<DOC>
[108 Senate Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:90576.wais]
S. Hrg. 108-212
TRANSPORTATION CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS IN THE SOUTHWEST WASHINGTON/
PORTLAND METROPOLITAN REGION
=======================================================================
HEARING
before a
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SPECIAL HEARING
AUGUST 13, 2003--VANCOUVER, WA
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
senate
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
90-576 WASHINGTON : 2003
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
TED STEVENS, Alaska, Chairman
THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia
ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina
CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont
MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky TOM HARKIN, Iowa
CONRAD BURNS, Montana BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland
RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama HARRY REID, Nevada
JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire HERB KOHL, Wisconsin
ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah PATTY MURRAY, Washington
BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
LARRY CRAIG, Idaho DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
MIKE DeWINE, Ohio TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota
SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
James W. Morhard, Staff Director
Lisa Sutherland, Deputy Staff Director
Terrence E. Sauvain, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury and General Government, and
Related Agencies
RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama, Chairman
ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania PATTY MURRAY, Washington
CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia
ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland
BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado HARRY REID, Nevada
KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas HERB KOHL, Wisconsin
MIKE DeWINE, Ohio RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
Professional Staff
Paul Doerrer
Shannon Hines
Lula Edwards
Peter Rogoff (Minority)
Kate Hallahan (Minority)
Diana Gourlay Hamilton (Minority)
Administrative Support
Meaghan L. McCarthy (Minority)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Opening Statement of Senator Patty Murray........................ 1
Statement of Senator Mark O. Hatfield, Former U.S. Senator From
Oregon......................................................... 4
Prepared Statement........................................... 9
Statement of Donald Wagner, Regional Administrator, Southwest
Regional Washington Department of Transportation............... 11
Prepared Statement........................................... 14
Statement of Bruce Warner, Director, Oregon Department of
Transportation................................................. 18
Prepared Statement........................................... 21
Statement of Craig A. Pridemore, Chair, Clark County Board of
Commissioners and President, Southwest Washington Regional
Transportation Council, Washington............................. 26
Prepared Statement........................................... 28
Statement of Royce Pollard, Mayor of Vancouver, Washington and
Board for the Southwest Washington Regional Transportation
Council, Washington............................................ 30
Prepared Statement........................................... 32
Statement of Fred Hansen, General Manager, Tri-County
Metropolitan Transportation District (TRI-MET), Portland,
Oregon......................................................... 33
Prepared Statement........................................... 36
Statement of Joseph Kalinowski, Director of Facilities, WaferTech 42
Prepared Statement........................................... 43
Statement of Phillip Parker, Chairman, Southwest Washington Labor
Roundtable..................................................... 44
Prepared Statement........................................... 46
Statement of Glenn Vanselow, Executive Director, Pacific
Northwest Waterways Association................................ 47
Prepared Statement........................................... 48
Statement of Tom Zelenka, Chairman, Oregon Freight Advisory
Committee and Chair, Transportation Committee, Pacific
Northwest International Trade Association...................... 50
Prepared Statement........................................... 52
Prepared Statement of Lynne Griffith, Executive Director/CEO,
Clark County Public Transportation Benefit Area Authority (C-
TRAN).......................................................... 59
Prepared Statement of Steve Clark, Chairman, Portland Business
Alliance Transportation Committee, and Gary Cardwell, Chairman,
Pacific Northwest International Trade Association.............. 60
Prepared Statement of the Transportation Investment Task Force... 62
Letter From Jim Howell........................................... 69
TRANSPORTATION CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS IN THE SOUTHWEST WASHINGTON/
PORTLAND METROPOLITAN REGION
----------
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 13, 2003
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury
and
General Government, and Related Agencies,
Committee on Appropriations,
Vancouver, WA.
The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., at the Public Services
Building, 1300 Franklin Street, Vancouver, Washington, Hon.
Patty Murray presiding.
Present: Senator Murray.
opening statement of senator patty murray
Senator Murray. Good morning, if we can have everyone come
in and sit down. We want to have this committee hearing
started.
This committee hearing is called to order. And I want to
say good morning. Welcome all of you. I'm delighted to have so
many people here who are interested in the topic of
transportation.
I've called this field hearing this morning of the Senate
Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury and
General Government to bring together the stakeholders to
address the important transportation problems that are
affecting the Southwest Washington/Portland Metropolitan
region. Today, in this hearing we will examine current and
future transportation challenges and how our solutions can
improve the economy, our safety, and our quality of life.
This morning we're going to be hearing from elected
officials, regional representatives, along with labor and
business interests. So I want to thank all of the participants
who are here and the witnesses for their testimony today. We,
unfortunately, could not accommodate all of the leaders who
wanted to be here today to testify but we certainly do want
input from anyone who would like to share their thoughts with
us.
So I will be keeping this committee record open of this
hearing for 15 days. And I know several groups and individuals,
including C-Tran, have additional opinions that they want
included in the committee record. So if anyone would like to
submit a statement or comments as part of these proceedings,
please give them to my staff, Kate Hallahan is one side, Dale
Learn on the other. Make sure they get your comments. And
again, the record will be open for 15 days for any additional
comments from anyone.
I especially today want to thank Senator Mark Hatfield, who
is the former Chairman of the Full Appropriations Committee and
the Transportation Subcommittee, for taking time out of his
schedule to be with us today and to testify. I think all of us
know that Senator Hatfield is uniquely qualified to speak to
this region's transportation infrastructure. We have many
transportation assets here, and, frankly, most of them are the
products of Senator Hatfield's work. Whether it's the Columbia
River system or Portland's nationally recognized light rail
system, these economic assets are truly a legacy of his
tremendous work. Senator Hatfield worked to bring people
together to address the current needs and plans for the future.
And we've all benefitted from his wise approach and it's one
that I hope that we can follow today.
Let me begin by putting this hearing in context. Next month
in September in Washington, DC I will help write the Senate's
transportation appropriations bill. I'm going to use what I
learn here today to make sure that what we do in the Senate
reflects the needs and priorities here on the ground. We should
all recognize that it will not be possible to fund every
request. In fact, the budget allocation for my subcommittee is
already $300 million below what the President has requested.
And because resources are so limited, I want to ensure that
whatever we do, we are meeting the region's highest
transportation priorities. The information that we gather today
will help me and the subcommittee assemble the Senate's
transportation budget for fiscal year 2004. In addition to the
appropriations bill, in the very near future, Congress is going
to update the 6-year Surface Transportation Reauthorization
Act, known as TEA-21.
I will be working on that along with Representatives Baird,
Blumenauer and DeFazio who are all on the House Transportation
and Infrastructure Committee and this region's Senator Ron
Wyden, who sits on the highway authorizing committee, along
with Senator Gordon Smith from Oregon. Again, I want to ensure
that those Federal efforts meet the needs here from this
community. So please know that whether you're testifying today
or you're submitting your comments next week, your input will
help develop this transportation bill that's responsive to the
needs of this region.
Let me highlight for all of us a few of the challenges that
we are going to examine today and touch on a few proposals. The
Southwest Washington/Portland Metropolitan region has grown at
a tremendous rate. Today 1.9 million people live here, but that
number is expected to grow to 2.4 million by the year 2020.
That growth is already straining the region's transportation
infrastructure. If we do not improve this infrastructure soon
we are going to see increased congestion across all modes of
transportation. That will have a painful impact on the region's
economy, productivity and quality of life. Unless we act, the
price of goods and services will increase and we could lose
jobs.
This region is one of the Nation's most trade dependent and
that reliance on trade is increasing. For example, we expect
import/export freight tonnage to increase 123 percent by 2020.
Domestic freight tonnage will increase by 76 percent. Currently
Oregon and Washington export $45 billion in products every
year. As a percentage of our region's economy, that is about
twice the national average. Of course, the region has several
major deep-water seaports, a large international airport,
significant upriver barging on the Columbia River, two
transcontinental rail lines and extensive industrial space.
Overall, there is enormous potential for growth and for
economic development. However, without significant planning and
investment, the already congested freeways, rail lines,
seaports, and airports will become even more backed up. For
example, on the I-5 Columbia River corridor we can expect
vehicle traffic to increase by 44 percent by 2020. Unless we
act the peak congestion period which today lasts 4 hours will
expand to 10 hours. Truck routes on I-5 corridor would see the
annual vehicle hours of delay soar by 93 percent. We would see
similar congestion problems at our seaports, at our rail yards
and other important highways like I-205, and the impact would
extend far beyond the region itself.
This area is home to some of the Nation's most significant
lumber, wood, and paper industries. Six Washington and Oregon
counties ranked among the top ten wheat growing counties in the
entire Nation. They rely on safe, reliable, and efficient rail
and barge transportation. We know that the world's grain
markets are extremely competitive. If the rail links to our
Columbia River ports are not efficient, then American growers
will lose out.
Other important industries in the region depend on
reliable, efficient transportation such as farm and food
products, distribution and warehousing and hi-tech companies.
Intel, for example, is one of the world's largest microchip
manufacturers, and is Oregon's largest private employer.
Without a cost effective means of shipping their products to
PDX, costs would increase and we could lose jobs.
So in every transportation mode and every regional industry
we've got to take the right steps now to address this coming
growth and that is why we're holding this hearing today in
Vancouver. Wise transportation investments will improve our
economy, our productivity, and our quality of life.
Before I turn to our first witness, I want to note that we
do have a very strong partnership and record of success that we
can build on. This region and the two States are already taking
innovative steps to deal with congestion, which I look forward
to learning more about today. The two State departments of
transportation, local and regionally elected officials,
planning organizations, business, labor on both sides of our
river have come together to analyze, discuss, and plan our
regional transportation solutions. The Federal Government will
be a partner in helping the Southwest Washington-Portland
Metropolitan region.
As the former chairman and now ranking member of the
subcommittee, I've been very proud to fund projects on both
sides of this river. Many of you worked on the I-5 Columbia
River Corridor Improvement Study. It received over $7 million
in Federal funding. Several highway projects on I-205, I-5 and
the roads feeding these highways have received Federal
earmarks. Transit projects run by C-Tran and Tri-Met have
received funding. In fact, the interstate MAX light rail system
has received over $130 million over the last 2 years. Portland
International, the seaports and other marine safety programs
have also received support from my subcommittee recently.
So we do have a record of progress to build on today. And I
especially today want to thank and praise the work of our State
governments. Despite extremely tight budget periods for both of
our States, they have stepped up to the plate and dedicated
billions of dollars to infrastructure improvements. I want to
end by saying that everyone in this room has a role to play in
improving the economic viability and the livability of this
region, and I am looking forward to working with all of you.
With that, I want to welcome our first panelist, Senator
Hatfield, if you want to come up to the witness table. Senator
Hatfield, it is really an honor to have you here. I should say
Mr. Chairman. That's how I needed to address him in Washington,
DC when he was there, Mr. Chairman. He is the former chairman
of the full Senate Appropriations Committee and the
Transportation Subcommittee that I'm now ranking member on. And
I know that his tremendous experience and his understanding is
going to be very helpful to our work. His wisdom and his
insight on how this region has solved difficult issues in the
past I think will help set the right stage today.
So, Senator Hatfield, thank you so much for joining us. We
look forward to your testimony and appreciate you very much for
being here today. Senator Hatfield.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR MARK O. HATFIELD, FORMER U.S.
SENATOR FROM OREGON
Senator Hatfield. Thank you, Senator Murray. Senator
Murray, I'm going to just put my testimony in the record as if
given and proceed to highlight. And when I heard that from
witnesses in the past I used to cringe because they usually
took longer if they would have just stopped and read it instead
of just ad-libbing their highlights.
Senator Murray. That's his first piece of advice for us.
Senator Hatfield. I'm delighted to be here with you in this
role. I'm glad you mentioned the kind of collaboration and the
kind of support, working relationships you have with our Oregon
delegation and relating to our Oregon projects. Which reminds
me of a little incident, to illustrate this matter of
regionalism. In 1980, Senator Warren Magnuson had asked me to
come to Seattle to deliver a farewell address as he was leaving
the Senate after many years of great service. And I told a
story that Senator Magnuson, when I went on the Appropriations
Committee as a junior member, took me aside and explained to me
that there was a very basic principal that he liked to exercise
on the Appropriations Committee, and that is, ``What is good
for Washington is good for Oregon.'' Then he would proceed to
allocate and he'd say, ``One for you and two for me.''
So in the Seattle speech I recall the fact that whatever I
knew because I was going to succeed Senator Magnuson as the
chairman of the Appropriations Committee that year of 1980 was
the switch in the party's control of the Senate, I said I have
learned from the master. I've been at the feet of the master,
Senator Warren Magnuson. And so, therefore, I'm going to take
his cue from years of experience and just remind the folk of
Seattle and Washington, ``That what is good for Oregon is good
for Washington.'' ``Two for me and one for you'' to kind of
catch up.
If I had a simple theme today to share with you it would be
that with seniority, moving back and forth across borders and
so forth, that the necessity today is even greater than in the
past, perhaps, to understand that we have to work, collaborate,
cooperate and plan together for the Great Northwest. We have a
$350 billion economy between our two States and over 5 million
people that are employed in that economy. And with the economy,
as it is today, it's all the more reason we pay attention to
what impacts on our economy of the Northwest. But there are
other things that draw us together in the Northwest far beyond
just the political cooperation that we can exhibit, and that is
we are tied together in an energy sense by the Bonneville Power
Administration, and we also are tied together in even the Ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals being a part of this Great Northwest.
I mention that because sometimes we have not really understood
the necessity of working together.
I recall just a moment of Oregon history. We became a State
in 1859. Washington State and Montana together did not become
States until 30 years later in 1889. Idaho another year, 1890.
Now, in the meantime, Portland really felt pretty smug about
the fact that it was the center of the Northwest, population,
economics. We had two rail heads tying this country together
east/west before Seattle had one. We had the river as almost a
monopoly of transportation and moving the goods, services and
so forth. We had the coastal transportation from California,
the whole access was San Francisco, Portland. And so,
consequently, the Portland business community and political
people and others began to feel, you know, that's a nice
country up there in the territory of Washington, but we're the
State. We're the one that has the center of commerce, and
particularly transportation. And we had worked hard for that
because we found that New York bankers weren't interested in
funding our rail program out here north/south, or our river
program, or our coastal programs of water transportation. And
we finally found the funding out of the German bankers in
Germany. But we had reached out to the international world to
show the importance of this area of the world to them to cause
them to want to invest in transportation.
I only mention that to illustrate how easy it is to feel
like the world centers around even within our States. We face
today, like most States, an urban/rural division. If you take
the politics, you take the economics, it's centered in a tri-
county area of Oregon, as far as the State of Oregon is
concerned, Washington County, Multnomah County, and Clackamas
County population. I suppose you could say three-fourths of the
population that votes is in Eugene to Portland, under 25, one
valley out of the whole State of Oregon. And the people of
Eastern Oregon really understand that. As a consequence, this
transportation that we talk about in the I-5, in the river, and
all the other transportation, air, is really a unifying factor
if we want to look at it that way. What good is the Port of
Portland if it doesn't have the products to ship out, and those
products come from Eastern Oregon. What good is it to raise the
products in Eastern Oregon if they don't have an access to the
market.
So as Senator Smith has often said that the river unites
and the mountains divide, but it's all the more important for
us to understand that we have a unit called State of Oregon,
and a unit called the State of Washington and we'd better start
looking at how we make all of those people within our
respective States feel a part of the whole. And as we do that
within the State and then as between the States, and our
governors having the bi-State committee of planning and all
these other wonderful organizations that have shown the ability
to cross the borders and work together. Even our great Columbia
River Gorge with it's bi-State commission. We see there again
the opportunity to unite the region.
I think one other thing I would like to mention about this,
is that when there was a great dependence upon the mid-Western
wheat and other grains going down the Mississippi River, out
through the mouth, down through the canal, out through the
oceans to Asia because there were not competitive rail rates to
bring that grain west and out the mouth of the Columbia River.
And as this delegation of Oregon and Washington and Idaho
and Montana working together putting the pressure on the rails
to get competitive rail rates, we find that this so-called
transportation goes beyond even Oregon, Washington, Idaho,
Montana. It goes into the Dakotas, it goes into Minnesota and
all of the mid-Western States that export grains and other
commodities. We're seeing an increasing dependence upon that
part of the country to get their products out into the markets,
particularly of Asia. Japan being our largest trading partner.
So again, I just want to emphasize that in 1981 when I did
become the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, I invited
the northwestern States to put together in a collaborative
planned way what we needed to do in transportation to enhance
the transportation, to make it grow, to make it a vital part of
the world picture of trade. And that was also an opportunity to
demonstrate that Senator Magnuson, who had set this very
carefully crafted program of being as much an expert on Oregon
needs as he was on Washington needs, that I, too, must become a
chairman that had concern as much for the needs of Washington
State, Idaho, Montana, this great region that is united by the
Columbia River.
I think also it is of an international import as well in
the sense that we are providing for our country one of the very
prosperous ports and when you look at balance of trade picture,
it is not too happy a picture. And we'd better realize that we
can be then contributing to the national and international
economics.
I don't see this as a pork-barrel program as oftentimes our
critics have mentioned that the appropriators are pork
barrellers. Used to say ``it's not pork it's beef. It's much
better than pork.'' But anyway, I'm just so grateful for your
leadership in the transportation field. And as I say, I am
happy to respond to questions. And thank you for giving me more
than 5 minutes.
Senator Murray. I would always give you more than 5
minutes. And again, Mr. Chairman, you just have to understand,
to me he was Mr. Chairman. I know to you he is Senator, but Mr.
Chairman, it really is an honor to have you here. And I
appreciate that broad look at what we need to be doing and why
it is so important to this region. You've been involved in
government here and in transportation issues for a long time.
Can you give us the benefit of how you have seen the
transportation profile of this region change over the years?
Senator Hatfield. I could go over a lot of years to tell
you the answer to that question. Growing up on the railroad, my
father having been a boxsmith for 42 years and riding a pass, I
was very much oriented in my life development to the rail, and
then to the highway, and then to the air and to the water. I
would say that the things that have changed so much is the
tremendous growth that's been exploding. It's an explosive
growth. And as an example, the bridge that unites the two
States. Let's use that as an example.
A number of years ago we'd had a couple of shakes, earth
shakes in the Portland area and you had in the Washington
State. And we put together a program to do an analysis of
Portland as it related to seismic character, and we found where
the weakest parts and the stronger parts. And we found that our
library, our wonderful public library was in the weakest area.
And it was the weak construction. And as a consequence we did a
profile of the City of Portland, and we replaced the library
through a rebuilding program because of that seismic mapping.
We also tried to do the I-5 because it is not only a
vulnerability here in these bridges, but you go down to
California and beyond, every bridge across those rivers we
found had to have an analysis. How much could they withstand,
what do we have to retrofit in order to strengthen them. And I
think things of that kind become illustrative of the vitality
of our transportational system, water and highway and rail. But
we have lost in this program, perhaps, I think too much a
focus--we haven't put enough focus on rail.
You remember that under a previous administration there
were corridors designated by the Secretary of Transportation,
and we secured out of the cooperation of the delegation from
Washington State and Oregon, Vancouver, British Columbia to
Eugene, Oregon, as one of those rail corridors that could be
upgraded for fast rail, goods and services. And, frankly, as I
look at the terrain out from our side of the river south we go
into farmlands, we go into the flatlands. You have much more
geographic diversity coming from Seattle to Vancouver area, and
you have much more population. But we have wide open spaces. We
could have enhanced and really started that fast rail corridor.
Unfortunately, we didn't. And it seems to me instead of looking
at more farmland going into more highway expansion--and it may
be necessary, I'm not making a judgment--I'm just saying if I
had my druthers, if I had my pick, I would say enhance the rail
north/south rather than taking more land into the I-5 corridor.
Nevertheless, we have to look at all options. But those are
some of the changes and I think that rail still stands out
there as a potential that we have not fully given our priority
to and that would be one such.
I think water is another. Remember, energywise water is the
most efficient, then comes the rail, and then comes the
highways, the last, and then the airports. And I think we ought
to have an energy factor in all of the analyses we make of our
highway planning. What is the impact requirement of energy in
those plans, and what are the alternatives? What are the
options?
Senator Murray. Very good. And when you were chairman of
the Transportation Subcommittee, you, like I, received numerous
requests from all different levels. How much did you encourage
local decision making and look to those local decisions as you
made your decisions about what you would fund?
Senator Hatfield. I think it's like a structure, that's the
foundation. If we don't have the local support it's going to be
difficult. As you know in the Appropriations Committee, every
State has a list of its desires and wants, and therefore when
we did not have the local support for the north/south rail,
light rail, we lost out. We could have had the money for that
on a 75/25 matching basis, not on a 50/50, which it would be
now. But we incorporated that project as a three-part project,
west, east--or east, west and then the north/south. We had to
have Clark County; we had to have the three counties,
Multnomah, Washington, and Clackamas, but we failed to get that
support from those local people. Now, that's an illustration in
my book on how important it is to have those local people.
That's one example but there are others.
I think also they have to feel like it's not a gift of the
Federal Government and which they just have to take what the
Federal Government has decided. We have competent people. You
have in this room today far greater experts than I on
transportation of this area. You have metros, you have light
rails, you have all of these transportation, inland waterways.
And these are the real experts, and they are part of that
local, in my view, local support that is mandatory in order to
have something succeed in the Appropriations Committee. Because
we are not going to settle those local arguments in the
Appropriations Committee. If they can't settle them in their
own communities, don't come to us because we can just go down
the list and find some other State that has settled them and
give the money there instead of trying to force the money.
Remember we never force the money on any community. It has to
be with their welcome and the State and the region.
Senator Murray. Wise words again. We're running out of
time, but I do want to ask you one important question that I
think we are all trying to comprehend. You've had many
successes in projects that you've championed and were able to
bring funds home for the Portland's Metropolitan MAX light
rail. I think it's a 39-mile line now that runs and 102 bus
routes and has a tremendous impact on the region. In looking at
projects like these now they have such tremendous costs and we
have a Federal budget that is very difficult to deal with, we
have State budgets that are extremely tight, local communities
don't have these funds. Are we going to have to look at
innovative new ways of funding transportation projects? And, if
you think so, what ways should we be looking at?
Senator Hatfield. We always get to the vulgar subject of
money, don't we. That's our job. Or it was mine. Yours now. I
would only say I think this is where we have to really prove
the mathematics. I think we have to prove it, as I said, let's
use the energy factor. What is the most energy-efficient in our
projects and have we chosen the most energy-efficient. I think
we have to realize also that it has to be productive and have a
cost-benefit ratio like we have in the Corps of Engineers on a
water project. Cost-benefit ratio. How much does it cost? How
much revenue is it going to produce? And really figure the fine
points of money invested, money reproduced, or money as an
investment returned. And I think sometimes we haven't given
that care we should have given in order to say, well, we have
the most cost-effective, we have the most efficient, we have
the most fundamental as far as producing revenues and returns
for our investments than they have in Mississippi for that
particular project. That we in the Northwest, because we grew
up in an area and we've worked in an area that the Federal
Government has a very fundamental ownership and we have had the
water projects that had to prove they're cost effective and
they cost-benefit ratio, we have all that background, but had
we applied it in the same vigor that we could have for our
competitive transportation projects, I'm not sure. I'm not--I
don't remember that we got into those details because we
depended a lot more on our status and our seniority to get our
projects. And it seems to me now that cost is such an important
factor to be considered for any Federal participation in
anything. We've got to go back to the drawing board and to the
math of it and prove our case superior.
Senator Murray. I would agree. I would just say that we
have to also take into account regional impacts. When you're
looking at cost effectiveness it's fairly easy to build a
system in a landlocked area, and many of our areas where we
have to do cross water; we have to deal with energy; we have to
deal with different modes of transportation and water--bodies
of water that other regions don't. We don't want to get into a
position where we're being pitted against a city that may be
able to cheaply put in light rail where it could be very
expensive because of our geography. But I appreciate your
words.
prepared statement
Mr. Chairman, I thank you so much for coming today. I thank
you on behalf of all of us in this region for your tremendous
legacy and for your willingness to travel here today to share
with us a few thoughts this morning and I thank you so much.
Senator Hatfield. Any day you call I respond. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Mark O. Hatfield
Thank you Senator Murray for inviting me to participate in this
morning's discussion about transportation challenges facing the
Portland-Vancouver region. It is an honor to be back before the
Committee on which I served for many years. You are a leader on
transportation issues in the United States Senate and an unyielding
advocate for the Pacific Northwest. At a time when the Northwest does
not enjoy the seniority that it once had, we in Oregon appreciate your
willingness to work with our Senators to support important
transportation projects throughout the region.
There are many hard working elected officials and transportation
experts here today that are far more capable of covering today's topic
than I am, so I will keep my comments brief. As someone who has dealt
with transportation issues at the State and Federal level for many
years, perhaps I can offer a perspective that will be of some interest.
I'd like to share with you two observations. The first observation
that I will make is that the Portland-Vancouver region is an intermodal
hub and international gateway for trade. The second is that the region
has a long history of using innovation and collaboration to overcome
transportation challenges.
We have as a region made progress on many fronts but there is still
work to be done to finish what was started years ago, and to address
future needs. I am sure that those transportation leaders who will come
before this panel today will speak to how they intend to address and
overcome the transportation challenges we currently face--and I leave
that work in their good hands.
The Portland-Vancouver region is an intermodal hub and a gateway to
international trade. This region is located at the center of a
transportation crossroad. We sit at the convergence of two interstate
highways, two Class One Railroads and two major waterways. Like the hub
of a wheel, this region is connected to other States in the Pacific
Northwest, the rest of the Nation and overseas markets by
transportation corridors, or spokes. These corridors move people and
freight by highway, rail, air and water. Freight and passengers moving
north/south and east/west pass through this region.
