angeles regions, projects for the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) and the L.A. County Metropolitan Transit Authority, and other important mobility projects in the state. Read more about the economic benefits offered by these improvements here.

Regional Plan Association commends the state of California on taking this critical step toward realizing the nation's first dedicated high-speed rail network.

Getting Infrastructure Going: A New Approach

2012-06-28T07:30:07Z

Big infrastructure projects take years or even decades to complete. Too often, that's because planning work gets bogged down in protracted environmental reviews. But new research by Regional Plan Association has identified ways environmental analysis could be completed more quickly, without sacrificing environmental protections.

In "Getting Infrastructure Going: Expediting the Environmental Review Process," RPA finds that the National Environmental Policy Act adopted in 1970 still provides a strong regulatory framework for protecting the environment. But misguided implementation of the law contributes to lengthy delays in delivering big infrastructure projects.

]]> Stretching out projects far longer than initially projected drives up costs and delays improvements to vital infrastructure, from repair of aging roads and bridges to construction of new rail lines to the expansion of key shipping facilities. As projects take longer to complete, their costs rise. The uncertainty discourages private investors and erodes public confidence in government's ability to use infrastructure funding wisely.

In the more than 40 years since NEPA's adoption, the practice of carrying out environmental reviews for major infrastructure projects has significantly lengthened project delivery times. For example, in 2011, the average time it took to complete an environmental impact statement on a highway project was more than eight years, compared with two years in the 1970s.

The study describes how inconsistent policies among myriad government agencies contribute to delays. Some environmental reviews are longer and more complex than necessary, in part as a defense against the risk of future litigation. An absence of consensus from the outset over the nature or scope of projects also leads to logjams, as stakeholders seek to modify project goals during the environmental review process.

To help government agencies, NEPA practitioners and others avoid unnecessary slowdowns in infrastructure work, RPA worked with more than a dozen legal experts and environmental practitioners from the public and private sector to develop guidelines for future projects. Among the recommendations:

Establishing broad agreement on project goals at the outset;
Prioritize federal leadership on major job-generating projects while reducing federal involvement in minor projects;
Increase accountability through clear deadlines and public transparency;
Adopt digital transmission of environmental documents.

To demonstrate the feasibility of following these recommendations, the report also presents three case studies in which environmental reviews of major infrastructure projects were successfully expedited.

Read the full report

Read the news release

Image: Minnesota Public Radio