“The emerging oil crisis will permanently change society, increasing costs in every sector, forcing people to relocate closer to work and to reconsider mass transit options. The demand for the lowest cost and most reliable option, namely walking and cycling, will increase and the demand for solo driving will decrease.”
So said Daniel Kellogg, a citizen testifying before the Commonwealth Transportation Board yesterday in a public hearing, as it kicked off a year-long process of massaging the state’s transportation plan. With an influx from new revenue sources, this year’s 2008-2013 plan includes $8.7 billion for highways and $2.3 billion to rail and public transportation. (Read the report in the Manassas Journal Messenger.)
Virginia’s transportation system was designed around oil costing $30 per barrel or less. When the price of gasoline and asphalt triples, the supply and demand equation changes. The transportation system has to change with it.
Douglas Koelemay, the Bacon’s Rebellion representative to the CTB (technically, he’s a Northern Virginia representative, but we claim the B.R. columnist as our own), said the CTB is changing the way it considers projects, with an eye to the future instead using “measurements from the past.” Said he: “The imperatives of energy prices and climate change are real.”
So, we know we have to change. That’s progress. But how do we change? There’s the rub.
There is widespread sentiment that we must invest more in mass transit. As an abstract statement, that is undoubtedly right. But we can’t just start dumping money into mass transit projects the same way we used to dump money into roads. Every project must be analyzed for its Return on Investment. Unfortunately, I have yet to see any sign that Virginia has devised a method for calculating ROI on transportation investments in any meaningful way, much less in a way that fairly ranks them in order of priority with such alternative investments as carpooling initiatives, bike paths, traffic light synchronization or accident response management.
Secondly, dumping money into mass transit without changing land use patterns is an exercise in futility. Mass transit is one of those things that everyone thinks is a great idea — for the other guy. But trains and buses do not run in a vacuum. If we want people to actually ride them, they must serve neighborhoods and business districts of a minimum density and level of pedestrian connectivity. Sadly, I have yet to see any sign that funding for mass transit projects will be made contingent upon communities enacting the land use reforms needed to make them financial viable.
Our thinking is inching in the right direction, but we have a loooong way to go.