Not far from where we are meeting today, the Columbia River carries
grain and other bulk products to and from America's Heartland to our
ports--our gateways to foreign markets. The main highway connecting
eastern Oregon farms to markets, Interstate 84 passes through here. Two
transcontinental railroads, carrying passengers and freight between the
western States and between the United States and Canada cross the river
here. The Portland International Airport, which links us to the rest of
the country and Europe, sits on the bank of the Columbia River. The
Interstate 5 Corridor, which carries international and national freight
movements traveling north and south, connects the United States, Canada
and Mexico, and the communities of Portland and Vancouver.
Trade is vital to both States' economies. Transportation underpins
the $350 billion economy of Oregon and Washington and the region's 5.5
million jobs. Simply put, the economy of our region as well as the
Pacific Northwest as a whole is dependent on trade. Much of the freight
traffic upon which the region's economy depends travels through the
Portland-Vancouver I-5 crossing. Congestion along this shared
transportation choke point is eroding the reliability of moving goods
and services in the Pacific Northwest and is reducing the economic well
being of business and industry.
To state the obvious--failure to maintain and improve the
transportation system for moving freight will no doubt result in the
region's economy becoming less competitive.
As noted earlier, the region's goods and services also move by ship
and barge on our waterways. The Columbia River navigation channel is a
critical piece of the transportation infrastructure. Each year, ocean-
going vessels on the Columbia River transport roughly $13 billion worth
of U.S. products to world markets (primarily to Asia). Critical to
sustaining this economic activity is the need for a 40-foot deep
Columbia River navigation channel.
Much like highways, railroads, bridges and airports, navigation
channels must be improved. Deepening the channel is critical to our
region in order to handle our ever-growing trade demands and enable
today's modern fleet of deep-draft ships to continue transporting
imports and exports by way of the Columbia River.
To further highlight the importance of this effort and how it
relates to international trade activities and relations--let me quickly
focus on how this links in with our relationship with Japan.
Japan is the largest trade partner with the Columbia-Snake River
region. More than 300 Oregon companies imported or exported cargo to/
from Japan via Port of Portland facilities. In 2002, $7.1 billion worth
of merchandise was imported from Japan and $2.4 billion was exported to
Japan via the Columbia-Snake River Customs District.
The threads that bind us on this project do indeed have local,
State, national and international significance. As one who has
participated in this critical discourse over the years, let me now
thank you for your support of the appropriations necessary to build
this project.
Let me now turn to how our region approaches transportation
challenges. The Portland-Vancouver region has a long history of
employing innovation and collaboration to overcome transportation
challenges.
In 1981 I challenged the State and Region to maintain their
cooperative and collaborative relationship by clearly identifying
priorities that could be the focus of the appropriations committee's
actions. What followed was an exemplary partnership that has identified
transportation priorities, collaborated on funding, devised both
innovative projects as well as methods to fund them and that have
lasted to this day as a model of cooperation and progress. Quickly, let
me share with you some of the innovative aspects of the Portland
Region's success in transportation:
The Banfield Project.--This is not simply a Light Rail Project. The
$321 million project opened in 1986 was also a complete rebuilding of
Interstate 84 from the Lloyd Center area all the way to the Gateway
District's intersection with I-205. In 1982 the Region asked the
Chairman of this committee for help in declaring the entire undertaking
a ``Transitway'' under Federal law making it eligible to receive the
flexible funds authorized by the Interstate Withdrawal program as
discretionary appropriations under contract with the Federal Transit
administration (at the time known as UMTA, Urban Mass Transportation
Administration). This enabled the highway improvements as well as the
new rail line to be constructed and finished together.
A recent example of a successful innovative approach is the Airport
Light Rail project in Portland. This project was a transportation
innovation from the outset because of its use of private investment
funds and its non-reliance on the Federal Government for any funds. The
nearly 6-mile rail line was built with local public money and private
sector funds.
The Oregon Department of Transportation quite frankly helped the
Transit District, TriMet, directly by providing Congestion Management
Air Quality (CMAQ) funds, which it had at its disposal for the
district's ongoing bus procurement program. This enabled the District
to make a sizeable allocation of its funds to the Airport project, and
to keep that project totally under local control.
Much of the credit for these successful innovative approaches needs
to go to the manner in which the State of Oregon through ODOT and the
State of Washington, through WASHDOT and the local governments in the
Portland area through METRO cooperate in the functioning of the
Portland area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). This has become
a cooperative and deliberative body in which representatives of both
States and of both Vancouver area and Portland area local governments
sit.
Many disagreements, some of them quite intense, surface at this
body. But its members have truly disciplined themselves to come to
agreement and to speak with one voice when the decisions are made.
These are just some of the region's transportation success stories.
While there are may others, the region also faces many challenges. I
view two challenges--completing the build out of MAX light rail and
improving rail service--as finishing what was started. In addition, we
face the new challenge of ensuring that the Nation's aging
transportation system can adequately move freight and people in a safe
and efficient manner. These issues are more than transportation
challenges, at their very core they are economic in nature. They will
help define who we are, and chart the course for our future.
Let me end by saying--and saying it with confidence, that the
capacity to deal with these many challenges resides in those present in
this room today.
Again, Madame Chair and Members of the Committee, thank you for
this opportunity.
Senator Murray. Thank you. We will now bring our second
panel forward. Don Wagner, who is the Regional Administrator
Southwest Regional Washington Department of Transportation, and
Bruce Warner, who is the Director of the Oregon Department of
Transportation. I would just let everyone in the audience know,
again, of our time constraints this morning. Each of our
panelists will be given five minutes for their prepared
remarks. We will then have some Q and A from here, and then
move to our next panel.
I will again say for anyone in the audience who hears
something that they would like to respond to, the record will
be open so that you can submit your testimony and your comments
afterwards. But, again, thank you to all of you for
participating today. We will begin this morning with Mr.
Wagner. If you want to start with your prepared remarks. Thank
you.
STATEMENT OF DONALD WAGNER, REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR,
SOUTHWEST REGIONAL WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
Mr. Wagner. Thank you. Good morning, Senator Murray. I'm
Don Wagner and I'm the Southwest Regional Administrator for the
Washington Department of Transportation. I think I will take
Senator Hatfield's advice and I will read my comments to make
sure that we get them done timely.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before this
subcommittee to discuss the transportation challenges facing
the communities of Southwest Washington and the Washington/
Oregon border region, and thank you for your strong interest,
and past assistance, in addressing our transportation
challenges.
Before I begin, I would like to acknowledge Commissioner Ed
Barnes, a local resident and representative of the Washington
State Transportation Commission since 1996. He's in the
audience today. I would also like to thank you for including
local officials and representatives from the business and labor
communities, as well as Mr. Bruce Warner, the Director of the
Oregon Department of Transportation, at this hearing. It is our
view as it is yours that our region's transportation challenges
will be best addressed by a broad and collaborative coalition
of interests.
This morning I will frame the challenges associated with
the highway and rail crossings of the Columbia River, while Mr.
Warner will focus his testimony on the efforts underway to
address these issues and the opportunities to meet our needs
and maintain economic prosperity in the region.
I have three things I would like you to remember from this
morning's hearing. The Columbia River is both a transportation
artery and a choke point. Second is today the I-5 corridor has
inadequate capacity to carry both rail and highway freight. And
lastly, if this region is going to continue to be relevant in
world trade we need increased capacity across the river.
Interstate 5 and other regional Columbia River crossings
form a multimodal trade corridor of national significance.
Highway and rail crossings provide critical freight connections
to the area's major ports for deep water shipping and upriver
barging. They link two transcontinental rail lines and connect
much of the region's industrial land.
I-5 directly serves regional and State economies in Oregon,
Washington and California. And it is the north/south backbone
for regional trade. Reliable transportation is key to Pacific
Northwest's trade dependent character. Oregon and Washington
export $45 billion in product each year. As a percentage of the
region's economy this is about twice the national average. In
fact, Washington is the most trade-oriented State in the
Nation, and 54 percent of our economy is built on
transportation intensive industries. About half of the rail
shipments originating from Seattle/Tacoma area travel south
through Portland/Vancouver in route to their final destination.
The geography of the Pacific Northwest defines the regional
transportation system. The Columbia River deep water ports
provide access to the West Coast and Pacific Rim. And the
Columbia/Snake River system provides barge access to the
agricultural areas in the eastern half of our region. The river
crossings are strategically important to freight transportation
locally, regionally and across the Pacific Northwest.
But the Columbia River is also a barrier to land-based
transportation and combined with growing congestion, the river
and its crossings effectively serve as transportation choke
points.
As depicted in attachment 1 of the information that I've
earlier provided, the Portland/Vancouver area has fewer
crossings than other U.S. metropolitan areas of similar size
with only two highway bridges and one rail bridge over the
river. With limited existing bridge capacity, few alternative
routes and growing travel demand, the crossings are major
bottlenecks.
Congestion is the cost of doing business, but the severity
with which we are experiencing it limits economic
competitiveness in the global markets and crucial economic
expansion. It will become a even greater drag on our economy as
the region grows and travel demands increase. Freight movement
into and out of our region historically leads to increased
business and employment growth, but it is sensitive to
congestion.
Unfortunately, freight shipping from Southeast and Southern
Asia is already being rerouted to the East Coast and mid-West
market distribution points to avoid this West Coast choke
point.
Freight rail traffic is disproportionately affected by this
choke point. The Portland/Vancouver rail network and the
Columbia rail crossings also are severely congested. This
network is one of the busiest in the Nation with over 160
trains moving within and through this region each day. When
measured in terms of delay per train, rail congestion in the
Portland/Vancouver area is twice that of Chicago, the Nation's
largest rail hub.
One of the causes of this congestion is inadequate river
crossing capacity. The rail system cannot handle projected
growth in freight and passenger traffic. Without increased
capacity worsening congestion will make supply chains less
reliable, drive up the cost of labor and materials and
undermine the competitive position of this region and the
Pacific Northwest businesses. Railroads may not grow at the
pace of the economy and will shed freights to trucks thereby
adding to the already congested highway. Efficient freight rail
helps reduce heavy truck traffic and congestion on the highways
and provide a competitive shipping option for both regional and
international farmers and businesses.
The Washington and Oregon Departments of Transportation
have analyzed these economic issues in considerable depth. Of
significant value is the 2003 report by Cambridge Systematics
entitled Regional Economic Effects of the I-5 Corridor/Columbia
River Crossing Transportation Choke Points. This report is
available on ODOT's website and is included in the executive
summary that I provided to your office.
For this report, case studies were developed for five
freight-intensive industries that, combined, comprises greater
than 30 percent of Washington and Oregon's gross regional
product, and account for 70 percent of the trucks and 60
percent of the rail tonnage crossing the Columbia. These five
industries are natural resource products, transportation
equipment and steel, farm and food products, high technology
and distribution and warehousing.
The case studies demonstrate the economic effects of this
critical nature of these transportation choke points. I invite
you to review the documents provided today illustrating how
congestion at river crossings shrink these industry markets,
reduce operating efficiency and lower profitability.
PREPARED STATEMENT
In closing, we have a positive choice for the future. The
choice is to improve the highway and rail crossings of the
Columbia River and make a greater distribution for the economic
vitality of the Pacific Northwest. We have made progress in
this direction. Mr. Warner will expand on these shortly. I
emphasize that the solutions will take time. As we weather
economic recession, involve stakeholders, complete studies and
acquisitions and build the improvements, I am confident that
with your help the region can provide the critical capacity and
manage our growth to keep the Pacific Northwest relevant in
world trade. Together we can strengthen the economy and
maintain the quality of life of the upcoming generations. Thank
you.
Senator Murray. Thank you, Mr. Wagner.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Donald Wagner
Good morning, Chairman Murray and members of the subcommittee. I am
Don Wagner and I am the Southwest Regional Administrator for the
Washington State Department of Transportation.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before this subcommittee to
discuss transportation challenges facing the communities of Southwest
Washington and the Oregon/Washington Border region. And thank you for
your strong interest, and past assistance, in addressing our
transportation challenges.
Before I begin, I would like to acknowledge the attendance of Ed
Barnes, a local resident and representative on the Washington State
Transportation Commission since 1996. I'd also like to thank you for
including local officials and representatives from the business and
labor community, as well as the Director of the Oregon Department of
Transportation, at this hearing because our view is that our region's
transportation challenges will be best addressed by a broad and
collaborative coalition of interests.
This morning I will frame these challenges, while Bruce Warner will
focus his testimony on efforts underway to address these issues and
summarize the opportunities to move this regional infrastructure into
the future--to meet our needs and maintain economic prosperity in the
region and in our two States.
interstate 5 and regional columbia river crossings form a multimodal
trade corridor of national significance
The Columbia River highway and rail crossings connect the
communities of Portland and Vancouver for work, recreation, shopping,
and entertainment. They provide critical freight connections to the
area's two major and numerous other ports for deep-water shipping and
up-river barging. They link its two east-west transcontinental rail
lines and connect much of the region's industrial land.
Interstate 5 is the only continuous highway from Mexico to Canada
on the West Coast and directly serves regional and State economies in
Washington, Oregon, and California. Within the Portland-Vancouver
metropolitan area, I-5 is the north-south backbone of regional trade,
providing primary access to regional warehousing and distribution
facilities.
The Portland-Vancouver region's proximity to two interstate
highways, I-5 and I-84, makes overnight truck delivery north into
British Columbia, east to Idaho and western Montana and south into the
Bay Area possible. As a result, the region serves as the Pacific
Northwest domestic distribution location for many retailers and
manufacturers.
For these and other reasons, Congress recognized I-5's national
significance and economic importance in the Transportation Equity Act
for the 21st Century (TEA-21) by designating it as a High Priority
Corridor. In TEA-21, Congress directed USDOT to conduct a review of
National Highway System freight connectors that serve major seaports,
airports, and major intermodal terminals. The bulk of these connectors
in Washington and Oregon feed the interstate.
efficient transportation is essential to our economy
Reliable transportation is essential as the Pacific Northwest's
trade-dependent character continues to grow. Oregon and Washington
export $45 billion of products each year. As a percentage of the
region's economy, this is about twice the national average. Portland
has the highest value of wholesale trade per capita on the West Coast
and the region ranks thirteenth among all U.S. cities based on the
value of exports. Exports make up the vast majority of the region's
traded volume, exceeding the volume of imports by a factor of 15. In
fact, Washington is the most trade-oriented State in the Nation.
The Portland-Vancouver area and the Pacific Northwest can expect
freight volumes to grow at rates faster than the national average.
Between 1998 and 2020 import-export freight tonnage is forecast to grow
123 percent and domestic freight tonnage 76 percent. While this will
benefit economic growth, it will put a strain on the State's network of
rail, highways, and water modes of freight transport.
In addition, the region's economy is built on transportation-
intensive industries. Agriculture, construction, transportation
equipment and utilities, wholesale and retail trade, and manufacturing
make up 54 percent of the Oregon-Washington economy, but only 49
percent of the national economy. Consequently, our economy is more
dependent on transportation and we spend more proportionally on
transportation than the Nation as a whole.
The Columbia River crossings, including the I-5 Interstate Bridge,
are a critical link in this trade network. To illustrate:
--About half of rail shipments originating from Seattle-Tacoma travel
south through Portland-Vancouver en route to their final
destination.
--About 133 million bushels of wheat grown in Eastern Washington and
Oregon are shipped through the corridor for export to foreign
markets.
--More than 10,000 trucks per day travel through the corridor.
the columbia river crossings are transportation choke points and
threaten the economic vitality of the pacific northwest
The Columbia River is a major regional transportation artery and
the physical geography of the Pacific Northwest defines the regional
transportation system. The deepwater ports provide access to the West
Coast and Pacific Rim, and the Columbia/Snake River system provides
barge access to the agricultural areas in the eastern half of the
region. The highway and rail crossings over the river are of strategic
importance to freight transportation, locally and regionally and across
the Pacific Northwest.
But the Columbia also is a major barrier and, combined with growing
congestion, the river and its crossings effectively serve as
transportation choke points. The regional economy and the ability to
effectively support freight movement are choked and languishing.
Let me provide a local example:
The duration of peak-period congestion at the I-5/Interstate Bridge
will double from 4 hours today to nearly 10 hours in 2020. The
congestion will spread into the midday period, the peak travel time for
trucks. This will entangle truck operations, increase trucking costs,
and make pick-up and delivery times less reliable. This will increase
the cost of delay to trucks by 140 percent--from $14 million in 2000 to
$34 million in 2020.
If we do nothing, traffic volume on the Interstate Bridge will grow
to 180,000 vehicles per day, an increase of 44 percent. If no
significant capacity is added to the bridge crossing, total vehicle
hours of delay during the peak periods will increase 74 percent from
31,00 hours per day in 2000 to 54,000 hours per day in 2020. Congested
lane miles on truck routes will increase by 58 percent.
fewer options exist in this corridor
As depicted in Attachment 1, the Portland-Vancouver area has fewer
crossings than several U.S. metropolitan areas of similar size, with
only two highway bridges and one rail bridge over the Columbia River.
With limited bridge capacity, few alternative routes, and growing
travel demand, the crossings have become major traffic bottlenecks.
While once an alternative to the Interstate Bridge the eight-lane
Glenn Jackson Bridge, which carries I-205 across the Columbia River 6
miles up river, now operates near capacity. The bridge carries 132,000
vehicles, including 7,800 trucks, across the river each day. Growing
congestion, due in part to diverted traffic from I-5, is diminishing
this route's reliability and predictability. As the Glenn Jackson
Bridge reaches capacity, it will discourage diversion of I-5 traffic
resulting in increased peak-period spreading within the I-5 corridor.
The next closest Columbia River highway crossing is the two-lane bridge
between Rainier, Oregon and Longview, Washington, 53 miles downstream;
it provides little relief to the metropolitan area.
congestion impacts the economy in diverse ways
Delays at the crossings affect a wide range of transportation
users, including employees commuting to work, customers traveling to
stores and business meetings, shippers meeting schedules, truck picking
up and delivering goods, and trains moving freight to and from ports
and intermodal terminals.
The costs of delay are passed on to businesses, either directly or
indirectly, by:
--Increasing production costs due to delay, unreliable travel times,
and increased logistics and inventory costs.
--Shrinking labor pools as the geographical area in which potential
employees can afford to work, or are willing to work, is
reduced in relation to the increase in time and cost of
commuting.
--Reducing access to business inputs and markets as the economies of
scale that can be realized by operating in large urban areas
are diminished.
Congestion is a cost of doing business but the severity with which
we are experiencing it in this region is leading to a reduction in
productivity, which in turn limits economic competitiveness and
curtails economic expansion. It will become an even greater drag on the
economy in the future as the region grows and the demand for travel
increases. It is weakening our competitiveness in global markets.
trade and land use are sensitive to this congestion
As stated earlier, trade comprises a significant share of our
regional economy. Freight movements into and out of the regional have
historically led to increased business and employment growth, with the
result that today the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan area plays a
leading role among regional distribution and transshipment centers for
international commerce.
Here is a local example:
While the volume of exports is still dominated by the natural
resources sector, the high-technology sector now makes up the majority
of the value of exported goods. The value of high-tech goods that cross
the Interstate Bridge exceeds $1.5 billion per year.
Because high-tech goods are valuable, light, and time-sensitive,
they tend to be shipped by airfreight rather than by sea. This has led
to a dramatic increase in airfreight shipments, which has created a
greater demand for timely access to the airport. Portland International
Airport is primarily accessed by the congested interstates, I-5 and I-
205. This demonstrates that growing and maintaining a strong regional
economy is increasingly dependent on an efficient transportation
system.
We are learning that shipping routes from Southeast and Southern
Asia are rerouting to East Coast and Midwest market distribution points
to avoid this West Coast choke point.
An additional economic consequence of this choke point to the
region is the access to available industrial land. The region is
currently short of industrial property available for development.
Development potential of two of the region's key industrial enclaves,
the Port of Vancouver and the Columbia Corridor/Rivergate area in north
Portland, is threatened by the heavy congestion at their access points
to I-5 near the Columbia River.
rail freight traffic is disproportionately affected by this congestion
The Portland/Vancouver rail network and the Columbia River Rail
Crossing also are severely congested. This network is one of the
busiest in the Nation, with over 160 trains moving within and through
the region each day. Currently, two transcontinental railroads, Amtrak
long distance trains, and the regional Amtrak Cascades use the network.
The two-track Burlington Northern-Santa Fe rail bridge, adjacent to the
Interstate Bridge, is the only rail crossing connecting Portland and
Vancouver. The rail bridge carries 63 freight trains daily. The next
major rail crossing of the river is 92 miles upstream near The Dalles,
Oregon.
The cause of congestion in the rail system is inadequate capacity.
It will not be able to handle projected growth in freight and passenger
traffic. On each side of the Columbia River, trains already compete for
track space with local and long-distance, transcontinental trains
moving to rail yards and terminals. Local operations--the movement of
locomotives and cars between yards and trains into and out of port and
railroad terminals--must share track time and space with long-distance,
through trains, including intermodal trains traveling from Seattle and
Tacoma to the Midwest and California.
When measured in terms of delay per train, rail congestion in the
Portland-Vancouver area adds about 40 minutes to every train move,
twice that of Chicago, the Nation's largest rail hub. With less than
one-fifth the number of trains as Chicago, the area's rail network
experiences nearly half the delay hours of Chicago. That's 402 hours of
delay for 600 freight and passenger trains in this area compared to 813
hours for about 3,500 trains in Chicago.
Without increased rail capacity, worsening congestion will make
supply chains less reliable, drive up the cost of labor and materials
and undermine the competitive position of the Pacific Northwest
businesses. Railroads may not grow apace with the economy and might
shed freight to trucks, adding to already congested highways. Shipping
costs may increase, reliability will decrease, and rail shippers may be
forced to divert traffic, change modes, or relocate. Limited rail
capacity will hinder the growth of the ports of Portland, Vancouver,
and others along the Columbia.
The recent I-5 Rail Capacity Study, completed as part of the
overall I-5 Transportation and Trade Partnership Strategic Plan,
highlights the rail needs for the region. Some relatively low- to
medium-cost solutions--estimated at $170 million--can significantly
improve existing rail capacity in the region.
To accommodate through trains and local terminal operations
efficiently, the railroads must invest heavily in new yard capacity,
sidings, bypass tracks, switches, and dispatching systems within our
region. The railroads will soon need to look at investing in an
expanded rail bridge across the Columbia River or a rail bypass of the
Portland-Vancouver area for through trains.
In the long-term, major improvements will be needed to accommodate
rail movements in the Portland/Vancouver region, including
modifications to the existing Columbia River rail bridge and possibly a
new span running parallel to the existing structure. These improvements
will require further analysis by the railroads, and the Washington and
Oregon Departments of Transportation.
freight offers opportunities to reduce congestion
Freight rail makes up the smallest share of the total freight
moved, but it has perhaps the greatest likelihood for expansion. Since
1970, approximately 40 percent of WA's active rail lines have been
abandoned. While this loss increased heavy truck traffic on State and
local roads, resulting in higher road maintenance and repair costs, the
remaining rail lines help reduce heavy truck traffic and congestion on
highways and provide a competitive shipping option for regional and
international farmers and businesses.
Preservation of remaining rail lines is crucial.
One of the key projects for the region--the Vancouver Rail
Project--was recently funded by the State of Washington and is slated
for construction in the 2007-09 biennium. The primary purpose of the
project is to support Amtrak Cascades service reliability and
expansion, with an important secondary benefit to the region's rail
freight mobility.
we are putting it all on paper
The Washington and Oregon Departments of Transportation have
analyzed these economic issues in considerable depth. Of significant
value to today's actions is a recent report by Cambridge Systematic,
Inc., entitled Regional Economic Effects of the I-5 Corridor/Columbia
River Crossing Transportation Choke Points. The report is available on
ODOT's Web site and the executive summary is provided today as
Attachment 2.
In addition to looking at effects on the regional economy as a
whole, case studies were developed for five freight-intensive
industries that, combined, comprises greater than 30 percent of the
Washington/Oregon gross regional product. These five industries--
natural resource products, transportation equipment and steel, farm and
food products, high technology, and distribution and warehousing--
account for 70 percent of truck and 60 percent of rail tonnage crossing
the Columbia River in the area.
The case studies demonstrate the general economic affects I have
described and the critical nature of these transportation choke points.
I invite you to review the documentation provided today, illustrating
how I-5/Columbia River crossing congestion is shrinking these
industry's markets, reducing operating efficiency, and lowering
profitability.
outlook
We are seeing diminishing returns from transportation initiatives
of earlier decades. Capacity and congestion problems today are eroding
the productivity of the trans system Congestion at the crossings has a
real and immediate cost to Portland-Vancouver residents and businesses
and there is a real cost, although less visible, to residents and
businesses beyond the region and across the Nation.
we have positive choices for the future
That choice is to improve the highway and rail crossings in this
region and make a greater contribution to the economic health of the
entire Pacific Northwest.
We have made progress in this direction and Bruce Warner will
expound upon this shortly.
In closing, I will emphasize that the solutions and ideas
summarized by Mr. Warner, will take time, as we weather an economic
recession and involve stakeholders, complete studies and acquisitions
and build the improvements. I am confident, that with the help of these
stakeholders and elected officials, and industry and the citizens of
the Pacific Northwest, the region can provide the capacity and manage
this growth and change. Together we can strengthen our economy and
quality of life for the coming generations.
Thank you.
Senator Murray. Mr. Warner.
STATEMENT OF BRUCE WARNER, DIRECTOR, OREGON DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION
Mr. Warner. Good morning, Senator Murray. I'm Bruce Warner.
I am the Director of the Oregon Department of Transportation. I
also want to thank you for giving me this opportunity to come
testify before you this morning on some of the transportation
challenges facing the region. And you do have my testimony, so
I will highlight some of the important pieces there.
I am going to focus my remarks on what I think is the
single greatest transportation challenge that faces the
Portland/Vancouver region, and that is the growing congestion
and the freight bottlenecks that Mr. Wagner talked about in the
Interstate 5 corridor. And I believe you know that Interstate 5
corridor is a corridor of true national significance,
recognized by Congress and it is a multimodal corridor that has
many modes of transportation that need to be addressed.
As you just heard, the growing congestion in this corridor
does threaten the region's economy and the movement of freight.
And with your help I want to let you know that this region is
developing solutions to overcome this threat. And through a
collaborative public process, we have identified transportation
improvements that are needed to relieve the highway and rail
congestion in this critical corridor. And I want to let you
know we will be talking with you and asking for additional help
from your committee in coming years. And what I really want to
assure you is that we have been working in a way to build a
solid foundation--in answer to your question to Senator
Hatfield--to make sure that there's a consensus from the local
level on what needs to be done. And I do want to thank you for
your strong support in the efforts that we've been doing. And
because of that the National Corridor Planning Development
Program funding that we received with your help and the help of
both the other Washington and Oregon Congressional delegation
has really been instrumental to moving this along.
And this region has been working to solve the problem in
ways that are different from other areas of the Nation. And I
say that because we have done that collaborative inclusive, but
public process that identified multimodal solutions to the
corridor. And we're also, as you identified, going to be
looking at ways to fund this in an innovative manner because we
know that the needs are great, and we are going to have to look
at innovative solutions and involve the private sector probably
in ways we never have before to get the solutions implemented
in this corridor. And I think this approach is in contrast to
other States where the normal answer is to just add highway
capacity as the simple and frankly only answer. And we know
that the highway widening in this corridor does not solve all
of the problems, and we partnered with many different groups in
our efforts. We've taken their opinions into account. And so
far the work to date has involved almost 2000 people and the
list is growing daily.
And the report that you have in your packet, the I-5
Transportation and Trade Partnership Strategic Plan has been
adopted I want to stress to you by Metro, on the Oregon side,
Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council here on
the Washington side, Tri-Met, C-Tran, our transportation
commissions, the Washington State transportation commissions,
the Ports of Portland and Vancouver, the City of Portland, the
City of Vancouver, Multnomah County and Clark County as an
example. And this all began in 1999 when a group of business
folks and elected folks said we need to solve the congestion in
this corridor. It resulted in the governors 2 years later
appointing a committee of 28 businesses, citizens and
interested groups to come up with a strategic plan, which you
have before you. It took nearly a year and a half of meetings.
And I want to commend all the members who sat through the
monthly probably 4- or 5-hour long meetings to come up with the
solution. But that 2000 strategic plan is the result of that
effort.
And this year, as you just heard, we've also now completed
the Economic Impact Analysis and the study did conclude that
the congestion in the I-5 Columbia River crossings was
affecting, as you heard, not only the Portland/Vancouver area
business and industry by increasing their shipping costs,
limiting their labor markets and reducing competitiveness with
other industries in the region, but it does impact the entire
West Coast and the Nation as a whole. It really is that
significant a corridor. And so I think that's important to
know. And I'm really pleased that the Federal Government has
been an active partner in this effort, the Congress, and the
U.S. Department of Transportation have supported this project
from the inception. And as I noted earlier, Congress has
designated the I-5 corridor as national significant--as of
national significance in 1997 which made it available for the
funding that we've been working on. And with the $7 million
that you noted in your opening remarks, that we have completed
this planning process and that's where we are today.
So we have the initial planning done. We've completed the
economic impact analysis and we now have a final strategic plan
adopted. And now our job is to move forward and figure out
which of the specific improvements we need to work on right now
and where the priorities are and to start moving into the
environmental analysis and actually preliminary designs.
Some of the questions--to give you a flavor of some of the
questions that we need to have answered are, as an example,
should a new freeway bridge be built or should an existing I-5
bridge be modified. Or if we build a new bridge should it be a
joint highway like rail bridge or should we be building two
separate bridges.
Again, another very big issue is how do we minimize the
impacts on the neighborhoods, and then how do we upgrade some
of the current interchanges to provide access to the Ports of
Portland, and the Port of Vancouver, just to add a few. But
we're scoping that out and are ready to get into that effort
right now. As I said, we're going to have to build a financing
plan which will involve some innovative things that have not
been put together before. We need to actually have good
construction estimates and time lines, and we need to consider
the options for managing that work in a different way, when you
have to keep an artery like I-5 open to commerce at the same
time you're trying to improve it.
So with additional funding we can get to those, so it is
needed. We're going to be asking you for assistance. I want to
let you know that Senators Ron Wyden and Gordon Smith have
submitted a joint request for planning dollars as part of the
2004 transportation appropriations bill to pay for this next
phase of this project. We believe a half million dollars at
minimum is necessary and any additional would help speed this
up. Federal money will also be needed to complete the
environmental impact statement to build on the actual strategic
plan that you have before you.
And Congressman Earl Blumenauer has submitted a $15 million
TEA-21 high priority project request to the House
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee as part of a joint
effort with Congressman Brian Baird. And Congressman Baird is
also working very hard, I wanted to let you know, to secure
Federal funding to construct one of the first priority
projects, which is the widening of I-5 between Delta Park and
Lombard Street on the Oregon side, and he has submitted a $32.8
million project request to that committee for consideration.
And this is a project, if you're not aware, is a project that
is a great source of aggravation for Washington commuters and
it has been for a number of years, so I'll make you aware, and
everybody in the room here, that we are supportive of that and
want to see that move forward as quickly as possible.
So in conclusion, we have made significant progress with
the help of this committee and our delegations and with our
U.S. Department of Transportation and other regional partners.
We understand the importance of doing our homework and want to
assure you that when we bring forward a project it will be a
project that has been vetted fully at the local level and has
the grass-roots and total support of the governments in the
area. And we do need to have a project that is broadly
supported and serves many needs or it's not going to be
successful.
PREPARED STATEMENT
The importance of this agreement can't be understated.
Senator Hatfield said it and said it very well. So I think I
would end there, but I wanted to leave you also in your packet.
I couldn't go on without noting that the other thing about the
transportation system here on the West Coast, it's fairly
young, but I point out to you the interstate system is about 50
years old in most areas and we have a problem in Oregon with
bridges that were built during that era that are starting to
fail. They were designed for 50 years and, guess what? They're
starting to fail at 50 years. And the bottom line is we have
about a $5 billion problem just to address the bridges in
Oregon. The good news is our legislature stepped up. I want to
acknowledge the governor and our legislature for passing a $2.5
billion program to address bridges and some modernization
needs, but that only starts to address the problem. So we are
going to be probably talking to you and your committee about
some of those needs here in Washington. So with that, I will
conclude and be glad to answer any questions that you might
have.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Bruce Warner
Good morning Senator Murray and Members of the subcommittee. I am
Bruce Warner and I am the Director of the Oregon Department of
Transportation. Thank you for this opportunity to briefly discuss the
transportation challenges facing this region. I will focus my remarks
on the single greatest transportation challenge that faces the
Portland-Vancouver region: congestion in the Interstate 5 Corridor.
The I-5 Corridor is a true multimodal trade corridor of national
significance. Growing congestion in the corridor threatens the movement
of freight and the region's economy. With the support of this
Committee, the House and Senate authorizing Committees, the Washington
and Oregon Congressional Delegations and the U.S. Department of
Transportation, this region is developing innovative solutions to
overcome this threat. Through a collaborative, public process, we have
identified transportation improvements needed to relieve highway and
rail congestion in this critical corridor. There is much more work to
be done, and we will be requesting additional help from this Committee
in the coming years. We have a solid foundation upon which to build.
Before I begin my remarks on our approach to this difficult
challenge and our future needs, I want to first thank you and the
Committee for your strong support of this effort. The National Corridor
Planning and Development Program funding that we have received, with
your help and the help of both Washington and Oregon's Congressional
Delegations, has been instrumental in bringing people to the table. It
has given us the ability to analyze a wide range of options and provide
local decision-makers and the public with good information, which leads
to more inclusive and better decisions. I think it is significant and
worth pointing out that this effort has received funding under both
Republican and Democratic Administrations and has strong bipartisan
support in Congress.
This region is working to solve the problem of congestion in ways
that are different from what others may be doing elsewhere in the
country. We have established a collaborative, inclusive public process
that is identifying multimodal transportation improvements needed to
relieve highway and rail congestion in this corridor. Further, we are
going to explore innovative financing and contracting options in the
next phase of project development.
This approach is in stark contrast to a traditional State highway
department approach, where added highway capacity is the simple and
only answer. These types of projects are rushed through design and the
environmental process, and the public is given minimal chances to
participate in developing the project. Then Congress is asked to pay
for a project that solves only a part of the problem and ignores other
needs in the corridor.
In our work on the I-5 Corridor, we took the time to examine many
different options, and we have partnered with many different groups and
individuals to ensure that we make decisions that take into account
many different needs. So far, more than 1,700 people--citizens, local
elected officials and business leaders--have been involved in this
effort. They have attended meetings, participated in workshops and
surveys and provided numerous comments. A Web site developed to inform
the public and receive feedback on our plans is used extensively and
already has been accessed more than 400,000 times. Presentations have
been made to more than 70 groups on both sides of the Columbia River,
and the list is growing.
The I-5 Transportation and Trade Partnership Strategic Plan has
been adopted by Metro, the Southwest Washington Regional Transportation
Council, Tri-Met, C-Tran, the Oregon Transportation Commission, the
Washington State Transportation Commission, the Port of Portland, the
Port of Vancouver, the City of Portland, the City of Vancouver,
Multnomah County and Clark County. We have been very busy.
Our work began in 1999, when, in response to increasing concerns
about congestion, a bistate committee was formed to consider the
problems in the I-5 Corridor. The committee found that doing nothing to
solve congestion in the I-5 Corridor was unacceptable. It recommended
that the Portland-Vancouver region initiate a public process to develop
a transportation solution for the I-5 Corridor that addresses all modes
of transportation.
Two years later, the Governors of Washington and Oregon initiated
the Portland/Vancouver I-5 Transportation and Trade Partnership. A 28-
member task force comprised of community, business and elected
representatives was appointed by the Governors and set up to guide the
development of a strategic plan for the corridor. This group worked
with stakeholders and sought input directly from the community for a
year and half. The result was adoption in 2002 of a Final Strategic
Plan.
This year an economic study was completed. The study concluded that
congestion at the I-5/Columbia River crossings was affecting Portland-
Vancouver area business and industry by increasing shipping and
production costs, shrinking labor markets and reducing the
competitiveness of these industries in regional markets. Further
increases in shipping costs would cause Oregon and Washington
businesses to lose market share and profitability.
My colleague, Mr. Wagner, has already discussed the results of this
study, so I will not go into great detail. However, the findings of
just how far the impacts of the I-5 bottleneck are felt beyond the
Portland-Vancouver region were very surprising. For example, about half
of rail shipments originating from Seattle-Tacoma travel south through
Portland-Vancouver on the way to their final destinations. About 133
million bushels of wheat grown in eastern Washington and Oregon are
shipped through the corridor for export to foreign markets. The study
showed that congestion in the corridor affects not only the Portland-
Vancouver area but also the economies of Oregon, Washington, the West
Coast and the Nation.
I am pleased that the Federal Government has been an active partner
in this effort. Congress and the U.S. Department of Transportation have
supported this project from its inception. Congress designated I-5 a
corridor of national significance in 1997, making it eligible for
funding under TEA-21's National Corridor Planning and Development
Program. Since then, more than $7 million of Federal funding has been
awarded to this project to help pay for the planning phase of this
project.
This brings us to where we are today. The initial planning work has
been completed, the economic impacts quantified and the Final Strategic
Plan adopted. Now we must now determine the best package of specific
corridor improvements included in the recommendations to move into
environmental analysis and preliminary engineering. Some of the
questions that need to be answered include:
--Should a new freeway bridge be built or should the existing I-5
bridge be modified?
--Should the new bridge be a joint use freeway/light rail bridge or
should two new bridges be built?
--How do we minimize impacts to existing neighborhoods?
--How do we upgrade current interchanges to improve access into and
out of the Port of Vancouver and the Port of Portland?
During this phase of the project, we also must develop a finance
plan, estimate costs and construction timelines, and consider options
for managing the construction and operation of the project.
Additional Federal funding is needed to perform this work. Oregon's
Senators Ron Wyden and Gordon Smith have submitted a joint request for
National Corridor Planning and Development funding as part of the
Fiscal Year 2004 Transportation appropriations bill to help pay for
this phase of the project. A minimum of $500,000 is needed, but more
funding would speed things considerably.
Federal funding also will be needed to complete an Environmental
Impact Statement. Congressman Earl Blumenauer has submitted a $15
million TEA-21 High Priority Project funding request to the House
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee as part of a joint effort
with Congressman Brian Baird. Congressman Baird is also working hard to
secure Federal funding to construct the first project ready to go in
the corridor--widening I-5 between Delta Park and Lombard. He has
submitted a $32.8 million project request to the House Transportation
and Infrastructure Committee. This project needs to be done as quickly
as possible to address a bottleneck that impacts thousands of
Washington commuters every day.
In conclusion, we have made significant progress with help from
this Committee, the Oregon and Washington Congressional Delegations,
the U.S. Department of Transportation and our regional partners. The
Federal funds we have received have been put to good use. And with your
continued support, we will be able to begin the environmental and
preliminary engineering work that will lead us to the improvements in
the I-5 Corridor that are needed to keep Pacific Northwest businesses
competitive and communities livable.
We understand the importance of doing our homework, of putting in
the time and energy now so that when we are ready to ask the Federal
Government for significant financial assistance to build the
improvements that are so desperately needed in this corridor, we will
have a project that is broadly supported and serves many needs. There
is bistate consensus on the needed improvements in the corridor. The
importance of this agreement cannot be overstated.
Lastly, I hope the Committee has an opportunity to read the bridge
report that I've submitted with my written testimony. Although not the
focus of today's hearing, the State is facing a $4.7 billion deficient
bridge problem that is beginning to impact the movement of freight
statewide. The Oregon Legislature passed and the Governor recently
signed into law a $2.5 billion funding package that will help, but not
alleviate, the problem. We will be working closely with our
Congressional Delegation to secure Federal funding for Oregon's bridges
when TEA-21 is reauthorized.
Again, thank you for this opportunity to be here today. I would be
happy to answer any questions.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much, Mr. Warner, and to
both of you for taking time out today to bring these issues to
the committee.
Senator Hatfield talked a lot about rail. Mr. Warner, you
mentioned it in your testimony as well and I think you
mentioned the $45 billion of products every year that make this
region one of the most trade dependent in the entire country.
We expect huge growth, as I said in my opening remarks, in
import/export freight tonnage by 2020 and domestic freight
tonnage. The grain producers in Eastern Oregon and Eastern
Washington rely on a reliable and efficient rail system to move
their products to domestic and overseas markets.
Can you, both of you describe to me what specific rail
improvements you see as critical to growing our freight rail
capacity and what assistance the States you represent have
provided to the existing rail infrastructure.
Mr. Wagner. I'll start and thank you for the question. The
rail system in the State of Washington certainly we are
focusing primarily on the I-5 corridor on the high speed rail.
In our last legislative session we did pass the what we call
the nickel package for new funding and in that it included over
a hundred million dollars of State funds to improve two track
sections, one in the Kelso area around Martin's Bluff, and one
here in Vancouver, the Vancouver rail project. Those are the
first steps and quite honestly, the least expensive steps in
trying to remove some of the congestion in the Portland Metro/
Vancouver rail congestion issue. The last report I saw
indicated that eventually we are going to have to replace or
add capacity to the bridge across the Columbia River. But for
about the next 15 years there are choke points outside of that
bridge area that need to be addressed, and those are the ones
that we are working on right now. I believe the timing on the
Vancouver rail project is 2007, 2009 we should be in
construction. That will provide an additional rail line around
the congested switching yard.
As far as the Columbia River bringing the products in,
those rail lines are being expanded at this time primarily by
the railroads themselves. The biggest issue is once they get
into the hub both rail lines have to cross the Columbia on the
same bridge. The nearest major crossing for rail is 92 miles
east of us at The Dalles right now. I'll let Bruce address
Oregon.
Mr. Warner. In answer to your question, Senator Murray.
First off, the Oregon Department of Transportation, our
legislature does clearly recognize the importance of rail,
freight rail in the I-5 corridor. I think the study that you
have before you has identified the choke points. It's
identified in some preliminary ways, some of the improvements
that need to be done in terms of just switching to make things
more efficient. Probably as we speak right now the legislature
is considering our budget where we have about $10 million for
passenger rail to continue the additional two trains that link
up with what the State of Washington has done. And again, as
Don mentioned, they are both on the same tracks.
The other thing they are going to be looking at is
consideration of $10 million package to do main line
improvements to the main line Union Pacific line that benefit
both freight and the passenger rail. And obviously that's a
general fund issue for the State. You're probably aware of the
budget problems the State of Oregon has right at the moment, so
I expect this will be a very interesting debate. But, again, if
it isn't addressed this year in terms of the improvements we
know that we have to do that in the future and we'll be working
with our legislature to continue their infusion of dollars into
projects like that in future years.
Senator Murray. One of the things I think we're all aware
of in this region is that the I-5 Columbia River bridge is
aging, and it's only one of two highway bridges that we have,
and you both mentioned one rail bridge that we have crossing
the Columbia River that has to be shared. You know that
similarly populated regions in this country have a lot more
highway and rail bridges. Kansas City, Missouri, for example,
has ten highway crossings and three rail bridges that span the
Missouri River. I think it goes without saying that that really
causes a lot of congestion. As we see the growth coming,
whether it's in rail infrastructure or in commuter crossings,
congestion is going to be a real down side to economic
development here in this region. What options are on the table
right now, a replacement bridge, supplemental bridge, or a
light rail bridge?
Mr. Warner. Senator Murray, all of those options are on the
table right at the moment. The next phase of the work will be
looking at those alternatives to figure out what is the best
solution for the crossing over the Columbia. New bridge or just
a freeway only, is it a joint bridge, is it two new bridges, I
mean those are the questions that we need to look at right now.
We also then need to answer the question on the freight rail
bridge. Again, what do we need to do there? Not only is it a
bottleneck for the rail line but it's also a bottleneck for the
maritime shipping in that area because of--I won't get into the
details--but essentially it creates a hazard for downward
barges during some of the water conditions on the Columbia
River.
So the next phase of the study that we're going to be
asking you for some funding to do, we will start to zero in and
get questions like that answered so we can give some clarity to
folks, figure out what is the best solution that addresses the
needs, but also minimizes the impact on neighborhoods, provides
opportunity for the whole area to grow. And again, addresses
all of the modes in a way that's comprehensive and doesn't look
at just widening one. Because this region--it took a year and a
half, as I said, to really determine there is no silver bullet.
It's just one of the modes being dealt with. We need to deal
with all of them or that entire corridor is going to fail, if
I'm being responsive to the question.
Senator Murray. And I think we're all aware that some
solution needs to come forward. You're talking about the
collaborative process that you put together to find the
solution and the options that are on the table. I think Senator
Hatfield mentioned what happens when local folks oppose a
project that everybody feels like they've been working on for a
long time. And certainly when it comes to my level and funding,
that kind of opposition can have a dramatic impact.
Can you elaborate on the process that you went through to
put this plan together and how you made the difficult decisions
of prioritizing projects?
Mr. Warner. Yes, I will try to answer that. If you look at
my testimony you will get a little more flavor on the effort
itself, but I will assure you that it was very inclusive. As I
said, there were 28 members that were appointed by the
governors of both the State of Washington and Oregon, who
represented business, represented local jurisdictions,
represented neighborhoods, and represented interest groups. And
some of these interest groups are folks that really don't like
widening of highways, as an example, or don't like one
particular thing or another in that corridor. So we had a
broad-based committee. We had a facilitator we actually hired
jointly with the State of Washington. A facilitator that was
neutral, that moved the process along, but it was understood
right up front, everybody agreed that we needed to do something
in this corridor. What we came up with was a solution that I
would not say everybody could agree with individually, because
there were pieces of it they probably don't like, but as an
overall comprehensive solution the whole committee, with the
exception of one individual, voted to support the plan that you
have in your packet today. They realized that we need to widen
the freeway, which some people don't like at all. But we needed
to limit the widening. We needed to deal with the heavy rail.
We needed to provide ways to get transit, both light rail and
more buses, which I think you will probably hear about from Mr.
Hansen in a bit, into that corridor. And I will guarantee you,
as I said, for a year and a half, probably once a month for 4
to 5 hours, this committee sat down and went through these
issues.
We had extensive outreach in the communities on the
Washington side and the Oregon side where we gathered input. We
had an opportunity for people to participate via the Internet,
the world wide web. Very extensive. If you're interested in
some of the volumes of input and what we did with that input, I
think you would be very pleased. Because what I would say to
you is not everybody will be pleased with the solutions that
we've come up with, but if you look at it as a comprehensive,
unified solution everybody can get behind, I think you have it
right there. We need to again put the details together, but I
feel very, very good about the process and to make sure that we
have that consensus at the local level, so you won't hear that
we ought not move forward with this.
Senator Murray. Mr. Wagner. Same opinion?
Mr. Wagner. Same opinion. It was a very long process and I
know that as we go into the environmental phase of this project
we will work out a few more details to answer some very
specific questions that we were not able to address at the
broadest sense.
Senator Murray. Very good. I want to thank both of you for
coming and testifying today, and I look forward to working with
you and appreciate your time and all the effort you've put into
these important regional transportation issues that are so
vital to make sure our economy continues--or at least gets
better, but continues to flourish in the future. So thank you
very much.
Mr. Warner. Thank you.
Senator Murray. That concludes the second panel for today's
testimony. And I would now like to invite our third panel
forward. If they would like to move ahead into the chairs I
will introduce them as they are coming up.
We have Mr. Royce Pollard, Mayor of Vancouver, Washington,
and Board of the Southwest Washington Regional Transportation
Council; Mr. Craig Pridemore, Commissioner Clark County,
Washington, Board of C-Tran Washington and Board of the
Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council; and Mr.
Fred Hansen who is the general manager of the Tri-County
Metropolitan Transportation District from Portland, Oregon.
Thank you to all of you for coming today and for your
testimony.
Again, if you have written testimony we're happy to put it
in the record or additional comments later and we will begin,
Mayor, with you.
Mr. Pridemore. Senator, we've had a discussion and hope
that we could----
Senator Murray. See, nobody ever listens to me.
Mr. Pridemore [continuing]. Make a small change.
Senator Murray. Mr. Pridemore will begin and, Mr. Pollard,
you will follow him. Mr. Pridemore.
STATEMENT OF CRAIG A. PRIDEMORE, CHAIR, CLARK COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND PRESIDENT,
SOUTHWEST WASHINGTON REGIONAL
TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL, WASHINGTON
Mr. Pridemore. Senator Murray, my name is Craig Pridemore.
I am Chair of the Clark County Board of Commissioners;
President of Southwest Washington Regional Transportation
Council; Chair of the Bi-State Transportation Committee; Past
Chair of C-Tran; and member of Metro's Joint Policy Advisory
Committee on Transportation.
It is a pleasure to welcome you back once again to Clark
County. We have been very fortunate here to have a senator who
attends to our needs here so frequently and we appreciate it
very much. What we would like to do in our presentation this
morning is I'm going to kind of give the 30,000 foot overview
of some of the historical and political realities of this
region, and then move on with Mayor Pollard and Mr. Hansen, who
will discuss some specific kinds of project areas, and then
we'd be very happy to take questions at the end.
Finally, I would also like to discuss some of the things we
are doing today within Clark County and in the greater
Metropolitan region to address the situation that we've seen.
Historically, Clark County was something of an island in the
Pacific Northwest. We were largely cut off from issues being
addressed by our northern neighbors, and even more isolated by
the political boundary and geographic boundary that separated
us from our neighbors to the south. That worked fine for the
first 100 years of our existence, but things began to change in
the 1950's. Two major events had a dramatic effect on our
community, and both were transportation projects. First was the
opening of the Interstate 5 freeway and expansion of the
existing bridge. Second was the opening of the Interstate 205
bridge in 1982. Both events inextricably linked Clark County's
economy with the economy of the Portland Metropolitan region.
Since then, any action taken on either side of the river has
inevitably had an impact, sometimes good, sometimes not, on the
other side.
An example of a positive development was the explosion of
the hi-tech sector in the region led by Intel, which chose to
build a major corporate center in Beaverton. Though 15 miles
and several political jurisdictions removed from us, Intel's
presence greatly strengthened the ability of communities around
the region to attract other high-tech companies and provided
for strong regional economic growth.
An example of a negative development in the region occurred
when Oregon implemented growth management strategies in the
1970's without complementary programs being in effect on the
Washington side.
As Oregon began limiting historic quantities of land for
residential development, a strong competitive advantage was
created on our side of the river to provide lower cost, entry-
level housing. This helped to propel Clark County's population
far ahead of the economy's ability to create the jobs and tax
base necessary to support these new residents.
Clark County has consequently become a bedroom community
with 65,000 commuters crowding the freeway system twice a day
to get to and from work. A survey taken in 2001 established
that 80 percent of these commuters would prefer a similar job
in Clark County rather than face the daily congestion, but
today they have little choice.
We have begun to change that both within Clark County and
within the greater region. Today, leaders across the region
recognize that if we don't tailor a transportation system to
meet the goals of our communities, our transportation system
will create our communities for us regardless of our goals.
Clark County's proposed comprehensive land use plan has
been modified to accomplish two primary goals that will have a
dramatic impact on how our transportation system will function
in the future.
First, the plan discourages sprawling residential
developments scattered throughout the county. Instead,
residential growth will be limited more closely within urban
areas where appropriate transportation systems can be developed
to accommodate this growth.
Second, the plan is considerably more supportive of
employment and business growth on our side of the river. It
establishes industrial and commercial corridors. They will have
priority on our infrastructure investments.
Simply painting colors on a map won't be enough to create
jobs in and of itself, of course. So, in cooperation with our
cities and with the Columbia River Economic Development
Council, Clark County has initiated an aggressive economic
development program encompassing everything from permitting
processes, to infrastructure investments, and to environmental
stewardship.
We are confident that Clark County will be well positioned
to take full advantage of the opportunities that a national
economic recovery can create and we hope that you in the U.S.
Senate will continue to push for genuine economic stimulus. If
we can be successful in economic development on our side of the
river, the strain on our transportation system, our
environment, and on our citizens will be greatly reduced.
While our community is taking those steps independently, we
have also worked with regional leaders across the river to
increase awareness about the regional nature of our economy and
of our quality of life.
In 1999 we formed the Bi-State Transportation Committee and
authorized it to directly discuss and coordinate transportation
issues of regional significance. Because of this coordinated
approach, Washington residents have increasingly begun
advocating for transportation projects located in Oregon and
vice versa.
While transportation projects are vital to the success of
our community, they should only be done in the context of a
broader vision that encompasses our goals as a community.
Consequently, the region has proposed expanding the role of the
Bi-State Transportation Committee into a Bi-State Coordinating
Committee. In this expanded capacity, the committee will also
discuss and comment on land use and economic development issues
on both sides of the river.
Regionally, we want to avoid problems of the past. When we
plan today, we envision the community that we would like to
leave to our children and grandchildren, and then we design a
transportation system that will support that greater vision.
Our community vision creates our transportation system today,
not the other way around.
PREPARED STATEMENT
I want to thank you once again for being here in Clark
County and for all the things you've done for the citizens of
the State of Washington, and in particular the citizens of
Southwest Washington. With that, I'll turn it over to my good
friend, Mayor Pollard.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Craig A. Pridemore
Good morning, Senator Murray. It is a pleasure to welcome you back
once again to southwest Washington. Clark County has been very
fortunate to have representatives in the U.S. Senate who spend as much
time working on our behalf as you and Senator Cantwell do and we
appreciate it very much.
This morning, I'd like to talk about some of the historic
influences on Clark County's growth and how those growth patterns have
impacted the regional transportation system. I would also like to
discuss some of the things we are doing today, both within Clark County
and in the greater metropolitan region, to address that situation.
Historically, Clark County was something of an island in the
Pacific Northwest. We were largely cut off from issues being addressed
by our northern neighbors and even more isolated by the political
boundary that separated us from our neighbors to the south. That worked
fine for the first 100 years of our existence, but things began to
change in the 1950's.
Two major events had a dramatic effect on our community. Both were
transportation projects. First was the opening of the Interstate 5
freeway and expansion of the existing bridge. Second was the opening of
the Interstate 205 bridge in 1982.
Both events inextricably linked Clark County's economy with the
economy of the Portland metropolitan region. Since then, any action
taken on either side of the river has inevitably had an impact,
sometimes good, sometimes not, on the other side.
An example of a positive development was the explosion of the high
tech sector in the region led by Intel, which chose to build a major
corporate center in Beaverton. Though 15 miles and several political
jurisdictions removed from us, Intel's presence greatly strengthened
the ability of communities around the region to attract other high tech
companies and provided for strong regional economic growth.
An example of a negative development in the region occurred when
Oregon implemented growth management strategies in the 1970's without
complementary programs in effect on the Washington side.
As Oregon began limiting historic quantities of land for
residential development, a strong competitive advantage was created on
our side of the river to provide lower cost, entry-level housing. This
helped to propel Clark County's population far ahead of the economy's
ability to create the jobs and tax base necessary to support these new
residents.
Clark County has consequently become a bedroom community with
65,000 commuters crowding the freeway system twice a day to get to and
from work. A survey taken in 2001 established that 80 percent of these
commuters would prefer a similar job in Clark County rather than face
the daily congestion, but today they have little choice.
We have begun to change that both within Clark County and within
the greater region. Today, leaders across the region recognize that if
we don't tailor a transportation system to meet the goals of our
communities, our transportation system will create our communities for
us regardless of our goals.
Clark County's proposed comprehensive land use plan has been
modified to accomplish two primary goals that will have a dramatic
impact on how our transportation system will function in the future.
First, the plan discourages sprawling developments scattered
throughout the county. Instead, residential growth will be limited more
closely within urban areas where appropriate transportation systems can
be developed to accommodate this growth.
Second, the plan is considerably more supportive of employment and
business growth. It establishes industrial and commercial cores that
will have priority on our infrastructure investments.
Simply painting colors on a map won't be enough to create jobs in
and of itself, of course. So, in cooperation with our cities and with
the Columbia River Economic Development Council, Clark County has
initiated an aggressive economic development program encompassing
everything from permitting processes, to infrastructure investments, to
environmental stewardship.
We are confident that Clark County will be well positioned to take
full advantage of the opportunities that a national economic recovery
can create and we hope that you in the U.S. Senate will continue to
push for genuine economic stimulus. If we can be successful in economic
development, the strain on our transportation system, our environment,
and on our citizens will be greatly reduced.
While our community has taken those steps independently, we have
also worked with regional leaders across the river to increase
awareness about the regional nature of our economy and of our quality
of life.
In 1999 we formed the Bi-State Transportation Committee and
authorized it to directly discuss and coordinate transportation
initiatives of regional significance. Because of this coordinated
approach, Washington residents increasingly are advocating for
transportation projects located in Oregon and vice versa.
While transportation projects are vital to the success of our
community, they should only be done in the context of a broader vision
that encompasses our goals as a community. Consequently, the region has
proposed expanding the role of the Bi-State Transportation Committee
into a Bi-State Coordinating Committee. In this expanded capacity, the
committee will also discuss and comment on land use and economic
development issues on both sides of the river.
Regionally, we want to avoid the problems of the past. When we plan
today, we envision the community that we would like to leave to our
children and grandchildren, and then we design a transportation system
that will support that greater vision. Our community vision creates our
transportation system, not the other way around.
Thank you again for coming to Clark County and for all the
outstanding service you've given to the citizens of Washington.
Senator Murray. Thank you. Mayor Pollard.
STATEMENT OF ROYCE POLLARD, MAYOR OF VANCOUVER,
WASHINGTON AND BOARD FOR THE SOUTHWEST
WASHINGTON REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL,
WASHINGTON
Mayor Pollard. Senator Murray, Ladies and Gentlemen, I'm
Ray Pollard, the Mayor of America's Vancouver. And once again I
would like to issue a warm welcome to you, Senator, for coming
back to Vancouver.
I also want to begin with a thanks to you, Senator, for
your frequent visits to our community and for all of your hard
work in helping us to develop and implement a comprehensive
strategy to deal with one area of public infrastructure where
we are the most challenged--transportation.
Senator, I'm happy to tell you that the general state of
bi-State relations in our metropolitan area, among all the
transportation and land use agencies, is as good as it has ever
been. Nothing illustrates this more than the recently concluded
18-month effort of the Bi-State Portland/Vancouver I-5 Trade
and Transportation Corridor Study led by our two governors,
community organizations, government at all levels, business,
labor leaders and private citizens by the thousands were a part
of this effort.
This corridor is a nationally recognized choke point that
nearly 65,000 residents, as the commissioner said, every day
tackle the road to work and back. It is our belief that the two
I-5 bridges that span the Columbia just a few hundred yards
from here are two-thirds of the remaining lift spans left on
this Nation's interstate system. The current state of this
corridor cost millions in lost productivity and adds costs each
month, and is an impediment to what is otherwise a promising
future for our economic growth.
The Port of Vancouver USA has hundreds of acres of
developable land available. The Columbia Gateway project, once
completed, will bring to Vancouver the largest single
industrial parcel in the bi-State metro area. The redevelopment
of our downtown and waterfront has begun big-time with over
$300 million in private sector investment capital already at
work and another $100 million anticipated in the near term.
We've diversified our economy, enhanced our labor force, and
our utility services and maintained competitive utility rates.
Our medical infrastructure continues to grow and advance as
does our K-12 and higher education systems. Housing is still
affordable and our general quality of life measures quite high.
We've got a lot going for us but I am fearful that
transportation infrastructure could be our Achilles heel.
For that reason we are, in my judgment, at a very critical
juncture. After 18-plus months of hard work we have received a
``Call to Action'' from the members of this task force and our
two governors. Improving the entire corridor, including added
capacity through the Delta Park area, replacing or modifying
the two I-5 bridges, enhanced multimodal and enhanced rail
freight capacity are the essential elements that are needed and
we must start down this road now.
We know what needs to be done. There is a shared vision
among the public and private sector partners for this critical
corridor. What are needed now are bold first steps to get us
moving forward. And in recognition of the multibillion dollar
scope of the challenge that lies ahead in ``fixing'' this
nationally significant and strategic corridor, you and the
other members of our Congressional delegation and other
elements of the Federal Government will need to be with us, as
a full-fledged partner, from the start and at every step along
the way.
Everyone here knows of my personal interest in expanding
transit and in bringing light rail to the people of Vancouver
and Clark County sometime in the future. In order to achieve
our comprehensive land use, community and economic development
vision, light rail will need to be expanded into and throughout
our community. I want you to know that extensive public
surveying and outreach has been done on this topic in recent
years and I'm convinced that the people of Vancouver and Clark
County want their local officials to look at ways that could
help make this happen, as part of a comprehensive
transportation system. I've said before that the people on our
side of the river are unique in the world in terms of the per
capita cost of buying into an existing multibillion dollar
system. This also could present us with the opportunity for the
folks from our State who work in Oregon to get a little bit
more back from the taxes they pay to the State of Oregon.
No final decision to bring light rail here has been made.
There would have to be a public vote. We're hoping that
innovative public-private financing partnerships can reduce the
cost to our citizens. It is my hope that a private-sector led
community visioning effort currently underway will give greater
focus and definition to the role of light rail as part of a
comprehensive transportation system serving the entire county.
Senator, every year since I've been mayor you have taken
the time to come here to Vancouver and ask ``How can I help?''
And you have helped, over and over again!
There are several short term steps that will help further
advance our efforts here and that require Federal assistance
and action, and they include:
An earmark of about $4.5 million for ODOT and WDOT to help
move the I-5 partnership recommendations forward and to bring
EIS work focusing on the bridges and adjacent influence areas;
we will also need an additional $16 million authorization for
EIS design and related work.
A $33 million earmark for the I-5/Delta Park to Lombard
widening project, as mentioned, and its inclusion among
congressionally designated ``High Priority Projects.''
Earmarks for Tri-Met and support of the I-MAX project that
will bring light rail to our doorstep--the Portland Expo
Center, an authorization and execution of a final design and
full funding grant agreement for the MAX South Corridor
expansion project. And finally:
Help us to attain ``new start'' authorization for the I-5/
I-205/SR500 light rail loop along with a $2 million earmark for
the initial Alternative Analysis pursuant to FTA's New Starts
feasibility process.
Senator, once again, let me thank you for your personal
interest and leadership in the field of transportation and for
the focus you have brought to our Southwest Washington and our
Bi-State Metropolitan Area.
PREPARED STATEMENT
I don't want to sound too dramatic but last year one month
from now I had open heart surgery. And I received a warning. I
didn't have a heart attack. Our transportation system is
clogged and needs an operation. We have been warned. We have
not had a heart attack yet. I think together the character of
our region is not inaction and I believe together we can find
solutions to our difficulties. Thank you, Senator.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Royce Pollard
Senator Murray, Ladies and Gentlemen, I am Royce Pollard, Mayor of
America's Vancouver. Let me begin with a warm ``welcome back'' to
Vancouver. I also want to begin with a thanks to you Senator Murray for
your frequent visits to our community, and for all your hard work in
helping us to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to deal
with the one area of public infrastructure where we are the most
challenged--transportation.
bi-state relations and the i-5 corridor
Senator, I am happy to tell you that the general state of bi-State
relations in our metropolitan area, among all the transportation and
land use agencies, is as good as it has ever been. Nothing illustrates
this more that the recently concluded 18-month effort of the Bi-State
Portland-Vancouver I-5/Trade and Transportation Corridor Study led by
our two Governors. Community organizations, government at all levels,
business and labor leaders and private citizens by the thousands were
part of this effort.
This corridor is a nationally recognized ``choke point'' that
nearly 65,000 residents of our County tackle each work day. It is our
belief that the two I-5 bridges that span the Columbia just a few
hundred yards from here are two-thirds of the remaining lift spans left
on the Nation's interstate system. The current state of this corridor
costs millions in lost productivity and added costs each month, and is
an impediment to what is otherwise a promising future for economic
growth.
The Port of Vancouver USA has hundreds of acres of developable land
available. The Columbia Gateway project, once completed, will bring to
Vancouver the largest single industrial parcel in the bi-State metro
area. The redevelopment of our downtown and waterfront has begun big-
time with over $300 million in private sector investment capital
already at work and another $100 million anticipated in the near term.
We've diversified our economy, enhanced our labor force, enhanced
utility services and maintained competitive utility rates. Our medical
infrastructure continues to grow and advance as does our K-12 and
higher education systems. Housing is still affordable and our general
quality of life measures quite high. We've got a lot going for us but I
am fearful that transportation infrastructure could be our Achilles
heal.
For that reason we are, in my judgment, at a very critical
juncture. After 18-plus months of hard work we have received a ``Call
to Action'' from the members of this task force and our two Governors.
Improving the entire corridor, including added capacity through the
Delta Park area, replacing or modifying the two I-5 bridges, enhanced
multi-modal and enhanced rail freight capacity are the essential
elements that are needed and we must start down this road now.
We know what needs to be done. There is a shared vision among the
public and private sector partners for this critical corridor. What are
needed now are bold first steps to get us moving forward. And in
recognition of the multi-billion dollar scope of the challenge that
lies ahead in ``fixing'' this nationally significant and strategic
corridor, you and the other members of our congressional delegation and
other elements of the Federal Government will need to be with us, as a
full-fledged partner, from the start and at every step along the way.
transit and light rail
Everyone here knows of my personal interest in expanding transit
and in bringing light rail to the people of Vancouver and Clark County
sometime in the future. In order to achieve our comprehensive land use,
community and economic development vision light rail will need to be
extended into and throughout our community. I want you to know that
extensive public surveying and outreach has been done on this topic in
recent years and I am convinced that the people of Vancouver and Clark
County want their local officials to look at ways that could help make
this happen, as part of a comprehensive transportation system. I've
said before that the people on our side of the River are unique in the
World in terms of the per capita cost of buying into an existing multi-
billion dollar system. This also could present us with the opportunity
for the folks from our State who work in Oregon to get a little bit
more back from the taxes they pay to the State of Oregon. No final
decision to bring light rail here has been made. There would have to be
a public vote. We're hoping that innovative public-private financing
partnerships can reduce the costs to our citizens. It is my hope that a
private-sector led community visioning effort currently underway will
give greater focus and definition to the role of light rail as part of
a comprehensive transportation system serving the entire county.
request for federal assistance
Senator, every year since I've been Mayor you have taken the time
to come here, to Vancouver, and ask ``How Can I Help?'' And you have
helped, over and over again!
Senator, there are several short term steps that will help further
advance our efforts here and that require Federal assistance and
action, and they include:
--An earmark of about $4.5 million for ODOT and W-DOT to help move
the I-5 Partnership recommendations forward and to begin EIS
work focusing on the bridges and adjacent influence area. We
will also need an additional $16 million ``authorization'' for
EIS, design and related work;
--A $33 million earmark for the I-5/Dela Park to Lombard widening
project and its inclusion among congressionally-designated
``High Priority Projects'';
--Earmarks for Tri-Met in support of the I-MAX project that will
bring light rail to our doorstep--the Portland Expo Center, and
authorization and execution of a final design and full-funding
agreement for the MAX South Corridor expansion project; and,
finally,
--Help us to attain ``new start'' authorization for the I-5/I-205/SR
500 light rail loop along with a $2 million earmark for the
initial Alternative Analysis pursuant to FTA's New Starts
feasibility process.
Senator, once again let me thank you for your personal interest and
leadership in the field of transportation and for the focus you've put
on South West Washington and our Bi-State Metropolitan Area.
I don't want to sound too dramatic but I think it fair to say that
we are on the cusp and will either, literally, build the bridges our
region needs in the 21st Century or we will fall into the abyss of
failure and inaction that is out of character for the people and
institutions in our region.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much, Mayor. I appreciate
your testimony and your heart-felt comments. Thank you, Mr.
Hansen.
STATEMENT OF FRED HANSEN, GENERAL MANAGER, TRI-COUNTY
METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT (TRI-
MET), PORTLAND, OREGON
Mr. Hansen. Thank you, Senator. It is a pleasure to be here
and thank you for the opportunity to testify. I have submitted
written testimony. I've asked that it be made a part of the
record as if delivered. I will summarize those comments. Again,
for the record, I'm Fred Hansen. I'm general manager of Tri-
Met, that is the public transportation deliverer in the
Portland Metropolitan region of the three county area.
Just a moment, if I may, you would recognize our national
reputation in terms of light rail, but beyond that the overall
system is a poster child for all that is done right in public
transportation. In the Portland region we rank 29th in
population and yet our ridership is 13th among all major
metropolitan areas. Again, demonstrating how significant that
public transportation sector is. Likewise, our weekend
ridership exceeds all other major weekend use on other major
metropolitan systems, short that in New York City. And we have
been able to deliver that service in a most cost efficient
fashion compared to, again, other communities. We have done
that by making sure that we deliver good service, service that
attracts people but also in a cost-effective way. In fact, in
an effort to reduce our overall costs, we have taken out over
$13\1/2\ million in annualized savings and still delivered
exactly the same level of service, if not better.
We at Tri-Met work very closely with C-Tran to be able to
make sure that our service is coordinated across the river.
Everything from being able to make sure that the system is
seamless from the standpoint of the customer, that is, the
ticket that they have to ride, as well as to be able to make
sure that our stops and other coordinations are there and it's
a pleasure to work together.
Recognizing the need for high-capacity transit, as the
mayor has indicated, as well as County Commissioner Pridemore,
across the Columbia River is not new. As you know and as
Senator Hatfield mentioned earlier, this is a project underway.
In fact, voted on by both our side of the river as well as
yours. It was approved in the original vote in the mid-1990's
on the Oregon side, but not able to be put together and
ultimately not in place for our very real needs.
The 28 member I-5 trade corridor, governor's trade corridor
task force you've heard much about. Let me add one additional
observation from my perspective as a member. I was particularly
struck that the level of agreement that occurred both between
the two States and among the various parties, principally
government, business and community was unanimous in terms of
the issues around how many--how much to be able to expand
freeways, how important transit was and virtually high capacity
transit provided by light rail. And it was I think remarkable
that the community of interest was so uniform across both sides
of the river and among those groups.
We are, as you noted in your opening comments, a nationally
recognized area for our light rail. We have the first train to
a plane in the West Coast. Now joined by BART in San Francisco.
But it's interesting to note that the terminus at the airport
is less than 2 miles from the Washington side of the river.
Likewise, this next April when we open the Interstate MAX
alignment terminating at the Expo Center will be less or just
about one mile from downtown Vancouver. The opportunities to be
able to make those systems be a part of an overall regional
system is there and needs to be able to be joined in a way that
I think will be very soon. I should add as an aside, we hope
that you will be able to join us for the opening of the
Interstate MAX alignment.
The planned construction now of the south corridor project
in Portland, in the Portland region, down to Clackamas Town
Center has another important element and that is a refurbishing
and reviewing of light rail on our transit mall. What that will
do is allow for additional capacity, again, a capacity that can
be utilized if Clark County is able to be entered into the
system. We really do believe that the stage is set.
One of the key elements of the balanced partnership is to
be able to make sure that we really do have that loop in Clark
County. Although it is certainly outside of my direct
jurisdiction, Mayor Pollard mentioned again how important it is
to be able to see that overall loop that addresses both traffic
in the I-5 area, in the I-205 area, and, in fact, the east/west
into Clark County. Although we certainly have focused much on
the transportation across the river, intraClark County
transportation on public transportation is equally important.
The first step is, as you've heard, to do a further
definition of the alternative work strategies and the early
environmental work, and that will require both bi-State
support, but also ultimately Congressional appropriations. We
have in this region a perfect record on being able to deliver
projects on time and within budget. In fact, I think one of the
elements of why we are justified in receiving additional
dollars is demonstrated by Interstate MAX. Here is a project, a
$350 million project that we are already about 6 months ahead
of schedule and about $30 million below budget. Ultimately, I
think delivering very efficient projects. Not only that, it has
provided important economic stimulus, nearly 3,000 direct jobs
have been able to be related to that construction. In addition,
approximately $85 million in terms of improved income in direct
and indirect benefits. About $250 million of that appropriation
will stay within this region to be able to further that
economic impact. And I am very proud that we also have in terms
of public projects in Oregon, the highest return in terms of
assuring that people of color and businesses owned by people of
color have participated at a higher level than ever before in
the history of our State.
Tri-Met and the Portland Metropolitan region support Clark
County and C-Tran's request for bus funds and funding for the
alternative analysis of that light rail loop. We are also
grateful for your committee's support for the Interstate MAX
appropriation and realize how that will be again a very tight
issue certainly in this budget, but one that's very, very
important.
I might stress as well in terms of your question to Senator
Hatfield earlier about doing innovative approaches. We believe
that new public-private partnerships are, in fact, an element
of that new innovative approach. And we are, in fact, seeking
language from the appropriations as--in the appropriation bill
this year that will allow us on the I-205 alignment to be able
to have a particularly aggressive and innovative public-private
partnership, something that we and the Oregon Department of
Transportation are working very closely on.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Lastly, I might mention that I do believe that it is very
important to be able to reward efficiencies in the delivery of
projects on time and on budget for as we have done earlier. You
noted earlier that the cost of crossing the river sometimes are
greater and your cost-benefit analysis may not take that into
account. What we do need, however, is to ensure that the
efficiencies that have been able to be achieved by this region
are able to be acknowledged by the Federal Government and
rewarded by ensuring that additional projects can be funded. I
would be happy to answer any questions. Thank you for your
time.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Fred Hansen
Madame Chair and Members of the Committee, I am Fred Hansen,
General Manager of the Tri-County Transportation District of Oregon,
known as TriMet. It is an honor to appear here today to discuss the
future of the development of the transportation system in the Portland-
Vancouver Metropolitan area.
Your committee has been a consistent partner with our region's
governments in nearly every aspect of improving and expanding the
metropolitan area's transportation system. On behalf of our Board of
Directors and the entire community, I would like to express deep
appreciation for your support, encouragement, and for your appreciation
of the challenges faced in this region.
TriMet is fully committed to expansion of transit services between
Vancouver and Portland. It is fully committed to a partnership with C-
TRAN to accomplish this, and I welcome the opportunity today to discuss
what that entails.
trimet background
TriMet is the public transit agency for the three urban counties on
the Oregon side of the metropolitan area. It is a full service
transportation authority operating over 600 standard size transit
coaches, 78 light rail vehicles, and 203 accessible smaller buses and
vans for the elderly and disabled population. We currently operate
nearly 39 miles of Light Rail, directly serving Hillsboro in the West,
Gresham in the East, downtown Portland and the Portland International
Airport. Attached is an information fact sheet describing how we are
governed and financed.
We are proud of our system because:
--We carry 300,000 people per day--more than any other transit system
our size;
--We rank 29th in population, but 13th in ridership; and
--TriMet carries 10 million more riders per year than larger cities
such as Minneapolis or Denver.
We have also made great strides in offering this service
efficiently. Our Productivity Improvement Program has trimmed $13
million in annual operating costs, without affecting underlying service
to our customers. We also have a perfect record in delivering capital
projects on time and on budget; and for each, private investment in
station areas has followed in dramatic ways.
TriMet is also in its last year of construction of the Interstate
MAX line which will extend the system from the Rose Quarter to the Expo
Center, close to the shore of the Columbia River and only a mile short
of downtown Vancouver. With our partners, including Washington County,
Oregon, we are also developing a 14-mile commuter rail line. With 50
percent local funding and all completed railroad agreements in-hand,
this project is poised with FTA for final design approval.
TriMet is an important element in the region's ``2040 plan''. This
is a framework for the orderly growth and development of our urban area
for the next 40 years. In our opinion this plan wisely envisions strong
reliance on public transit to deliver a significant portion of the
daily trips required to keep that future metro area functioning in a
livable environment.
portland-vancouver lrt: progress to date
For more than a decade the Portland-Vancouver transit connection
has been a priority for our region. In the mid-1990's, Portland region
voters approved a $475 million bond measure to provide local match for
the South/North LRT Project, which included an LRT connection with
Vancouver. However, after a funding vote was defeated in Clark County,
this original funding proposal has not been pursued.
Since then we have been incrementally implementing light rail
system improvements on the Oregon side that can relatively easily be
expanded to provide an Oregon-Washington link.
The most vital development to date regarding the Portland-Vancouver
link has been the construction of the Interstate MAX light rail
extension. This 5.8-mile addition to our 39-mile system is on time,
under budget and scheduled for opening of revenue service next spring.
Its terminus, at the region's EXPO center in North Portland, is only
one light rail station away from downtown Vancouver.
In September 2001, TriMet opened service of the MAX line to
Portland's International Airport, the first such service on the West
Coast. This terminus is also close to the intense growth and
development in east Clark County, just across the Glenn Jackson Bridge
on the I-205 corridor. This line was constructed through a public-
private partnership that has become a model for the Nation.
Recently, our area governments made a very significant decision for
the future of the Portland-Vancouver LRT link, when it approved the
study of developing light rail along Portland's downtown Mall. This
decision, when implemented, makes it possible to handle the impact of
additional trains in the central business core when additional lines in
Clark County are established. Without the move to improve the Mall,
such service from the State of Washington could not be contemplated.
The Mall project is part of a greater project called the South
Corridor Project which eventually will see Light Rail extensions among
I-205 South to the Clackamas Regional Center and South on the near east
side to the City of Milwaukie.
The local match for the first phase of this project has been
identified. We will shortly be asking the Federal Government for
permission to enter Preliminary engineering.
With the Mall, Airport, and Interstate MAX extensions, we are
poised to extend service to Clark County efficiently, when the Clark
County area so decides.
To operate the extended system, additional general fund revenues
will be needed. During this session of the Oregon Legislature, we are
seeking authority for our Board to adjust the payroll tax rate, which
is the main revenue source for the operation of our system. The Board
proposes to make such adjustments if authorized to do so only to
support the expansion of the system.
portland-vancouver lrt: current activities
Work continues on bridging the Columbia River with LRT in the
context of a comprehensive solution to problems in the I-5 Corridor.
I am a member, along with my colleagues Mayor Royce Pollard of
Vancouver, Commissioner Craig Pridemore of Clark County and Mayor Vera
Katz of Portland, as well as representatives from Metro, the State
DOTs, local governments, and citizens, of the Portland-Vancouver I-5
Transportation and Trade Partnership Task force. The Task Force has
been charged by the governors of both States to recommend
transportation improvements in the I-5 corridor and to devise a
strategic plan for achieving those improvements.
The Task Force members, met for nearly 2 years, completed their
recommendations last June, and called for significant improvements in
transit as a well as freeway and bridge improvements along I-5 in both
Oregon and Washington.
The Task Force recommendations, which are included in the Task
Force Report attached to this testimony, call for a phased light rail
loop in Clark County in the vicinity of I-5, SR500 and 4th Plain Blvd.
and the I-205 corridor.
It also recommended that in markets not served well by light rail
that peak-hour premium express bus service be established from the I-
205 and I-5 Corridors to those markets.
The recommendations call for the implementation of transit service
improvements as envisioned in the regional transportation plans of both
METRO, the Portland area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), and
the Regional Transportation Council, the MPO for Clark County.
For both C-Tran, our sister transit agency to the North, and
TriMet, the Task Force urged that new operating support be established
for the two transit systems and that the efforts be coordinated with
plans to extend both bus and light rail service.
congressional support
Congressional support is essential for the realization of these
proposals for improved bi-State transit service.
TriMet and the entire METRO region have supported C-Tran's
proposals for fiscal year 2004 to improve bus system and to seek
preliminary engineering funds for the Clark County LRT loop.
We are also in support of Federal highway funds for the I-5 trade
corridor for preliminary studies in both Oregon and Washington. I
respectfully hope that your committee will give favorable consideration
to C-Tran's request.
Our own Interstate MAX project, which is nearing completion, is
also seeking funds under its Full Funding Grant Agreement for the next
Federal year. We hope your committee can support the proposal for $77.5
million, as recommended in our full funding grant agreement and the
President's budget.
closing
In closing, I again wish to thank you for this opportunity to
discuss our plans with the Committee, and I would be pleased to respond
to any further questions you may have.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much. Thank you to all three
of you for your testimony this morning. I do have a couple of
questions I would like to present to all of you. But, Mayor
Pollard, I want to start with you.
I think that you had worked particularly hard to try and
bring Interstate MAX light rail to Clark County. What
challenges remain in getting light rail to Clark County?
Mayor Pollard. I think the vote in 1995 I believe was done
too hastily for Clark County and Vancouver, but I was involved
in that somewhat. I was not the mayor. And what we--the
approach--I think the greatest challenge is making sure that
our community is involved in the process. And we have been
doing that for a number of years now through various surveys,
focus groups, meeting with citizens. And our intention is, with
discussions with the county commissioners, that any system that
we develop will be done in conjunction with our citizens, and
it will be a system designed by the citizens of Vancouver and
Clark County for Vancouver and Clark County. With all respect
to our partners across the river, we know what's there,
certainly it's part of what we're looking at. But we at first
want to design a system that's good for our community and then
we will look at the opportunity of hooking into the marvelous
system across the river.
So, it is a continuation of this entire process, providing
facts and information to people, and that's what we're trying
to do right now, in fact, with the continuation of the
transportation priorities process, which is a community
process, is to provide facts to people. Those facts that we
have now and hope that with the help of the Federal Government
we will be able to continue forward and provide additional
facts so that this community can come to a decision of where we
want to go in reference to our future transportation system
and, quite honestly, what role light rail may play in that.
Senator Murray. And have you done analysis on the economic
benefits that this kind of project would bring to the region?
Mayor Pollard. I would admit to you that not in any
significant detail, but there have been. I think we have
available to us the information of the impacts that have been
across the river, and they are significant. We hope that the
future studies and the analysis that we are doing now will
provide those kinds of facts and information, and I, quite
honestly, they have to show us. We have to see the numbers.
You're absolutely right.
Senator Murray. Aside from light rail to Southwest
Washington, it's also important to improve transit capacity and
service there. My subcommittee has provided resources to build
Park and Ride lots and adding buses to the existing fleets in
this region to try and reduce congestion. Mr. Pridemore, you
are on the C-Tran board, I believe. If you could talk with me a
little bit about what projects have been successful in
particular, I would appreciate it.
Mr. Pridemore. I think the most significant one is the
Fishers Landing Park and Ride which opened about a year and a
half ago, 2 years ago now, which is already nearing capacity.
We've had in the past at Salmon Creek an extremely successful
Park and Ride that's been over capacity for a number of years,
which we will be looking to relocate now as we try to work out
the problems with I-205 and I-5 connection.
We have 99th Street which you very recently assisted us in
getting support for which is a Park and Ride that will be
moving forward here in the course of next year and hopefully
coming on line and relieving some of that additional pressure.
What we've found with our Park and Rides is that if we build
it, they will come very quickly. So we're looking very forward
to developing those further along both I-5 and I-205.
Senator Murray. Are you looking at supporting any peak hour
premium bus service on the I-5 and I-205 corridors as part of
the solution?
Mr. Pridemore. We look at a range of all kinds of
incentives that can encourage that, certainly everything is on
the table, and we have numerous programs now that we use to
encourage peak hour usage, special programs, particularly the
clean air action days, for example. It helped to do that. So
we've got a fairly broad based program.
Senator Murray. Is the region looking at any HOV lanes on
either I-5 or I-205?
Mr. Pridemore. We actually have HOV lanes in operation now
in Clark County. It's the first one outside of the Puget Sound
area. It's been in place for about a year and a half and still
on a pilot phase. It's showing better numbers and more
productivity as time goes on. It's a large shift for this part
of the community. We've advocated over on the Portland side
that as we expand capacity on their freeway system that that
also be dedicated HOV.
We have HOV now that runs from 99th Street in Clark County
down to Mill Plain and then it opens up again because you can't
run it across the bridge as it exists today. To really make it
effective having it run all the way down significantly further
into Oregon would make for a lot of time savings both for HOV,
drivers of carpools and things and for our transit system.
Senator Murray. Mr. Hansen, do you want to add any
comments?
Mr. Hansen. The one thing that I would add is I that think
that it's important that each time there's an addition to the
public transportation system whether it be light rail or bus
systems and so on and whether it be on the C-Tran side or on
the Tri-Met side, what we have seen is that the more ability to
be able to get to different parts of the region has a
multiplier effect. It's not just an additive. It is a
multiplier effect on the attractiveness of the system. Every
time we add an additional light rail alignment, it attracts
more than just the ridership that will be associated with that
alignment. It really provides for that broader set of
connections. The Park and Rides, the bus system, all the other
elements come together and are very, very important. We do
provide on the Oregon side important Park and Ride
opportunities that are principally utilized by people from
Washington, both the Parkrose as well as the Gateway. And we
think that's an important part of our commitment to the region
as a whole.
Senator Murray. We've talked a bit about the need to
replace or supplement the I-5 Columbia River bridge, but some
of our previous witnesses spoke about the bottlenecks leading
into the three lanes of traffic on that bridge.
Can somebody talk to me about the Delta Park to Lombard
project and how important that project is in the scheme of
things?
Mr. Pridemore. The recommendation that came out of the I-5
Governors--the partnership agreement was that we would turn I-5
into a fully functioning three-lane facility in both
directions. As you point out, the vehicles coming on and moving
off really does slow down the effect of one of those lanes
currently. The Delta Park is actually two lanes now, and so
you've got the two lanes, plus that impact of traffic entering
and exiting, so it really does create that bottleneck.
Expanding that to three lanes will achieve that
facilitation of the goals of the committee. Also, there will be
additional on/off ramps with their own auxiliary lanes that
will help serve the industrial areas of the Columbia Boulevard
and elsewhere. The big vision is that as we replace the
Interstate 5 Bridge, it would be replaced with essentially a
five-lane facility in each direction with two of those lanes
essentially being those add/drop lanes that would allow--
currently, if you go onto SR 14 you're going southbound on
Interstate 5. You're merging with traffic just as you're
entering onto the bridge. It's a tremendous slowdown. If that
lane could instead go across the bridge as a separate lane----
Senator Murray. Without----
Mr. Pridemore [continuing]. Drop off at Jantzen Beach,
you'd eliminate that merge and greatly increase the ability of
I-5--the bridge to handle the traffic.
Senator Murray. Mayor.
Mayor Pollard. If I might just add very quickly, purely the
emotional issue of the Delta Park project for our citizens is
staggering. But beyond that, if we are really serious about
improving the flow of trade and commerce in our region we
absolutely have to have that opening up. Because it will allow
the cars to essentially have a way to get out of the way so
that trade and commerce can move forward. And part of the long-
term vision, of course, is that the HOV lane would continue.
There's been no decision made, but I think a lot of people are
thinking that the HOV lane would be able to continue across the
bridge and through into Oregon on that side which would speed
up the car traffic. There already is an HOV lane on the Oregon
side coming north in the afternoon, so it's a system approach.
But the Delta Park fix is, I believe, the first little bypass
for the heart that we have to fix. And not only symbolically,
but symbolically and efficiency wise.
Senator Murray. I caught that word first. What's second,
third and fourth? What other projects are out there that you're
looking at in the system?
Mayor Pollard. I think our support for Metro's light rail
efforts across the river are very significant. As you know,
every time you come back they are high on our priority list
and, of course, the initial money for our watchdog here and our
requests from the city for our study of the light rail loop
system for the AA analysis is very important to us.
Mr. Hansen. Senator Murray, if I might just add two quick
things. One is that you heard earlier from Bruce Warner, our
director of Department of Transportation, how high our priority
is for the Delta Park widening. That is something I strongly
support. We all do in Oregon. No. 2, as County Commissioner
Pridemore indicated, the issues around how much of local
traffic that is close to the Columbia River going just over the
river but not too much further versus the through traffic and
other things are work that was done by the I-5 Trade Corridor
Study Group and really believe that that next level of analysis
to make sure that we have the most efficient system, the one
that really makes the flows work very well, is what will come
out of the alternative analysis in the environmental work, and
that's why we think it's so important to be able to take that
next step.
Senator Murray. The strategic plan that's been talked about
is pretty ambitious. I think implementing your recommendation
for improvements to the bridge and providing a light rail loop
alone in 2001 dollars is something like $2.2 billion. Both of
our States have just signed multibillion dollar transportation
budgets, and I know there are demands everywhere. It's going to
be very difficult with the tight Federal funds that are
available, State funds, local funds, that we'll see any of that
fully implemented without looking at some innovative financing
solutions. And I would like each one of you to talk about what
we need to be looking at down the road to be able to fully
implement some of these plans. And whoever wants to start.
Mr. Pridemore. I will go ahead and start just because I
know the mayor would steal my thunder by saying it. Mayor
Pollard and I have talked over the years. As a matter of fact,
he started the discussion several years before I was in office,
and that is the idea that we do need to look at tolling at
Interstate 5 and Interstate 205 bridges to help fund some of
these cross bi-State issues is something that, frankly, I'm
supportive of. I think the community will become supportive of
over time. It's a very fair user tax. It involves a lot of work
here locally, at the State level and the Federal level in order
to implement something like that. But in order to get the kind
of level of funding necessary to fund this scope of project,
it's the type of funding mechanism that we need.
Senator Murray. Mayor.
Mayor Pollard. Obviously, I'm on record as saying that we
ought to consider tolling because I agree with you, our
citizens and the Federal Government, quite honestly, the
staggering amount that we are going to require. I think if we
can break it down into manageable bites and find possible
innovative things like tolling both bridges to use for our
transportation infrastructure, that could be a possibility.
But beyond that I believe there are possibilities that with
the private sector where there may be--and there's a good
example. If it's been used across the river Fred can talk
about. There are opportunities where there are benefits to the
private sector where we can work together to probably reduce
this cost to our citizens. I think without those kinds, I agree
with you, without those, Senator, I think we face a very
daunting task, so I think we have to look for those options.
Senator Murray. Mr. Hansen.
Mr. Hansen. Senator, I would add that happily the issue
around the tolling, that's obviously always an important
element. I remember my parents certainly talking about the
tolling that was on the original I-5 Bridge for construction.
Beyond that, however, I do believe that the public-private
partnerships are, in fact, important here. I think contracting
methods, such as design-build, which can lower costs and make
more efficient are the types of things that can lend themselves
to this type of a project. We're still too early to be able to
have a specific plan of that sort, but I do believe that those
will, in fact, not provide additional revenue, but by lowering
costs make the band on the revenue a more palatable amount.
Senator Murray. And those are some of the things you'll be
looking at as you move along the strategic planning?
Mr. Hansen. Well, certainly, there are two parts to
planning. The alternative analysis is really looking at what
should the structure look like and how should it be used. In
terms of the overall financing that will be a part of the work
as well. It will be separate from the specifics of the
alternative analysis, as I understand that process, but those
are pieces that are being put in place I think already or at
least being talked of and my guess is it will start to come
together here in the not so distant future.
Senator Murray. Well, thank you to all three of you for
your testimony today, and for your participation. We need to
move on to our fourth panel, so as you leave I would like them
to come up and I will introduce them as they are coming to the
forefront here as well.
For our final panel this morning for this hearing we have
Mr. Joseph Kalinowski, who is director of WaferTech; Mr. Philip
Parker, who is Chairman of the Southwest Washington Labor
Roundtable; Mr. Glenn Vanselow, who is the Executive Director
of the Pacific Northwest Waterways Association; and Mr. Tom
Zelenka, the Chairman of the Oregon Freight Advisory Committee
and Chair of the Transportation Committee; Pacific Northwest
International Trade Association.
Gentlemen, thank you so very much for coming today and
participating. Mr. Kalinowski, let's start with you.
STATEMENT OF JOSEPH KALINOWSKI, DIRECTOR OF FACILITIES,
WAFERTECH
Mr. Kalinowski. Good morning, Senator. I'm briefly going to
summarize my testimony. You have a copy of it. Again, I'm Joe
Kalinowski. I'm the Director of Facilities at WaferTech.
Senator Murray. Could you raise your mic just a little bit.
Thanks. That's good.
Mr. Kalinowski. Is that better? Just a little bit about
WaferTech. WaferTech is a hi-tech semi-conductor facility.
We're wholly owned by Taiwan Semi-Conductor, or TSMC. And TSMC
produces more semiconductor chips than any other company in the
world. Right now WaferTech occupies about 260 acres in Camas.
The significance of that is we have one semiconductor fab at
that site. That site could house up to five semi-conductor
fabs. Presently we employ about 1,000 employees. And if you
built up that site completely that could go up as high as 5,000
employees. Companies like WaferTech and TSMC like to cluster
facilities. They like to build multiple facilities.
Senator Murray. Yes, move the mic closer and move up just a
little bit so the court reporter can hear you.
Mr. Kalinowski. Companies like TSMC like to cluster
facilities. We like to build multifacilities at one site. That
provides economies to scale. We get to share equipment. We
don't duplicate support functions. The problem we're running
into nowadays is the cost of these fabs. In the past when we
built our first facility about 5 or 6 years ago, the cost was
$1.6 billion. Now, we're looking at the cost of the new fabs to
be $3.6 billion. That's quite an investment. For companies to
make those kind of investments there's key factors that have to
be in the decision-making process. The basic infrastructure in
an area are part of those key factors, and that includes things
like power, water, sewer, the work force and such.
Transportation falls into that basic need category. For us, the
transportation infrastructure must provide timely access to the
airport; that's where we ship our products. We need timely
access to our site 24 hours a day. That's where we get our
equipment; that's where we get our parts; that's where we get
our supplies. And we need easy access to the industrial parks
for all of our employees.
PREPARED STATEMENT
For TSMC and other companies to make these kind of
commitments this basic infrastructure must be already in place
or we will not come. A few years ago we were very alarmed with
the concurrency issues we had in the area which restricted
growth. Working through the hi-tech council we worked with the
local communities, the county and the State to fund the 192nd
interchange; that was very successful. More recently we had the
same support to fund the 1st Street widening project that
connects the industrial park to 192nd. And we would like to
thank you, Senator Murray, for your support for attaining
Federal funding for that 1st Street project. Without those two
projects I doubt WaferTech would consider expanding in Clark
County. They were very important to us. Bottom line, if you
want hi-tech to expand and bring jobs to the community we must
have the basic infrastructure in place. Without a regional
transportation plan the hi-tech expansion may be compromised.
And again, thank you on behalf of WaferTech and the hi-tech
community of Clark County.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Joseph Kalinowski
Transportation infrastructure is crucial not only for WaferTech's
current needs but also our needs in the future if we are to expand our
site. WaferTech is a contract semiconductor manufacturer located in
Camas, Washington across the Columbia River from Portland, Oregon. We
currently employ approximately 1,000 employees at our single
manufacturing facility or ``Fab''. WaferTech is wholly owned by TSMC,
Ltd. of Taiwan, considered to be the leading contract manufacturer of
semiconductors in the world, with facilities located in Taiwan,
Washington and Singapore and plans for a facility in Shanghai, China.
TSMC typically does not construct just a single facility at a location
preferring instead to follow the cluster concept of multiple
facilities, which benefit from economies of scale.
TSMC's original plans for WaferTech called for a total of five
manufacturing facilities at the Camas location. New Fabs currently
being constructed are all 300 mm Fabs which means simply that the
silicon wafers upon which semiconductors are fabricated are
approximately 12" in diameter as opposed to the wafers currently in use
at WaferTech which are 8" in diameter. The larger the wafer the more
semiconductors can be placed on it. New Fabs are enormously expensive
costing in excess of $3 billion each. Before undertaking an investment
of such magnitude TSMC looks very carefully at all aspects of the
location. One of the most important is the local and regional
transportation infrastructure.
When TSMC originally made the decision to locate the WaferTech
facility in Camas, there were several transportation infrastructure
concerns regarding the rural location of the site. There was no
convenient access to Highway 14, an important arterial for access to
Portland International Airport. One major concern was lack of a direct
access from the Camas industrial area to major highways such as Highway
14 and Interstate 205. The second major concern was the concurrency
issues, which have restricted growth in the area. Thanks to a concerted
effort among WaferTech, State, local and Federal representatives, the
192nd Ave interchange with Highway 14 was approved and funded along
with the widening of SE First Street to provide that convenient
connection that was needed.
If TSMC's ultimate goal of building four additional 300 mm Fabs at
its Camas site is realized it could add as many 4,000 additional jobs
to the 1,000 already existing. In such event (which would occur over a
period of several years), there will be additional transportation
infrastructure issues that will need to be dealt with to handle the
additional employees at the site as well as surrounding neighborhoods
that will be impacted by the influx of people to fill the jobs that
will be created. Convenient modern transportation facilities will be
needed for the construction and equipping of the facilities.
Construction of a facility alone will take approximately 2 years during
which time huge amounts of materials and equipment will need to be
delivered to the site. Similarly, when full production is reached
(estimated at 40,000 wafers per 300 mm facility per month) access to a
modern international airport such as Portland International Airport
will be even more important to the company as virtually all of our
finished products will pass through the airport. Expanded air cargo
services such as direct service to Taiwan would be a very important
element of any future regional transportation plan.
When the time comes for TSMC to consider construction of their next
300 mm facility, the Camas site will be considered and the long term
transportation infrastructure plans for the region will be closely
scrutinized to ensure that they will be able to meet the needs of an
expanded site as part of any decision to expand in Camas. Without an
adequate regional transportation plan Camas may well be at risk of not
being considered for future expansion by TSMC.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much. Mr. Parker.
STATEMENT OF PHILLIP PARKER, CHAIRMAN, SOUTHWEST
WASHINGTON LABOR ROUNDTABLE
Mr. Parker. Good morning. I'm Philip Parker, Chairman of
the Labor Roundtable of Southwest Washington, Trustee to Clark,
Skamania and West Klickitat Central Labor Council and a 30-year
member of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.
I would like to thank our senior Senator Patty Murray for
her leadership in both Washingtons. Her energetic support
continues to benefit Southwest Washington and our Oregon
neighbors. I appreciate being asked to participate on this
distinguished panel today.
Members of organized labor believe the most pressing
regional issue is funding for multimodal transportation and
infrastructure systems. We are active participants in seeking
solutions to our challenges. We serve as members of interstate
commissions like the Columbia River Channel Coalition; State
boards and commissions; local groups like the Vancouver
Transportation Finance Task Force and have organized discussion
groups like the Light Rail/Economic Development Forum.
Because of our worries about the anti-worker anti-union
attitude in the other Washington are looming larger, I would
like to share some of the issues that concern the men and women
of organized labor. There are many unfounded myths regarding
union workers which continue to surface when government on any
level considers investing in infrastructure and transportation.
Government agencies fail to understand how including prevailing
wage, union apprenticeship project labor agreements in
infrastructure and transportation contracts can actually lower
costs while increasing worker safety. It is both possible and
profitable to create family wage jobs, with reasonable benefit
packages, to strengthen the economy and the community.
Statements that repealing the current prevailing wage law
will create savings of 20 percent or more are unfounded,
counter-productive and just plain wrong. Take the example of
new building construction. The generally accepted cost
breakdown is 24 percent labor and 76 percent fixed cost. Since
fixed costs will not change, the only way to attain 20 percent
labor savings is to eliminate almost all of the project's total
craft payroll. And this is possible only if the tradesmen work
for nothing! Obviously, this is highly unlikely.
Right-to-work organizations would have you believe non-
union training programs are equal to union apprenticeship
programs. Again, I disagree. Apprenticeship is the original 4-
year degree. A proven method to enhance skills, efficiency and
productivity. Union apprenticeship programs include ten times
more minorities and women than non-union programs and their
graduation rates are at least 15 percent higher.
In addition, union contractors continue to lead the way
regarding fair, mandatory and inclusive drug testing. As much
as 40 percent of job fatalities and 47 percent of injuries can
be linked to alcohol. In addition, 77 percent of illegal drug
users work full time. Non-union contractors are very slow and
non-reactive on this issue.
The opponents of Project Labor Agreements would have you
believe that PLAs lead to higher costs and more job-site
accidents. A recent study conducted by the Rhode Island 21st
Century Labor Management Partnership provided actual data to
the contrary. Since I have already discussed the issue of
project costs, let's talk about safety. The Rhode Island
project studied OSHA records for the period of 1998 to 2001.
During that period, there were eight construction fatalities--
all in the non-union sector and OSHA recorded over four times
more violations against non-union contractors. The hallmark of
organized labor has always been productivity, safety, knowledge
and skill in the workforce.
When governments consider major road construction, they
seem to think that low wages and low benefits mean lower total
costs. This is a false assumption. A study of the Federal
Highway Administration data indicates how skills and
productivity--not differences in wage rates--are critical
determiner of bottom line costs per mile of highway. Using data
for 13 low-wage States (including MS, GA and FL) and 13 high-
wage States (including WA, OR and CA) this study showed that
the use of higher-paid, higher-skilled workers reaped an
average of $123,000 a mile savings in the high-wage States.
This despite the fact that wages in these States averaged $17
an hour compared to $9 per hour in lower-wage States.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Our diverse union membership stands ready to support
America in her important mission to build and maintain our
infrastructure and transportation systems. Union members live,
raise their families and vote in our community. We support our
governments by paying gas, property, sales and Federal income
taxes. We see infrastructure and transportation as both the
fertilizer and the seed needed for economic growth. Together,
we can grow our communities, the State and the Nation. Thank
you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Philip Parker
Good Morning, I am Philip A. Parker, Chairman of the Labor
Roundtable of Southwest Washington, a Trustee of the Clark, Skamania
and West Klickitat Central Labor Council and a 30-year member of the
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.
I would like to thank our Senior Senator Patty Murray for her
leadership in both Washingtons. Her energetic support continues to
benefit Southwest Washington and our Oregon neighbors. I appreciate
being asked to participate on this distinguished panel today.
Members of organized labor believe the most pressing regional issue
is funding multi-modal transportation and infrastructure systems. We
are active participants in seeking solutions to our challenges. We
serve as members of interstate commissions like the Columbia River
Channel Coalition and the Regional Transportation Commission; State
boards and commissions; local groups like Identity Clark County and the
Vancouver Transportation Finance Task Force and have organized
discussion groups like the Light Rail/Economic Development Forum.
Because our worries about the anti-worker, anti-union attitudes in
the other Washington are looming larger, I would like to share some of
the issues that concern the men and women of organized labor. There are
many unfounded myths regarding union workers, which continue to surface
when government, on any level, considers investing in infrastructure
and transportation. Government agencies fail to understand how
including prevailing wage, union apprenticeship and project labor
agreements in infrastructure and transportation contracts can actually
lower costs while increasing worker safety. It is both possible and
profitable to create family wage jobs, with reasonable benefit
packages, to strengthen the economy and the community.
Statements that repealing the current prevailing wage laws will
create savings of 20 percent or more are unfounded, counter productive
and just plain wrong. Take the example of new building construction.
The generally accepted cost breakdown is 24 percent labor and 76
percent fixed costs. Since fixed costs will not change, the only way to
attain 20 percent labor savings is to eliminate almost all of a
project's total craft payroll. And this is possible only if tradesmen
work for nothing! Obviously, this is highly unlikely.
Right to Work organizations would have you believe that non-union
training programs are equal to union apprenticeship programs. Again, I
disagree. Apprenticeship is the original 4-year degree--a proven method
to enhance skills, efficiency and productivity. Union apprenticeship
programs include ten times more minorities and women than non-union
programs and their graduation rates are at least 15 percent higher.
In addition, union contractors continue to lead the way regarding
fair, mandatory and inclusive drug testing. As much as 40 percent of
job fatalities and 47 percent of injuries can be linked to alcohol. In
addition, 77 percent of the illegal drug users work full time. Non-
union contractors are very slow and non-reactive on this issue.
The opponents of Project Labor Agreements would have you believe
that PLAs lead to higher costs and more jobsite accidents. A recent
study conducted by the Rhode Island 21st Century Labor Management
Partnership provides actual data to the contrary. Since I have already
discussed the issue of project costs, let's talk about safety. The
Rhode Island project studied OSHA records for the period of 1998-2001.
During that period, there were eight construction fatalities--all in
the non-union sector and OSHA recorded over 4 times more violations
against non-union contractors. The hallmark of organized labor has
always been productivity, safety, knowledge and skill in the workforce.
When governments consider major road construction, they seem to
think that low wages and low benefits mean lower total costs. This is a
false assumption. A study of Federal Highway Administration data
illustrates how skills and productivity--not differences in wage
rates--are the critical determiner of bottom line costs per mile of
highway. Using data for 13 low-wage States (including MS, GA and FL)
and 13 high-wage States (including WA, OR and CA) this study shows that
the use of higher paid, higher skilled workers reaped an average
$123,000/mile savings in the high wage States. This despite the fact
that wages in these States averaged $17 an hour compared to $9 per hour
in the lower wage States.
Our diverse union membership stands ready to support America in her
important mission to build and maintain our infrastructure and
transportation systems. Union members live, raise their families and
vote in our communities. We support our governments by paying gas,
property, sales and Federal income taxes. We see infrastructure and
transportation as both the fertilizer and the seed needed for economic
growth. Together, we can grow our communities, the State and the
Nation.
Thank you.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much, Mr. Parker. Mr.
Vanselow.
STATEMENT OF GLENN VANSELOW, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
PACIFIC NORTHWEST WATERWAYS ASSOCIATION
Mr. Vanselow. Thank you for this opportunity to testify on
this important topic. I am Glenn Vanselow, Executive Director
of Pacific Northwest Waterways Association.
First I want to thank you, Senator Murray, and, like you, I
want to recognize that the entire Northwest delegation is
uniformly supportive of the transportation infrastructure
maintenance and improvement throughout the Northwest. And like
you, and, Senator Hatfield, in your opening remarks and in his
remarks, you very ably described the importance of the role of
transportation and the role that the Pacific Northwest plays as
a gateway in international trade.
The Northwest economy, while suffering, is as strong as it
is because the region's international trade related
infrastructure is strong. We want to keep it strong. There are
some philosophical differences between the administration and
our members in Pacific Northwest Waterways Association that
affect our requests to Congress. The administration is seeking
to decrease Federal funding on infrastructure, shift funding
responsibility from the Federal Government to the private
sector and local governments and establish new or increased
user fees.
By contrast, PNWA is working hard to keep the Federal role
in operating, maintaining and improving navigation
infrastructure; keeping essential government functions such as
operating the dredges Essayons and Yaquina; increasing Federal
funding for navigation and transportation projects; and
opposing the expansion of user fees.
Federal investment is justified because for every Federal
dollar spent on navigation and transportation infrastructure
many more dollars are returned to the treasury, to local
economies and to corporations and individuals. This happens
because navigation and transportation efficiencies reduce
shipping costs and increase the competitiveness of the United
States producers in the world marketplace.
Our philosophical differences could have major impacts in
the Northwest. On the navigation side the administration
proposes to reduce or eliminate funding for what they're
calling low-use waterways, ports and harbors. Ultimately, their
goal is to de-authorize low-use waterways either closing them
down or shifting responsibility completely to local interests.
The Columbia/Snake inland barge system, for example, is on
the administration's list of low-use waterways. The ports of
Ilwaco and Chinook, as well as the coastal ports in Oregon, are
not funded by the administration. These differences in
philosophy and approach between the PNWA and the administration
leads to our appropriations requests.
On the navigation side, we support increased operations and
maintenance funding for cargo facilities like the Ports of
Vancouver, Kalama, Longview and Portland, and for commercial
and recreational fishing ports like Ilwaco and Chinook. We
support Federal investment in navigation improvements, like the
Columbia River channel deepening and the widening of Blair
Waterway in Tacoma. And we support funding to rehabilitate our
region's failing infrastructure, from the jetties at the mouth
of the Columbia to the locks on the Snake River and the seawall
at Elliott Bay in Seattle.
On the land side, we appreciate the gains that have been
made in freight mobility through your support and we continue
to encourage more investment in moving freight along our
transportation corridors. We support the initiatives of the I-5
partnership which you heard about earlier in this hearing,
including the I-5 improvements and rail improvements in
Vancouver and Portland. Moving the BNSF rail bridge swing span
will increase the safety of barge traffic and reduce the need
for opening the I-5 lift span. And both inside and outside the
Southwest Washington focus of this hearing are several rail,
highway and airmodal projects we are supporting, some examples
include the Fast Corridor in Seattle, the Lake River overpass
at Ridgefield, Washington, and from large mega-projects down to
some smaller local community interests, eliminating rail-at-
grade crossings is a priority for both safety and efficiency in
both contexts.
We support rural market access improvements including
widening to four lanes, the U.S. Highway 12 from Wallula to
Walla Walla, the Port of Pasco's Ainsworth Avenue realignment
and the crane project at the Port of Umatilla, most of which
are already underway as a result of funding you helped to
secure.
PREPARED STATEMENT
In conclusion, much has been accomplished. There's still
much to do. And, Senator Murray, we thank you for your efforts
and your success in elevating our regional issues and regional
needs into national priorities. We look forward to continuing
to work with you and the committee to improve our regional
transportation corridors, and this will result in more
efficient trade gateways to maintain our Nation's and our
region's competitive position in the international marketplace.
Thank you very much.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Glenn Vanselow
Thank you for the opportunity to testify on this important topic.
PNWA is a non-partisan, regional, multi-industry association focusing
on Federal trade, transportation, navigation and economic development
policy. We represent public and private sector interests in Washington,
Oregon and Idaho, including ports, towboat companies, steamship
operators, river and bar pilots, agricultural producers, forest
products manufacturers and others.
First, we would like to thank you, Senator Murray, and the entire
subcommittee for your support of transportation infrastructure
maintenance and improvement throughout the Pacific Northwest.
The Pacific Northwest is an important national gateway for
international trade. Washington is the most trade-dependent State in
the Nation. Oregon ranks No. 6. In the region, as a whole, more jobs
are dependent on international trade than in any other region of the
United States. (One in four in Washington; one in five in Oregon.)
Waterborne foreign trade through Pacific Northwest ports totals over 60
million tons of cargo and $65 billion in cargo value each year. Seattle
and Tacoma are among the world's largest container ports. The Columbia
River is the largest wheat export gateway in the United States,
handling 40 percent of U.S. wheat exports.
The Northwest economy is as strong as it is because the region's
international trade-related infrastructure is strong. Although Congress
appropriates funds for navigation and surface transportation in two
different bills, we view both as part of a single unified
transportation system. That system includes harbors and navigation
channels as well as the rail lines and highways that feed the ports and
move cargo to and from our Nation's producers and consumers.
The Pacific Northwest Waterways Association urges the
administration and Congress to fund needed navigation and
transportation infrastructure to ensure that we have an efficient, safe
transportation system that meets the needs of both people and freight.
On the navigation side, we support increased operations and
maintenance funding for cargo facilities like the Ports of Vancouver,
Kalama, Longview and Portland, and for commercial and recreational
fishing ports like Ilwaco and Chinook. We support Federal investment in
navigation improvements, like the Columbia River channel deepening and
the widening of Tacoma's Blair Waterway. And we support funding to
rehabilitate our region's failing infrastructure, from the jetties at
the Mouth of the Columbia River to the locks on the Snake River and the
seawall at Elliot Bay.
On the land side, we have been urging Congress to increase the
priority of freight mobility for several years. We appreciate the gains
that have been made through your support and continue to encourage more
investment in moving freight along our transportation corridors. That
is a key component in maintaining our Nation's competitive position in
the international marketplace.
The Interstate 5 (I-5) Corridor is the most critical segment of the
transportation system in the Portland/Vancouver area. The I-5 highway,
the road and rail bridges that cross the Columbia River, and the area's
rail network constitute a serious chokepoint for passenger and freight
traffic. Growing congestion significantly slows not only local traffic
but traffic headed to the Puget Sound and California as well. In that
sense, it is a serious local, bi-State, regional, and even national
challenge.
According to a recent study, without improvements, the duration of
peak-period congestion at the I-5 Interstate Bridge and the parallel I-
205 bridge will double from 4 hours today to nearly 10 hours in 2020.
As a result, congestion will spread into the mid-day period, which is
the peak travel time for trucks. The rail network within the Portland/
Vancouver area is equally congested. Congestion adds about 40 minutes
to every rail move, twice the delay in Chicago--the Nation's largest
rail hub. Delays of this kind have a direct impact on the cost of
shipping and, ultimately, our ability to trade.
The I-5 Partnership, a bi-State task force, has studied the I-5
road and rail chokepoint and recommended several improvements to
enhance its capacity and efficiency. Several public and private sources
will have to contribute funding for these improvements. At the Federal
level, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the Port of
Portland are seeking funds in the fiscal year 2004 transportation
appropriations bill and the TEA-21 reauthorization bill. Specifically,
ODOT is requesting $500,000 in the appropriations bill to initiate
detailed studies of the Columbia River crossing and $32.8 million in
the TEA-21 reauthorization bill to widen the Delta Park/Lombard segment
of I-5--a critical project to reduce congestion between Vancouver and
Portland. The Port of Portland is seeking $11 million to build a rail
yard on Port property that will add capacity to the area's rail
network.
Another of the I-5 Partnership's identified projects is
construction of a new rail line that would bypass the Vancouver Rail
Yard. This would increase the efficiency and safety for freight trains
moving through the Vancouver area to Columbia River ports as wall as
for freight and Amtrak trains moving to and from Puget Sound on UP and
BNSF lines that run south to Vancouver then east to the interior of the
United States through the Columbia Gorge.
The BNSF Rail Bridge across the Columbia just west of the I-5
Bridge presents a safety hazard that needs improvement. By moving the
swing span from the north side of the rail bridge toward the center of
the river, the opening would be aligned with the tall span of the I-5
bridge. This would increase the safety of barge traffic on the river
and reduce the need for opening the I-5 lift span, thus reducing delays
for automobiles and trucks on I-5. We have been seeking Truman-Hobbs
funding for this project.
Also over the Columbia River, work has begun on improvements to the
Lewis and Clark Bridge between Longview, Washington and Rainier,
Oregon. We appreciate your support for that project. The next phase
needs funding of $1.75 million for improved access to the bridge from
Longview.
Within the Pacific Northwest, but outside the Southwest Washington
focus of this hearing, are several rail, highway and intermodal
projects we are supporting. From the FAST Corridor in Seattle, to the
Lake River Overpass in Ridgefield, Washington, eliminating rail at-
grade crossings is a priority for both safety and efficiency.
Rural market access and industrial park access improvements are
underway throughout the Northwest, and more work is needed. As
examples, we thank you for your support of the first phase of the
widening to four lanes of U.S. Highway 12 from Wallula to Walla Walla.
The U.S. Highway 12 Coalition has requested $5.1 million in fiscal year
2004 to begin work on the next phase. We also support the Port of
Pasco's fiscal year 2004 appropriations request for $3 million for the
Ainsworth Avenue Realignment and Sacagawea Heritage Trail Project to
improve access to the Big Pasco Industrial Center.
As an example of intermodal projects supported by this
subcommittee, again, we thank you for funding the crane project at the
Port of Umatilla, Oregon. Two-point-eight million dollars of the $4.2
million needed was funded last year.
In conclusion, much has been accomplished to improve transportation
in the past few years. There is still much to do. Senator Murray, we
appreciate your efforts and your success in elevating our regional
needs to national priorities. We look forward to continuing to work
with you and the subcommittee to improve our region's transportation
corridors. This will result in more efficient trade gateways to
maintain the country's competitive position in the international
marketplace. Thank you.
Senator Murray. Thank you, very much, Mr. Vanselow. Mr.
Zelenka.
STATEMENT OF TOM ZELENKA, CHAIRMAN, OREGON FREIGHT
ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND CHAIR,
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE, PACIFIC NORTHWEST
INTERNATIONAL TRADE ASSOCIATION
Mr. Zelenka. Good morning, Senator Murray. Tom Zelenka,
Vice President with Schnitzer Steel Industries and here today
as Chairman of the Oregon Freight Advisory Committee which is
statutorily created committee by the Oregon legislature to
provide advice to the director of the Department of
Transportation and the Oregon Transportation Commission on
various freight mobility issues, programs and policies on all
the modes affecting freight.
If I could, I would like to preface my comments and deviate
a minute just to thank you, also related to a different matter
that's not on the agenda, per se, but your steadfast support of
the Maritime Fire and Safety Association has been a key issue
and supportive of really the whole lower Columbia River
transportation infrastructure. As you know, that's a bi-State
public-private partnership providing ship fire safety and spill
response capability, ships and terminals along the entire 40-
foot navigation channel, and your steadfast support has been
critical and appreciated very much.
If I could, the Oregon Freight Advisory Committee one of
its first projects was a study called Freight Moves the
Economy, and that really I think sums it up in terms of from
the business perspective dealing with the freight component of
transportation. Freight does move the economy. And today's
focus on I-5, as you've heard an awful lot of comments on that,
clearly is a transportation route. It's also an international
trade route from Baja to B.C.
Just this summer I've been in meetings from Seattle to
Portland to Sacramento to L.A. and next week in Oakland, coast
wide of States and local interests looking at I-5 as a critical
issue and how are we going to fund and move ahead to make sure
that we continue with the advantages that that I-5 system
provides, not just to the local areas but for the entire
international trade community.
We're facing immense challenges. The global supply chain
logistics, the just-in-time delivery system, as you know, the
heightened port requirements that we are facing, and again, the
renewed interest of the Panama Canal by overseas interests
looking at all water moves that impact the West Coast. I've
been ticked off a number of times the challenges we're looking
ahead at relative to the rapid growth that we're forecasting
both in terms of people and goods, and yet how businesses are
supposed to be competitive in those global markets.
As we are hearing about congestion today and we've all sat
in congested roadways, it's very irritable and frustrating when
we're sitting there whether it's in a car or a bus. But to that
18-wheeler it's more than just an irritation. It often means
did we make or lose the sale, did we make or lose a profit. Are
we going to lose jobs. And that's a critical issue for
business.
So funding for the Interstate Bridge and the related
projects that you heard about, and I was glad Mayor Pollard
ticked off for you a set of specific earmarked projects. We
heartily endorse every one of those that he was mentioning to
you. Those are critical. I would only add that, and as you
know, that's almost kind of a down payment, but somewhere down
the line we need to be looking at things like the I-5/I-84
connection down by the Rose Quarter. We've got to deal long
term with that or this will just have been a temporary fix.
Rail--and you've been asking the question and I would like
to respond to it a little bit. Rail certainly is part of the
solution. We need to do more both with rail and frankly with
barge and the connectors, the road connections to our railways
and to our port terminals. Will it help? Yes. Is it the total
solution? Will we be able to avoid doing road improvements if
we just do the rail? I think the answer is no.
My company alone, we have a steel mill in McMinnville. We
built a brand new facility there and made the major investment
to put all the product moving in and out by rail. We move maybe
half by rail, and that's because of the various inefficiencies
and other unrelated issues, I don't need to get into today,
relative to the movement of freight by rail.
So it will be part of the solution. We need to do all we
can, but it's not the panacea alone.
Certainly there's a lot of talk about public and private
partnerships and the capital investments needed. I think that's
true both operationally in terms of what we need to do at the
private sector and our own warehouse distribution of
manufacturing facilities, as well as the roadways themselves.
And I was glad that you are asking questions about the
local process. Process is something that we also need to look
at. It's something that frankly our committee has been looking
at and, in fact, recently, we had a series of discussions with
some Federal Highway Administration people from DC visiting,
discussing freight needs. And what was really instructive in
part of that discussion was listening to their review
nationwide and understanding that from the business perspective
businesses increasingly are looking at the national and the
international markets, strategizing how they are going to be
making their investment strategies attendant to those national
and international global markets while in terms of the planning
and the funding for transportation projects are increasingly
localized. This is the Federal Highway Administration people
seeing this phenomena nationwide, so that businesses are
looking globally, making their investment strategy so that they
can remain competitive. And yet what we're seeing is, in terms
of transportation planning, transportation funding,
increasingly localized and be neighborhood oriented. It's a
natural tension, and it's not to dismiss the local issue at
all, but it's one to recognize it's there and we need to come
to grips with how do we mesh those, because clearly what the
Federal Highway Administration folks were recognizing and what
we're seeing is there is a tremendous potential for a major
disconnect as businesses try to invest and make those national
global investment strategies depending on the transportation
infrastructure, and it may or may not be there, and we have got
to come to grips with that. It's something that our freight
advisory committee is looking at. And I'm pleased that that is
a topic of discussion today.
PREPARED STATEMENT
So to summarize because I realize time is getting on, from
our vantage point freight moves the economy. I-5 is a critical
not just a transportation but a trade corridor. And I would
encourage, in fact, look at it in terms of the reauthorization
measure, if there's any way to be giving greater value in the
formula for multistate trade routes that are critical to the
national economy that would benefit the entire I-5. And I know
from my conversations with the West Coast corridor, up and
down, that it's something that we might even find Californians
supporting. Maybe. I-5 needs the investments, and I appreciate
your interest.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Tom Zelenka
My name is Tom Zelenka, Vice President with Schnitzer Steel
Industries, Inc., a leading national scrap metal recycler and steel
manufacturer, as well as for the Schnitzer Group of Companies, involved
in real estate development and investment, ocean shipping and
industrial gas production and distribution. With our corporate offices
located in Portland, Oregon, the efficient movement of people and goods
and transportation is key to all these business endeavors.
Let me preface my comments by first thanking you for your steadfast
support of the Maritime Fire and Safety Association (MFSA), a bi-State
public/private partnership providing ship-fire safety and spill
protection to the ships and terminals along the 40-foot navigation
channel. Even though MFSA isn't the subject of this hearing, it is a
key support feature of the Lower Columbia River's transportation
infrastructure--and your continued leadership to earmark Federal funds
for MFSA is critical to its success.
I'm also appearing today as Chairman of the Oregon Freight Advisory
Committee, which is statutorily created to advise the Director of the
Oregon Department of Transportation and the Oregon Transportation
Commission on issues, policies and programs affecting multi-modal
freight mobility. Our focus is on all modes of transportation, whether
road, rail, air, water or pipeline and the committee's make-up includes
representatives of carriers, shippers, manufacturers, governmental
agencies and port districts.
Let me first make a few remarks from our company's perspective.
Whether it's moving our company's recycled scrap metal for processing
or export, from Tacoma, Portland, Oakland or LA . . . the I-5 freeway
plays a part. The same is true for the movement of finished new steel
products, manufactured at our steel mill in McMinnville, Oregon,
serving 13 western U.S. States. As the only continuous freeway the
length of the West Coast, I-5 is a critical component to ensuring the
efficient movement of both goods and people. I-5 is a significant
freight route. It should also be seen as a key national trade route
from B.C. to Baja, as well as the movement of goods to/from overseas.
Yet, the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan area has become a choke
point for freight mobility along the corridor because it simply does
not have the capacity to handle the 100,000 vehicles, 14 percent of
which are trucks, that use this portion of I-5 daily.
Perhaps, the need for efficient transportation can be best
illustrated by our 220-acre industrial park in Vancouver, the Columbia
Business Center, on the north side of the Columbia River, in close
proximity to the Interstate I-5 Bridge. Close-in to the Portland/
Vancouver metropolitan area, the 100 plus tenants' transportation needs
of the Columbia Business Center are served by both north/south and
east/west roadways, rail and barge. The tenants range from the small
mom and pop operations to the Fortune 500, with customer markets that
are the local Vancouver market solely, to a customer base that is
metropolitan region based, Pacific Northwest based, national or the
global international market-place.
Yet, no matter which market is the ultimate goal for these tenants,
I-5 plays an important role either directly or indirectly as it
connects to other modes. Our area is the gateway and hub of
transportation; key issues are the connectors between our major
roadways, railways, port terminals and airport and manufacturers,
producers or end users. Every day the challenge is to make the supply
chain move seamlessly and without a delay or break. For every company
the specific costs of delay may be different, but an average cost of a
general delay for a truck is at least $60 per hour and up to about $375
per hour for unexpected delays due to major traffic incidents.
But, the cost of congestion isn't just hitting the freight move--it
ripples through the economy--with a multiplier like effect--the net
effect of congestion can mean not just a loss of a day's profit, but
the ability to make a sale, stay in business--or loss of jobs.
While this area has benefited from good transportation investments
in the past, that competitive advantage is fading fast. By the year
2020, freight tonnage in the western United States is predicted to
increase by 100 percent, outpacing all other regions in the United
States; congested lane miles on truck routes will increase by 58
percent, and the duration of congestion at the Interstate bridge will
double from 4 hours today to nearly 10, increasing the cost of delay to
trucks 140 percent from $14 to $34 million.
Here, more than other areas across the Nation, we are dependent on
transportation-intensive industries, making up 54 percent of the
regional economy, as compared to 49 percent nationally. Local, regional
and national transportation routes must be preserved and enhanced if
business is to effectively participate in economic markets, whether
local or global. With 1 out of 10 jobs in the metropolitan area related
to the wholesale trade and freight sectors of the economy we have a lot
at stake to insure we retain this region's economic viability to be
competitive in the market-place.
It is critical, however, that we understand and find the funds
necessary to invest in the entire transportation infrastructure in this
corridor. This means not exclusively limiting strategic investments to
the I-5 freeway itself, but ensuring its ability to connect with other
important transportation links, such as I-84. Although much focus has
necessarily been given to addressing the frustrating standstill traffic
jams at the I-5 interstate bridge, we know there is more yet to
address. For example, as long as the bottleneck at the I-84 junction
continues, improvements made along the I-5 corridor will be less
effective in securing efficient freight movement. The I-84 exchange
should be studied and improved along with other significant bottlenecks
along the corridor such as Delta Park and the Interstate Bridge.
Another critical component to I-5 and the ability to move freight
efficiently are the railways. The Portland-Vancouver area benefits from
the service of two transcontinental railways, but significant
improvements are needed to take advantage of the rail system's long
haul capacity. We understand that at times the rail delay here double
that of Chicago's, the Nation's largest rail hub. Railways are an
important tool in moving freight for businesses along the Lower
Columbia, such as our tenants at Columbia Business Center whom are
provided access to rail spurs and switching services. Can more goods be
shipped by rail? Yes. Can we avoid the need for road investments if
more is shipped by rail? No. However, the critical component rail
provides to the overall transportation infrastructure underscores the
importance of evaluating the system as a whole, ensuring good
connections between all modes, and investing in the viability of the
entire network.
Let me now conclude with a few comments on behalf of the Oregon
Freight Advisory Committee. One of the first efforts of our committee
was the preparation of a report entitled ``Freight Moves the Oregon
Economy'' (www.odot.state.or.us/intermodalfreight/Reports/FreightMoves/
freight_moves_contents.htm). This could have just as easily been
entitled ``Freight Moves the Washington Economy''! Or ``Pacific
Northwest'' Or ``California'' Or ``U.S.''
The west coast faces an enormous challenge in handling the growing
volume of freight related to trade. Global supply chain logistics,
just-in-time deliveries and heightened port security requirements are
several of the factors.
Clearly, part of the challenge is the need for greater investments,
both on the public side and by the private sector in optimizing
existing capacity and improving productivity of freight operations.
But, perhaps there are also some ``process'' improvements needed.
One of the key concerns we have been grappling with is how to address
the natural tension that sometimes exists between freight movement and
freight transportation needs and local concerns about growth, density
and livability. Recently our committee met with several Federal highway
administration officials discussing freight needs. It was most
instructive to hear from them their awareness that around the Nation
the private sector has become much more focused on the national and
global markets and the need for business investment strategies
attentive to those markets, while in terms of planning and funding for
roads, which is dependent on local government planning and
authorization actions, have become increasingly focused on localized or
neighborhood based solutions, often resulting in significant
disconnects between the strategies of the business sector needing to
invest for the national or global markets, while the local government
is investing in infrastructure based on local impacts alone.
There is no easy solution to balancing this tension between
neighborhood desires or getting goods and services to global markets.
Nevertheless, we must come up with the means to provide the broad
perspective needed to ensure appropriate transportation investment
strategies are developed that meet the needs of all citizens.
Thank you for the opportunity to present a few remarks. I'd be
pleased to answer any questions.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much to all of you for your
testimony. Mr. Zelenka, you have the mic and since we're moving
it around up here let me just start with a quick question for
you. And I appreciate your comments on rail and on your
comments on that tension that we have between trying to plan
globally and recognizing the critical input from local citizens
because without the support from local citizens it's impossible
to get Federal funds. In a very competitive time when a lot of
communities come to us with requests, it's pretty easy to use
that as a criteria of which projects don't get funded, so it's
always important to do both. But I appreciate that.
Let me ask you in particular on the rail part of this
because the efficient movement of freight on our rail system
and coordinating intermodal transportation services has to
occur. Can you tell me if there are any new initiatives in the
strategic plan that will help us improve rail efficiency?
Mr. Zelenka. Some of the things I think we need to get at
are in each of the States, as you know with the deregulation
and the movement away and the move towards short lines, that
we've got to come to grips with how we better mesh their long-
term investments so that if you're off the I-5 valley corridor,
how are the local communities going to be able to feed in. I've
got a facility in north Portland where it takes 10 days to get
cargo 38 miles.
Senator Murray. Ten days?
Mr. Zelenka. Ten days, if I'm lucky. The same is true
coming out of Eugene because it's a switch between lines--
between carriers. And I don't want to be disparaging any
individual carrier, but again, if I'm company A I'm going to
move company's A cargo first other than company B's, which is
going to involve a switch. And that's also dependent on what's
the availability of the crews and the switch engines, which may
move around, depending on other more global needs of the rail
carriers. So short lines, the rail yards.
You had some discussion about the needs for some of the
rail improvements on the side tracks that I think are critical
for both in Vancouver as well as in Portland. And I would also,
as Mr. Vanselow said, I think really looking at the Columbia
River railroad bridge and the need to deal with that both from
the improvement on the Interstate Bridge replacement, but also
from the navigation standpoint. You know, the old days it was
Truman Hobbs Act in terms of obstruction to navigation but we
really need to look at that as well.
Senator Murray. Are there any efforts underway right now to
identify or study how to improve some of the intermodal
connections between rail and truck, seaports?
Mr. Zelenka. At the individual State level I know there are
in Oregon, and I believe in Washington as well. I would defer
to probably the transportation department officials for a
specific listing.
Senator Murray. Thank you. Mr. Vanselow, we'll move the mic
on down to you. In your prepared remarks you mentioned the need
to improve our navigation channels. In seaborne trade it
doesn't help to have land infrastructure that is efficient and
reliable if our cargo vessels can't move in and out of our
seaports. The ports all along the Columbia have done a great
job of improving the technology of intermodal connections at
their facilities, but channel accessibility is having an impact
on business today. Your association represents ports up and
down the Columbia. Can you talk a little bit about what some of
the needs are that are common among these ports that will
improve port access?
Mr. Vanselow. Well, one thing I think that what we may want
to start with is the fact that we have a system. And the system
starts on the navigation side in Lewiston, Idaho, and so that
one of the common elements is that barges are coming down the
system to feed the ports whether it's grain at the United
facility here in Vancouver or down in Kalama or in Portland or
whether it's containers.
So that we have a system that is in some degree of
disrepair and we also have a system that's been difficult to
maintain. We have not had dredging on the Snake River now for
3, actually, 4 years, and we're hoping that we will get to a
position to be able to do dredging next year in this current--
--
Senator Murray. I'm surprised it's taken this long in a
hearing to have that word to come up. Thank you.
Mr. Vanselow. It is a key factor for us. Then as we look
down, we have failing infrastructure. We have lock gates that
are failing. We have lock walls. I know that your staff was
upriver at some of the dams taking a look at that just
yesterday.
So we have to do the maintenance that's necessary to keep
the feeding system or the feeder to the lower Columbia ports
open. Then in the deep draft side we have a 40-foot channel
that is restrictive of cargo primarily for grain and for
containers. And we can have dramatic improvements. We
appreciate that last year you were able to get some funding
into the appropriations bill, and, again, so far, it's looking
as though there is some funding that will be coming forward in
fiscal year 2004. But we need significantly more. We're looking
to the Federal Government for roughly $95 million and we got $2
million last year, and if we're successful in conference,
presumably we'll end up with $5 million this year. It's a
start, but it's a slow start and we'll be moving more slowly
than would be economically efficient. So we're looking forward
to finding a way to increase the appropriations for the channel
deepening.
Finally, on the lower Columbia as far as the multiple ports
in Oregon and Washington, is the fact that there are problems
with deteriorating jetties, both the north and south jetty and
there is funding that you helped to secure to do some study of
that, but it will be an expensive proposition to solve the
problem.
And then finally, while not the ports that you mentioned,
we do have issues down in Ilwaco and Chinook. There's a dredge
in Ilwaco today doing work to dredge their channel to keep
their channel open. In fact, to reopen their channel. It has
been at less than authorized depth. Chinook, if we are
successful, both the House and the Senate for fiscal year 2004
put money into the budget for Chinook, but--about $500,000 in
both cases. The mobilization of the dredge to get from
Vancouver, Washington, down to Ilwaco was $190,000.
So we're working with your staff and with others at the
Corps of Engineers trying to find a way to get that dredging
done this year so that if we're going to spend $500,000 we get
$500,000 worth of dredging rather than $300,000 worth of
dredging. So there are a number of issues to both maintain and
improve navigation on this system that are reaching critical
stages and significant amounts of funding, and we need to do
some planning as to how we can accomplish over the next 5 to 10
years some rather dramatic investments on the system.
Senator Murray. Thank you. Mr. Zelenka, you mentioned the
word ``security'' in your testimony. It is one of the realities
of life today that transportation has new costs associated with
it concerning the security regime that has been put in place
since September 11, a necessary cost, but one that we are
trying to work out and not impact economic development.
Can either of you talk to me a little bit about what the
ports are doing to try to ensure security without passing huge
costs onto their customers?
Mr. Zelenka. I think the answer is probably we don't know.
Certainly there's a big difference between aviation versus the
maritime side. In general my sense is the waterborne side. The
main terminals feel that all the costs are being pushed on to
the--solely on to the private sector, so that is a challenge.
Our company has a series of private terminals. We're in the
midst of doing the details, security planning, assessment work
that Congress has put in place as requirements.
We already have in a number of the requirements, the
fencing, and the ID's, and the cameras, but the additional
costs I think still are unknown of just how detailed those are
going to have to become.
Mr. Vanselow. The ports up and down the river system and
along the coast and up in Puget Sound are all looking at their
vulnerabilities and identifying and initiating projects to
address those vulnerabilities. One of the issues that Tom
raised is on a national basis the Transportation Security
Administration has estimated that port security costs will be
in the neighborhood of $7 billion. A part of your question was,
how are the ports attempting to increase their security
capability without passing those costs on to customers, and so
far they have not found a way to address that. We have not
gotten to the point to where we are spending the bulk of that
anticipated $7 billion. We're in the early phases. The security
assessments, while they are--they do cost money. They are not--
they are not in the multimillion dollar arena. We have
appreciated very much that the grant programs, which you have
supported, have assisted ports in Puget Sound. Port of
Vancouver got a small grant, Port of Portland a small grant and
the Regional Maritime Security Coalition on the Columbia River
got a grant to try to find ways to--the Regional Maritime
Security Coalition is a program to try to find ways to use the
information networks and the chain of custody of cargo to
identify risks while reducing impacts on those 99.9 percent of
the cargos that are not at high risk.
But we do have a significant question, the new rules that
have just come out from the Coast Guard are not clear. People
don't know whether the rules apply to their port or not or to
their cargo facilities or not. They don't know whether they
apply to their passenger facilities or not. So there's a great
deal of uncertainty of what they must do by Federal law.
There's also a great deal of uncertainty even if they are not
covered by the Federal law if there are issues related to
liability. If an event were to occur the law says you're not
covered, you don't need to do this work, but then there is
concern on the part of the ports and those elected
commissioners that there may be liability in their communities
if an event does occur on their facility if they haven't done
the due diligence.
And so we're still struggling with how to get some of those
initial questions answered, the initial assessments done and we
haven't yet turned to the big dollar questions of, okay, now
that we've done the assessments, how do we secure the facility.
Senator Murray. We have many challenges. We'll be working
with you on that.
Mr. Vanselow. I look forward to that. Thank you.
Senator Murray. Mr. Parker, let me turn to you. Washington
and Oregon have shared one other statistic, unfortunately, for
the last several years and that's that we have the highest
unemployment in the Nation between the two States and Alaska.
Numerous reasons for that, from bursting the hi-tech bubble, to
9/11, to the aerospace industry, to markets in Asia. Thousands
of workers have been laid off in both of our States. But one
area where opportunity exists for us is in the transportation
construction business. We know that for every $1 billion spent
on transportation over 47,000 new family wage jobs are created.
And I think that is an important statistic we need to keep in
mind as we invest in transportation, particularly in the
Northwest right now as we're struggling.
Mr. Parker, could you outline for the committee what is
organized labor's role in promoting new construction jobs in
this region?
Mr. Parker. Yes, ma'am. What we were looking for is to help
shape public opinion to help focus it on the need. We as
organized labor are not necessarily trying to drive and
prioritize which form of transportation is No. 1. There are
professionals and very great people from our group and from the
community who can drive that.
We do agree with you that family wage jobs are very driving
factors for organized labor. We stand ready to help America
rebuild. But to prioritize which job we would like, we would
look forward to help rebuilding America through our work.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much. Mr. Kalinowski, as an
employer, you know that when employees suffer from those long
commute lines and show up late and commercial products are
delayed getting to you or being sent from you it really impacts
business, and we know business looks long term to make many of
these business decisions and transportation is a critical part
of that.
What impacts have you felt from the increased congestion in
this region whether it's our highways, or rails, or airports
that's impacted your business?
Mr. Kalinowski. Let me answer that from the hi-tech
industry perspective. The greater Portland/Vancouver area is a
hi-tech cluster. And what I mean by that is there are scores of
hi-tech companies throughout the area. They're all interlinked.
They're interlinked through employees, they're interlinked
through vendors, they're interlinked through suppliers. If I
have, for instance, a tool-down situation, I need a part and
the part is across the river, I need to get that part
immediately. I can't afford to have that tool down waiting for
parts to come across the river or be caught up in congestion.
It hurts our business significantly.
The biggest cost to our business is the equipment. I
mentioned our facility costs are $3.6 billion. Two-point-six
billion dollars of that is our equipment. We have to keep our
equipment running all the time. So we need the supplies, we
need the parts, we need the people to run that equipment. We
can't afford to have the roadway slow that down.
So I think the I-5 corridor, the 205 corridor and the
roadways are very important to us at this point in time. We
also connect ourselves to the airport. All our product is
shipped via air. And it's very timely that we have to get to
the airport in a very quick manner. So that is the other part
that we have to have good access to the airport and that takes
us across the river from our perspective. So those are the
major impacts that we've had. So we need to get our employees
to work, we need to get our suppliers and our vendors there and
we need to get our----
Senator Murray. And grow your industry, that's our goal.
Mr. Kalinowski. Thank you.
Senator Murray. Very good. I want to thank all of our
witnesses today. That concludes this panel's testimony. Before
I close, I do want to thank several people that are here with
us today, Theresa Wheel, who is the district director to
Congressman Baird; Bill Gunley, City Council, City of
Battleground who has been with us; Betty Sue Morris, Clark
County Commissioner, who is here as well; and, of course, Craig
Pridemore, who testified from the Clark County Commission.
In particular I want to thank the Clark County
Commissioners for letting us hold our field hearing here in
their facility today and for their hospitality. It's greatly
appreciated. I want to thank all of our witnesses for their
testimony today, particularly, again, recognizing Senator
Hatfield who has contributed so much to this region and the
Clark County Commissioners as well.
ADDITIONAL SUBMITTED STATEMENTS
I want to reiterate for all of you, that this record will
remain open for 15 days for anyone who wants to submit any
comments or testimony to the committee on any of the topics
that were covered today. And if you are interested in doing
that, please check with my staff afterwards and they will tell
you how to make that happen.
[The statements follow:]
Prepared Statement of Lynne Griffith, Executive Director/CEO, Clark
County Public Transportation Benefit Area Authority (C-TRAN)
Senator Murray and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Lynne
Griffith, Executive Director/CEO of the Clark County Public
Transportation Benefit Area Authority, also known as C-TRAN. On behalf
of the C-TRAN Board of Directors I would like to thank you for the
opportunity to submit testimony following the August 13, 2003, Senate
Field Hearing held in Vancouver, Washington. I was present at the
hearing, as were several C-TRAN Board members, and it is an honor to
contribute to the important discussions that occurred regarding the
challenging transportation issues present in Southwest Washington and
in the Portland/Vancouver region.
C-TRAN has provided bus service in Clark County and to and from
Portland, Oregon for the past 22 years. Our service district spans
nearly all of Clark County and includes our county's most urban area
and the State's fourth largest city, the City of Vancouver, as well as
Clark County's smaller suburban communities including LaCenter,
Ridgefield, Battle Ground, Yacolt, Amboy, Hazel Dell, Brush Prairie,
Camas, and Washougal. Nine elected officials, representing these
diverse communities, govern C-TRAN forming one of the few countywide
transportation forums in Clark County.
For the past several years C-TRAN has actively participated in the
regional bi-State transportation discussions. C-TRAN served as a task
force member throughout the I-5 Transportation and Trade Partnership
Study, sits as a voting member of the Southwest Washington Regional
Transportation Council (RTC), is a member of the Bi-State
Transportation Committee, partners with TriMet in numerous ways, and
participated in the community's Transportation Priorities Project
(TPP)--Dream It, Fund It, Build It.
C-TRAN's Board of Directors unanimously supported the I-5
Partnership's Strategic Plan recommendations and welcomed the citizen-
driven Transportation Priorities Project and the citizen feedback that
resulted from that effort. The Board immediately took steps to
implement solutions that supported the transit related priorities of
both projects and in so doing, directed the C-TRAN staff to involve the
public in the development of a 20-Year Transit Development Plan. This
work is underway and will specifically look at service alternatives
that address several funding scenarios for C-TRAN as well as the
transit elements identified in the I-5 Partnership's Strategic Plan.
The plan being developed by C-TRAN is not another independent
planning effort. It is an action plan that synthesizes the planning and
public involvement efforts completed in the past several years by the
I-5 Transportation and Trade Partnership Task Force, the Southwest
Washington Regional Transportation Council, the City of Vancouver,
Clark County, the Transportation Priorities Project, and C-TRAN. The
20-Year Transit Development Plan reflects the transit elements
addressed by each of these agency efforts and will incorporate aspects
of the I-5 Partnership's Strategic Plan, Vancouver's Transportation
System Plan, the county's update of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan,
Phase I of the Transportation Priorities Project, and C-TRAN's
exhaustive research and update of its 2002 Financial and Service Plan.
The transportation challenges confronting Clark County and the
Portland/Vancouver region will require continued analysis and plan
development, bi-State coordination, public involvement, and a
significant financial commitment by this region to realize the multi-
modal transportation improvements needed to keep our economy, services
and goods, and citizens moving efficiently and effectively through our
communities. The good news is that there is tremendous public
participation, support, and momentum and a strong commitment by
government, business, and community interests in Clark County to
accomplish the improvements identified.
The testimony provided by the Honorable Mark O. Hatfield is
particularly relevant to Clark County's next steps in realizing the
multi-modal transportation improvements suggested in the I-5
Partnership Study. It will be necessary for us to prove that the
transportation improvements desired are productive, efficient, and cost
effective. This emphasizes the importance of our completing the
required homework. C-TRAN supports completing an alternative analysis
to determine the best transit solutions for Clark County and asks the
Subcommittee to support the Southwest Washington Regional
Transportation Council's request for $2.0 million to complete this
essential study. C-TRAN also supports the regional funding requests
made by other agencies including funding to begin the EIS in the I-5
bridge influence area, to widen I-5 at Delta Park, to complete TriMet's
Interstate MAX line, and to obtain a full funding grant agreement for
TriMet's south corridor. C-TRAN also asks the subcommittee to support
C-TRAN's funding requests for $6.4 million for bus and van replacement
over the next several years, $1.6 million for the development of a new
transit center in the Vancouver Mall area, and $1.2 million for
continued deployment of Intelligent Transportation System (ITS)
technology.
Senator Murray, you and the subcommittee have supported C-TRAN on
numerous occasions and provided substantial Federal funding to improve
Clark County's transit system. I would like to share with you the
progress of several of the projects that you have helped to fund. C-
TRAN's newest transit center and park and ride, Fisher's Landing, is
located in East Clark County, opened in the fall of 2000, and is
operating today at near capacity. The 99th Street Park and Ride, a key
new facility being built in the I-5 corridor, is in design and expected
to be completed in September 2004. Thirty-four replacement transit
buses have been acquired allowing C-TRAN to retire its 22-year-old
commuter bus fleet. Each of these capital projects supports our very
popular commuter bus service to Portland, which is also operating at
near capacity.
Expansion of the region's transportation demand management (TDM)
strategies, including additional bus service, vanpools, and carpools,
were also recommended in the I-5 Partnership's Strategic Plan. C-TRAN
is aggressively pursuing TDM solutions that maximize our current
infrastructure and resources wherever possible. C-TRAN supported the
Washington State Department of Transportation's recommendation to
continue the HOV lane project on I-5 from 99th Street to the Main
Street exit and believes the project's future is linked to the HOV
system being continued across the Columbia River and south on I-5. C-
TRAN has partnered with the Washington State Department of
Transportation in conducting a regional vanpool study and C-TRAN
actively participates in the City of Portland's Carpool Matching
Program. These transportation demand management efforts are
particularly important when factoring the limited Federal, State, and
local dollars available for transit investments and are critical to the
region given the lengthy timeframe associated with planning, funding,
designing, and constructing major infrastructure improvements.
In closing, C-TRAN supports the regional multi-modal transportation
system improvements identified in the I-5 Partnership's Strategic Plan.
We are committed to developing public transportation solutions that
provide effective and competitive mobility choices to our citizens and
will continue to work with other regional partners to realize the
improvements envisioned in the I-5 Corridor. Again, thank you for the
opportunity to add testimony to the August 13 hearing and for your
continued support of Washington State's public transportation systems
and C-TRAN.
______
Prepared Statement of Steve Clark, Chairman, Portland Business Alliance
Transportation Committee, and Gary Cardwell, Chairman, Pacific
Northwest International Trade Association
Madam Chair, Members of the Senate Appropriations Transportation
Subcommittee, on behalf of the members of the Portland Business
Alliance (the Alliance) and the Pacific Northwest International Trade
Association (PNITA) we sincerely appreciate the opportunity to provide
written comments for your consideration as part of the Senate
Appropriations Transportation Subcommittee Hearing.
On July 1, 2003 the Alliance and PNITA formally merged as a
combined business entity to expand our member's voice on international
trade issues locally, regionally, and on the national stage. Our united
membership now represents over 1,650 businesses comprised of both the
area's largest private sector employers and hundreds of small business
owners.
Key among our members concerns is the critical role that
transportation and more specifically freight mobility plays in the
competitiveness and prosperity of the Portland/Vancouver region as well
as the Northwest region. They understand that the Northwest economic
health is directly related to trade within domestic markets and trade
with global markets. Access to these markets is either enhanced or
limited by the adequacy and efficiency of our transportation
infrastructure.
The convergence of surface transportation, rail, air service and
port facilities in Portland and Vancouver makes the Interstate 5 (I-5)
corridor, between the Interstate 84 interchange in Oregon and the
Interstate 205 (I-205) interchange in Washington, an important
crossroads for freight flows by all modes into, through and around this
region. In addition, I-5's intersection with the Columbia River,
connecting the Interstate system with deep water shipping, upriver
barging and two water-grade transcontinental rail lines, makes it a
natural crossroads for domestic and international trade.
Our geographic good fortune and wise past transportation
investments have created a transportation nexus for this region's
economy. The Portland/Vancouver region is an established distribution
area where we reap the benefits of a market area larger than our
jurisdictional boundaries and our overall population base. Our ability
to serve that broader market is directly linked to the ability of the
transportation system to support business needs by moving products to
market, particularly along the I-5 corridor. This is why we want to see
road and rail improvements that support freight mobility and transit.
We need to continue to take concerted action in these critical
areas. Freight volumes in our region are projected to grow. The
national commodity flow study shows volumes on the West Coast doubling
in 20 years, and Metro's commodity flow forecast suggests freight
congestion will increase by a measure approaching seven times the rate
of automobile congestion during that same period.
Over 10,000 trucks and 63 trains already move though the corridor
every day. Half of the goods they carry come from or bound to the
Portland/Vancouver metropolitan area. The value of these shipments is
more than $24 billion a year, which is equivalent to one-third of this
region's gross regional product.
As a major distribution center for the West Coast, transportation
is the means by which the businesses in this region reach other markets
and remain competitive with the rest of the country. The size of our
transportation and distribution industry is an indicator of the
importance businesses place on the transport of products. Six thousand
distribution and logistics companies combine to move goods to market,
and these companies employ more than 100,000 people in the metro area.
They represent about 10 percent of the region's workforce and with a
payroll of $4.7 billion, they contribute about 13 percent of the
region's total payroll.
Within the 17 western States, the Portland/Vancouver Metropolitan
area is the number one origin and the number two destination for
tonnage moved by commercial vehicles. The Portland metro area is
projected to be in the top five fastest growing origins and
destinations for freight tonnage in the United States. I-5 is central
to this region's ability to distribute products to market. The
convergence of transportation and port facilities in the I-5 Trade
Corridor makes it a crossroads for both north-south and east-west
trade, and an international gateway to markets in Canada, Mexico and
the Pacific Rim countries.
Yet this corridor is the most congested in the region and one of
the most congested in the country for road and rail freight movement.
With 1,600 hours of delay daily for trucks in the I-5 corridor, a
conservative estimate $60/hour for delay means about $26 million of
productivity is lost annually by shippers and carriers moving in the
corridor. Furthermore, these additional costs are not just borne by the
shippers and carriers, but are passed on in a multiplier effect through
the economy at a time when customers are saying, ``No more!'' In an
economy in which the challenges of competing in a global marketplace
require costs to be contained as much as possible, this leakage of
resources is no longer acceptable to our members.
Senator Murray, investments in transportation are not just
investments in transportation. They are investments in the economy of
the region and the States in which they are made or, in this case, the
States which the I-5 transportation system adjoins and serves. As a
result, targeted transportation investments not only put people to work
in Portland or Vancouver, but they keep people effective and at work in
far away communities and States which rely on the transportation
investments made in the I-5 trade corridor. And those local jobs
created, maintained and grown in the I-5 trade corridor, and in
communities the corridor serves, pay income taxes that are returned to
all levels of government.
Access to domestic and global markets is either enhanced or limited
by an adequate and efficient transportation infrastructure. Simply put,
our members need a transportation system that can move our people to
and from the workplace, and our goods and services to and from the
marketplace. A sound transportation system is a critical element in our
efforts to keep the region competitive for reinvestment and new
investment.
To that end, we would like to call the Committee's attention to a
report that was prepared by Metro's Transportation Investment Task
Force in December 2002 that outlines key projects, directions in
partnered funding and developing regional, business and municipal
commitment. It is a good plan and we strongly urge your support in
funding this important strategy forward to implementation.
We are not asking for a Federal silver bullet or a single, Federal
solution. As illustrated by the Metro Transportation Investment Task
Force recommendations, the Oregon Freight Advisory Committee, the I-5
trade corridor committee, the efforts and the investments we support
and are seeking Federal participation in are based upon State (and
multi-State), regional and local investments. We are not simply asking
for the Federal Government to do this on its own. The Metro report
calls for about $1.9 billion in balanced, multi-modal investments, a
small but critical portion is Federal. The rest would be State,
regional and local investments.
We know of your strong support in bringing Federal resources back
to the Pacific Northwest. We urge you to continue your close work with
the entire Pacific Northwest Congressional Delegation to accomplish
these goals, and we look forward to joining that effort with you.
______
Prepared Statement of the Transportation Investment Task Force
executive summary and recommendations
summary
In July 2002, Metro Executive Officer Mike Burton appointed a task
force of business and community leaders from Clackamas, Clark,
Multnomah and Washington Counties (the Portland Metropolitan area),
asking them to address a critical problem in our region: the need to
fund key transportation improvements which meet the demand of commuters
and businesses in order to maintain livability and support economic
health. He charged the Task Force with recommending a package of
highest-priority projects, along with revenue measures sufficient to
pay for them.
The Task Force reviewed the adopted capital investment plan for the
region's transportation infrastructure, and the nearly $4 billion
shortfall in expected Federal, State and local transportation funding
that will flow to these projects. Discussions were held with State
agencies and local governments that have responsibility for portions of
the transportation system. The group also investigated a broad spectrum
of revenue options. Public opinion polling and other mechanisms were
used to assess the feasibility of these revenue options and the level
of support for various transportation projects being considered.
recommendations
The Task Force recommends that the Metro Council adopt its action
plan as follows:
--Approve a package of highest-priority transportation projects that
is balanced among transportation modes in its approach and in
meeting critical transportation needs throughout the region.
The selected projects should be those that can be implemented
quickly and provide the most immediate value to the region's
citizens. The recommended package includes three components--a
highway portion, a community streets and sidewalks portion, and
a transit portion. The total cost will be $521 million.
This package addresses only part of a $4 billion shortfall in
capital funds for the area's transportation needs. More
effort--and other new funding--will be required to build,
operate and maintain the transportation infrastructure needed
for a livable metropolitan area. The impact of these projects,
and the other funds leveraged by this regional commitment, will
be significant.
In addition to its transportation impacts, this
infrastructure investment will have a beneficial impact on our
economy. Over 12,900 person-years of employment in family wage
jobs will be created, at a time when they are badly needed.
Highway Projects.--The highway package of projects is
intended to help alleviate traffic congestion, move freight,
and support the economic growth and livability of the region.
The package includes widening four sections of the regional
highway system from a current four-lane configuration to six
lanes: Highway 26 to 185th Avenue, I-5 in the Delta Park area
of North Portland, Highway 217 from Highway 26 to I-5 in
Washington County, and I-205 from West Linn to its interchange
with I-5. The Task Force also recommends building two new
planned facilities, the ``Sunrise Corridor'' in Clackamas
County and a connector road between I-5 and Highway 99W near
Tualatin.
Community Projects.--A series of neighborhood-scale community
livability and congestion relief transportation projects is
included in the package. Here, the emphasis is on building
missing sidewalk connections, addressing congestion ``hot
spots'' and improving neighborhood main streets to create
better pedestrian environments and support local business
districts.
Transit Projects.--To provide access to key employment and
residential centers, supply more transportation alternatives
and support the livability of the metropolitan area, the Task
Force recommends a package of transit improvements, which
includes building light rail from downtown Portland through
Southeast Portland neighborhoods to Milwaukie, a ``bus rapid
transit'' corridor along 99W/Barbur Blvd., connecting the
planned Washington County Commuter Rail project to the
Washington Square mall and assisting in the funding of the
planned light rail project along I-205 from the Gateway
district to the Clackamas Town Center.
Funding.--The Task Force recommends a regional vehicle
registration fee increase of $15 per year that would generate
approximately $270 million for highway and community
transportation projects and a General Obligation bond measure
that would raise $251 million for transit investments.
--Create an Accountability Committee.--This committee would be
composed of non-governmental representatives of the community
to oversee the implementation of these recommendations and to
help assure on time/on budget project delivery.
--Ask the Task Force Members to Consider Further Service in the Next
Phase of this Effort.--The Transportation Investment Task Force
has brought the perspective and the credibility of non-
governmental leadership to this critical community need. This
resource should not be lost.
--Actively Participate in the Legislative Process During the 2003
Session of the Oregon Legislative Assembly and Congressional
Deliberations.--The recommendation of the Task Force can only
be fully accomplished if there are additional State and Federal
funds available to leverage the proposed local resources. The
Task Force should take an active role in advocating at the
State and Federal level for additional funding for these
projects.
--Refine the List of Projects and the Selected Revenue Measures Once
New Information is Obtained.--Federal transportation
authorization and appropriation measures will be considered
next year, at the same time that the Oregon Legislature will be
considering transportation funding issues. The outcome of these
deliberations will affect the Task Force's recommendations.
committee findings and conclusions
the issue
This metropolitan area has been growing at historic rates, but
investment in the transportation system to accommodate that growth has
not occurred. During the 1990's, the area's population increased by
more than 250,000, and the daily vehicle miles traveled by that growing
population increased by more than 6.8 million to approximately 26
million miles per day.
Meanwhile, there has not been an increase in revenues to adequately
finance expansion of the transportation system to meet the needs of a
growing population nor even to maintain the system that exists today.
The end result is the following:
--Without new effort and improvements, highway congestion will be
widespread and will increase to more than 38 percent of the
region's freeways by 2020.
--The hours of delay on the road system due to congestion will cost
the freight industry more than $35 million every year and
motorists more than $255 million.
--Roadways and bridges are failing. More than $100 million per year
is required to bring the backlog of necessary repair projects
to a tolerable level.
--While transit ridership is increasing, it cannot grow at a rate
that would achieve the region's transportation goals without
increases in revenues for more buses and expansion of the light
rail system.
--The total requirement to achieve the region's goals is $7.6 billion
over 20 years, or more than $380 million per year. Less than
half that amount is estimated to be generated given currently
available revenue sources.
--Cars stuck in traffic are a threat to our air quality, wasting
energy resources, and eroding our quality of life.
--Neighborhoods without sidewalks lack a basic ingredient of safe and
livable communities.
the charge
On July 16, 2002, Metro Executive Officer Mike Burton convened the
Task Force with this charge:
``The Metro Executive Officer's charge to the Transportation
Investment Task Force is to propose a package of transportation
projects, programs and matching funding proposals for critical elements
of Metro's Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The projects may include
road, transit, bicycle or pedestrian components separated into packages
that have different funding sources or mechanisms. This may result in a
recommendation to the Council or other governments to place a measure
on the ballot. It would also include recommendations for a strategy for
the next legislative session as well as identifying local public or
public/private initiatives to enhance transportation funding.
Using the RTP as its framework, the Task Force will have sole
responsibility for recommending the list of projects and funding
mechanisms. The Task Force will also decide whether to develop a
strategy for funding the entire shortfall contained in the RTP or the
most critical elements of the plan. Metro's staff and an independent
consultant will provide technical and administrative support for the
Task Force.''
task force membership
The Task Force was structured to include:
--One chair from the private sector appointed by the Metro Executive
Officer;
--Approximately 15 members from the private sector;
--One Metro Councilor;
--One representative from Clark County;
--Two members of the Joint Policy Advisory Committee on
Transportation (JPACT);
--One member of the Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC); and
--Metro Executive Officer (ex-officio).
task force approach
The members of the Task Force have considerable experience as
community leaders on transportation issues, and relied on that
experience and their research to shape their approach. Although the
Task Force was empowered to make its findings outside of the official
governmental structure, it conferred with the Joint Policy Advisory
Committee on Transportation (JPACT), local governments and State
agencies throughout its deliberations, allowing local expertise to
inform its choices, but relying on a strategic approach to the four
basic questions facing it:
--What are the most needed and publicly supported transportation
projects in the Portland metropolitan area?
--What is the cost of an aggregation of the most critical of these
projects?
--How would this package of projects be funded?
--How quickly can proposed projects be implemented?
The Task Force began its work by reviewing the Regional
Transportation Plan, the 2040 Growth Concept and other regional
policies. Initial presentations also reviewed the significant financial
shortfall in funding for the planned improvements under the Regional
Transportation Plan. National trends in transportation finance, recent
polling data on public attitudes about transportation funding and
projects, and recent efforts to pass transportation funding measures by
referendum were also summarized and discussed.
policy background
Oregon now ranks among the lowest States for transportation
funding. The region has historically relied on Federal and State funds
to pay for large capital projects in the Regional Transportation Plan,
with some exceptions. The voters of the region approved General
Obligation Bond funding for the local portion of the cost of the
Westside Light Rail project, and Washington County voters have approved
a series of property-tax-funded measures in the county's Major Streets
Transportation Improvement Initiative (MSTIP). By and large, though, a
combination of Federal and State funds, allocated regionally or
distributed by formula to local governments, and city and county
general fund capital dollars have built the region's transportation
infrastructure. This strategy is not keeping up with the region's
needs. Only once in the last decade has the Oregon Legislature approved
new transportation funding, the exception being the Oregon
Transportation Investment Act (OTIA), a $500 million statewide program
approved in 2001.
In addition, the region is also in a prolonged economic recession.
Transportation investment to support key economic sectors should be one
part of the recovery effort. Finally, in all surveys conducted by Metro
and others, traffic congestion continues to be the No. 1 growth-related
issue for citizens in the region.
policy objectives
The Task Force determined that projects selected for funding
consideration should maximize to the degree possible the following
objectives:
--Enhance the regional economy (Projects that move freight, provide
access to terminals, or leverage commercial, industrial, or
mixed use development);
--Relieve congestion (Projects that address key bottlenecks or
relieve existing traffic congestion);
--Enhance community livability (Projects that assist in creating
notable places);
--Provide a funding connection with other public or private
investment and enhance the function and operation of the
overall system;
--Ensure construction begins within 3 years with full implementation
within 6 years from the time of voter approval;
--Provide for a multi-modal system;
--Ensure geographic balance; and
--Leverage other transportation dollars, whether Federal, State,
regional, private or local.
project identification
The Task Force next began to sort projects and develop a ``short
list'' of key projects which fit the criteria and which would be easily
understood by the larger public. Based on its adopted policy objectives
for regional livability, economic health, relieving congestion, etc.,
the Task Force decided to adopt a working model of three project
categories, and to look for the most critical investments in each
category:
Highway projects.--Move freight, relieve congestion, and support
economic health by making improvements and additions to the regional
system of major highways, regardless of whether these were State
highways or part of the interstate system. This category is focused on
limited access, regional highways and their interchanges.
Transit projects.--Improve transportation choices, the environment
and support complete communities by making capital investments in the
transit system, including light rail, streetcars, buses, park-and-ride
facilities or other capital facilities (shelters, ``Bus Rapid Transit''
improvements, etc.).
Community projects.--Support neighborhood quality of life and
remedy unsafe conditions by funding improvements to local major streets
and to bike, pedestrian and trail systems. Although local in scale, the
effect of these projects is felt regionally in providing transportation
choices and in reinforcing local districts or neighborhoods.
State agencies and local governments were interviewed by the Task
Force and by a Projects Subcommittee, which, in the middle portion of
the group's 6-month effort, focused on a possible project list. An
initial project list for each of the three categories was drafted by
the subcommittee and reviewed and approved for further research by the
full Task Force.
revenue measures considered
The Revenue subcommittee examined a variety of potential revenue
sources for the three project categories, including:
--Tolls and other direct user charges;
--Tax Increment Financing;
--System Development Charges;
--Transportation Utility Fees;
--Vehicle Registration Fees;
--Fuel taxes;
--Parking taxes (levied on parking spaces for business and commercial
uses);
--General Obligation Bonds supported by property taxes;
--Payroll taxes;
--Vehicle excise taxes (levied as a percentage of vehicle sales
price); and
--General retail sales taxes.
The subcommittee ultimately recommended that the Task Force test
the feasibility of five funding mechanisms, three for highway and
community projects and two for transit projects. This segregated
approach to revenue measures is necessitated by Oregon's Constitutional
limitation on the expenditure of vehicle-related revenues.
During its deliberations on possible revenue measures, the Task
Force met with Representative Bruce Starr, who led transportation
funding efforts in the 2001 session, and who is developing legislative
concepts for the 2003 Legislature Assembly. Rep. Starr indicated that
he plans to seek an increase in the State gas tax and the vehicle
registration fee, with the proceeds to be directed into bridge repair,
maintenance and capital improvements.
public opinion polling
The Task Force contracted with Davis, Hibbitts & McCaig, Inc. (DHM)
to conduct a survey of preferences and priorities for transportation
projects and funding proposals among motivated voters in Clackamas,
Multnomah, and Washington Counties. This telephone survey was conducted
during November 2002.
The sample size for the survey was 500 registered voters voting in
at least two of the past four elections. Respondents were 18 and over
and proportionately selected to reflect the population of the
metropolitan area. The survey tested individual projects and revenue
sources, and a variety of packages which combined them.
A package approach.--All of the packages of transportation
improvements described to poll respondents received very high levels of
support, and every specific project tested in this survey received
majority support from these respondents. However, each of the three
packages--as well as the full package encompassing all three of the
strategies--generally fared better than individual projects. This
indicates that the traveling public perceives transportation solutions
from a regional perspective.
An appeal to balance.--The citizens of the region strongly support
the proposed projects, as well as an approach to transportation
investment, which provides a choice of modes, as shown by the following
table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Support Oppose
Transportation packages (percent) (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transit Projects........................ 74 25
Highway Projects........................ 80 20
Community Transportation................ 76 24
-------------------------------
Total Package..................... 78 19
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The support for each package was very strong and comparable (74-80
percent), for the transit, highway and community projects. The general
public appears to recognize the value of multiple strategies to address
the region's transportation demands.
Geographic differences are not as pronounced as initially
anticipated.--All of the respondents, regardless of where they lived,
had an overarching preference for a balanced approach incorporating
each of the three approaches. Multnomah County and Portland respondents
expressed very strong (approximately 80 percent) support for the
transit package, while still supporting the road package by more than
70 percent. Citizens in Washington and Clackamas Counties reflected the
opposite dynamic, supporting the road package by 85 percent, while
still supporting the transit package by more than 70 percent.
Though survey respondents were more likely to support projects near
where they lived, the support level was generally not that much greater
than the community at large. This may reflect a growing sense of
connectedness citizens feel in the region based on commuting patterns
or other factors.
Funding options.--The poll suggests that the vehicle registration
fee is a promising revenue source for the road-related needs. Because
of the restrictions of the State Constitution, road-related funds are
not available for transit. Among the sources tested for transit
investments, none currently have majority support. The Task Force
believes that the General Obligation bond has the highest likelihood of
voter approval.
Overall guidance and conclusions from the poll.--While the survey
suggests that there is not a clear majority which supports any given
revenue measure, the data suggest that a successful measure can be
crafted. The combination measure of a General Obligation bond for
transit projects and a Vehicle Registration Fee increase for highway
and community projects polled higher than any of the other options to
fund the package.
deliberation and decision
The Task Force reviewed its proposed projects and revenue measures.
They did this considering their charge, the region's policies and
capital project needs as described in the Regional Transportation Plan,
the Task Force's own objectives and criteria, and the findings of the
public opinion poll. Recommendations were discussed, drafted and
approved as follows:
recommendations
The Transportation Investment Task Force submits the following
recommendations to the Metro Council:
Recommendation No. 1: Adopt the Task Force's proposed package of
projects and revenue sources, and move it to voter approval as a
package.--Following the charge given by the Metro Executive Officer,
the Task Force has developed, and recommends that the Metro Council
support a package of highest-priority transportation projects
consisting of $270 million in highway and community transportation
investments and $251 million in transit improvements. The recommended
package is modally balanced in its approach and supports the livability
of the region's communities in meeting critical transportation needs
throughout the region.
The package includes three components--a highway portion, a transit
portion, and a more localized, community-level set of projects. These
projects are all found in the adopted Regional Transportation Plan, but
merit particular attention because they enjoy high levels of public
support and will significantly and visibly make progress in improving
the region's transportation system. The Task Force believes that the
public will be more inclined to support a package that includes a
combination of highway, transit and local improvements which
distributes its benefits across many areas of the region.
Recommended Highway Projects
The Task Force recommends a combination of highway investments
which are intended to move regional freight, help alleviate traffic
congestion, and support the livability and economic growth of the
region. The package includes widening four sections of the regional
highway system from a current four-lane configuration to six lanes:
Highway 26 to 185th Avenue, I-5 in the Delta Park area of North
Portland, Highway 217 from Highway 26 to I-5 in Washington County, and
I-205 from West Linn to its interchange with I-5. The Task Force also
recommends building two new planned facilities, the ``Sunrise
Corridor'' in Clackamas County and a connector road between I-5 and
Highway 99W near Tualatin. The recommended highway package assumes
funding from State, Federal, and regional sources--some of it new
revenue--to match the regional commitment:
[In millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Task Force
Project funding
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I-5 North............................................... $41
Highway 217............................................. 30
Sunset Highway.......................................... 20
Sunrise Corridor........................................ 40
I-205................................................... 29
I-5/99W Connector....................................... 30
---------------
TOTAL............................................. 190
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The new regional funding is expected to leverage $60 million in
Federal funding and more than $400 million in new State funding.
Recommended Community Projects
This component of the package helps ensure that transportation
investments are made not just in large, regional facilities, but also
``close to home,'' building projects which improve safety, relieve
congestion ``hot spots'' and support neighborhood commercial districts.
Examples are provided below, but the community projects portion of the
package will require additional definition, since the Task Force has
recommended a total amount and general categories without selecting
each individual project. This process should be completed prior to
sending measures to the voters.
[In millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Task Force
Community project categories funding
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neighborhood congestion ``hot spots''................... $30
``Main Street'' boulevard improvements.................. 35
Sidewalks where lacking................................. 15
---------------
TOTAL............................................. 80
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of community projects:
--Construct sidewalks on Capitol Highway in Southwest Portland;
--Improve the intersection of Murray Blvd. and Tualatin Valley
Highway;
--Redesign Hwy. 8 in downtown Forest Grove as a community Main
Street;
--Construct sidewalks on Railroad Avenue in Milwaukie;
--Redesign Tacoma Street between the Sellwood Bridge and McLoughlin
Boulevard as a community main street;
--Improve the intersection of Beaverton-Hillsdale Highway, Scholls
Ferry Rd. and Oleson Road;
--Improve the intersection of Sandy Boulevard, Burnside and 12th
Avenue;
--Construct sidewalks on 92nd Avenue between Powell and Foster Roads;
--Reconstruct Grand Avenue and MLK Boulevard in the Central Eastside
as a community main street;
--Construct sidewalks on Murray Boulevard between Scholls Ferry Road
and Tualatin Valley Highway;
--Improve the intersection of Macadam Avenue and the Sellwood Bridge;
--Construct sidewalks on First Avenue from downtown Hillsboro to
Glencoe High School;
--Redesign NE 102nd Avenue in the Gateway district as a community
main street; and
--Construct sidewalks on Fuller Road between Canyon and Harmony
Roads.
The Community Projects portion of the package is expected to
leverage almost $40 million of Federal funds and $40 million in other
local contributions.
The Task Force recommends funding the highway and community
projects in this package by a regional vehicle registration fee of $15
per year.
Recommended Transit Projects
The Task Force recommends a package of transit improvements, which
includes building light rail from downtown Portland through Southeast
Portland neighborhoods to Milwaukie, a ``bus rapid transit'' corridor
along 99W/Barbur Blvd., and connecting the planned Washington County
Commuter Rail project to the Washington Square mall and assisting in
the funding of light rail along I-205 from the Gateway district to
Clackamas Town Center mall. We have assumed a combination of Federal
and local funding sources to pay for the full capital cost of these
projects, with new funding coming in the form of a General Obligation
bond measure supported by a property tax rate of approximately $0.25
per thousand of assessed value. This commitment of new regional funding
to transit projects is expected to leverage approximately $900 million
in other Federal and local funds. The light rail projects assume
Federal project support at a 60 percent level. The Task Force also
recognizes the need to increase the amount of revenue available for
operation of the transit system due to the growing population and
capital projects expansion.
[In millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Task Force
Project funding
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Downtown Portland/SE Portland/Milwaukie Light Rail...... $185
Bus Rapid Transit on Baurbur/99W........................ 20
Washington County Commuter Rail--Washington Sq. Connect. 10
Assist in Funding I-205 Light Rail...................... 36
---------------
TOTAL............................................. 251
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommendation No. 2: Create an accountability committee of Task
Force members and other interested citizens to maintain the basis of
the Task Force's recommendations in the community, and to thus improve
public acceptance.--Numerous surveys have shown, and recent experience
has confirmed, that one problem facing transportation funding measures
is a ``credibility problem'' of public agencies. Warranted or not, many
citizens perceive that transportation agencies do not use current funds
efficiently and therefore are wary of approving any additional funding.
Providing oversight by a body of citizens could help ameliorate this
concern and improve the package's chances of success. This
nongovernmental oversight group should also assist in explaining the
projects' benefits to the public and in assuring that the projects are
delivered on time and on budget.
Recommendation No. 3: Ask the Task Force members to consider
further service in the next phase of this effort.--Although the
Transportation Investment Task Force's members were asked to make a 6-
month commitment, the level of involvement and interest in this project
by Task Force members is notable. This is a citizen resource that the
Metro Council should continue to utilize. Many Task Force members would
be willing to further assist the Metro Council and help implement these
recommendations.
The unique value of the Task Force as a primarily volunteer and
private sector-based group working outside of the customary
governmental process should be retained as well. This effort has been a
successful example of a new approach.
Recommendation No. 4: Actively participate in the legislative
process during the 2003 session of the Oregon legislative assembly and
in congressional deliberations.--The recommendations of the Task Force
can only be fully accomplished if there are additional State and
Federal funds available to leverage the proposed local resources. The
Task Force should take an active role in advocating at the State and
Federal level for additional funding for these projects.
The Task Force recommends that a dialogue be continued with State
legislative leaders and other interests who are planning a
transportation funding effort in the next session. The Task Force
believes that a coordinated effort is possible and mutually
advantageous, and that the funding measures proposed for the
metropolitan area are compatible with the measures currently being
discussed for statewide application.
The Task Force also recognizes the need for the 2003 Oregon
Legislature to authorize an increase in the Tri-Met payroll tax, which
will be needed to meet growing capital and operating needs in the
transit system.
Recommendation No. 5: Refine the list of projects and the selected
revenue measures once new information is obtained.--Federal
transportation authorization and appropriation measures will be
considered next year, at the same time that the Oregon Legislature will
be considering transportation funding issues. The outcome of these
deliberations will affect the Task Force's recommendations. In addition
to questions about State and Federal funding which should become
clearer over the next 6 months, the Task Force believes that further
research will be needed to refine the package, to better understand
public attitudes about transportation generally, the proposed projects
in particular, and the types and amounts of revenue measures being
proposed.
______
Letter From Jim Howell
Portland, Oregon, August 26, 2003.
Senator Patty Murray,
Senate Transportation Appropriation Subcommittee.
Dear Senator Murray: This letter is intended to be part of the
record of the Sub-Committee's Hearing held on August 13, 2003
addressing the transportation problems affecting the Southwest
Washington/Metropolitan Portland region.
background
In January 2001, the States of Oregon and Washington started a
project called the Portland/Vancouver I-5 Transportation and Trade
Partnership to address the growing concerns about congestion in the I-5
corridor between I-84 in downtown Portland and I-205 north of
Vancouver.
The Project Task Force's final recommendation is to widen I-5 to a
maximum of three through lanes in each direction and build a new
supplemental or replacement bridge across the Columbia River with up to
two additional lanes in each direction and two light rail tracks. They
also recommend adding rail capacity by pursuing rail infrastructure
improvements required to accommodate anticipated 20 year freight rail
growth in the I-5 Corridor while allowing for eight additional
intercity passenger trains.
commuter rail
Commuter rail was not a recommended option, not because it was
looked upon unfavorably, but because the I-5 Rail Capacity Study which
was done as part of this project, determined that there was
insufficient capacity through Vancouver Yards, North Portland and over
the existing railroad bridge for commuter rail service.
We strongly believe that commuter rail is needed, in addition to
light rail and more local road capacity if we are going to permanently
solve the transportation problems in this corridor. We wish to point
out that commuter rail does not ``compete'' with light rail. The two
can work hand-in-hand to serve Clark County and Vancouver. They work
together by connecting to one another--serving different sets of
commuters based on origin and destination of those commuters. Because
of this, many more persons can find a rail line close to their home,
within walking distance or a short car drive. Commuter traffic on I-5
goes down as a result, freeing up capacity for freight on I-5. Stations
can provide for transfers between light rail and commuter rail,
creating a network serving central Vancouver and connecting to the
extensive light rail system throughout the Portland Metro area that now
includes not only downtown Portland, but the Portland International
Airport. The net effect will be a dramatic reduction in commuter
traffic by automobile in the I-5 corridor.
The I-5 Transportation and Trade Partnership Task Force is correct
to put the light rail connection to the Portland system as a high
priority. However, the substantial potential for commuter rail should
not be ignored. This is the primary reason we are proposing a
Vancouver-North Portland Passenger Rail Bypass that would, in addition
to providing capacity for commuter rail, accommodate more high speed
Cascade Corridor and long distance trains than is possible with the
Task Force's recommendations. It also would greatly increase freight
rail capacity by removing all passenger trains from BNSF's most
congested tracks in Vancouver and North Portland.
We offer the attached map (Figure 1) as an example of a passenger
rail bypass in the existing rail corridor. Another example could put it
further east next to I-5.
Two commuter routes, one north to Ridgefield or Kelso, and another
east to Washougal (Figure 2) would greatly reduce long distance highway
commutes, thus reducing congestion on I-5 and SR500. These commuter
trains would more than double the total number of passenger trains
currently projected for this corridor over the next 20 years.
These commuter lines could come into Union Station, but a decided
preference would be a new rail station on the East Side of the River
next to the Rose Quarter. Here, commuter trains can connect with all
light rail lines including direct rail service to the Portland Airport.
The beginnings of a true regional rail system could finally include
Clark County and Vancouver, and this time by two different rail modes
that would connect to each other in downtown Vancouver.
Another advantage of a new passenger rail bridge over the Columbia
is that it could accommodate, at minimal cost, a roadway on an upper
deck connecting the West Vancouver truck traffic from Mill Plain Blvd.
with N. Marine Drive near the Rivergate industrial area. This too will
help trucks stay out of the heavy commuter traffic across the I-5
Bridge, and will give them much faster passage from Vancouver's
industrial area to that of Portland.
highway improvements
I-5 and I-205 are the only options available for local travel
between Oregon and Washington. The fact that there are 12 freeway
lanes, with no alternative options, is one of the fundamental reasons
for the horrendous traffic problems on I-5.
Why is there no longer any arterial street access? U.S. Highway 99,
the primary highway between Portland and Seattle, used to follow
Interstate and Denver Avenues to Jantzen Beach and Vancouver. This
arterial connection was severed in the 1960's when the Minnesota
Freeway (now I-5) was built. Access to Hayden Island became a freeway
interchange and Denver Avenue dissolved into the freeway. It remains
this way today.
Many of the traffic snarls in this area, caused by local traffic
entering the freeway, could be resolved without widening I-5. The most
obvious solution is to disconnect Denver Avenue from the freeway and
re-establish its connection to Hayden Island and Vancouver via local
arterial lanes on the new bridges needed for light rail. The freeway
could be streamlined to provide three through lanes on the existing
southbound bridge span by providing an auxiliary lane to I-5 on the
light rail bridge from downtown Vancouver and SR14. Local access lanes
between downtown Vancouver and Hayden Island would negate the need for
a northbound freeway access from Hayden Island which currently reduces
the effective capacity of I-5 to two lanes on the northbound bridge
(see Figure 3).
Providing an integrated light rail, freight rail, commuter rail and
highway solution to the transportation problems rather than a
fragmented effort that deals with the various modes separately will
more efficiently solve the transportation problems affecting the
Southwest Washington/Metropolitan Portland region.
Cordially,
Jim Howell.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
CONCLUSION OF HEARING
Senator Murray. With that, this does conclude the field
hearing. The subcommittee is recessed according to the call of
the Chair. Thank you very much.
[Whereupon, at 12:26 p.m., Wednesday, August 13, the
hearing was concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to
reconvene subject to the call of the Chair.]
-