Reader Comments

December 8, 2008 in response to Project Selection Key in Stimulus Package, in the December 5, 2008 TWR edition:

Tom -

One NPR news story I have referred to for years was played at the height of the Japanese recession. One economist noted that one of the issues leading to the recession were the very large transportation projects that had been built in Japan. However, his point was that the projects themselves were not delivering the rate of economic return that was expected (regardless of the jobs created just during their construction). When you have a heavily taxed society, those taxes need to be invested in public projects that bring economic growth (e.g., access to trade, better use of resources), and achieve a rate a return that would be higher than what would be achieved through individual spending.

Often we cite the economic rate of return we had with the public investment in the Interstate system, but part of that was not just the scale of the system and the construction/design jobs it created, but also the larger purpose it served. As you note, it is not just about the size of a stimulus, but it is ultimately about the quality of the projects.

I always appreciate your newsletter. Thanks again.

Joseph S. Toole
Associate Administrator
Office of Safety Federal Highway Administration

July 9, 2008 in response to Editorial: Thoughts about a $25 Gas Card, in the July 8, 2008 TWR edition:

Good comments about how high fuel prices have changed your behavior.

Another point that we are looking at is the impact on tax revenues, in particular, the impact of the budget shift from buying things and eating out (taxable sales in Arizona) and buying gas (no sales tax on fuel in Arizona). Using cost increase of $1.53 for gasoline and $1.94 increase in fuel prices, and assuming all of the budget shift comes from taxable sales, the impact on state sales tax collections in Arizona is about $340 million or 6.6% of FY 2007 collections. Even if we assume half of the shift comes from taxable sales to fuel, the impact is still $170 million.

Eric J. Anderson
Transportation Director
Maricopa Association of Governments

May 9, 2008 in response to Nevada Law would Raise State Gas Tax if Federal Tax is Suspended, in the May 9, 2008 TWR edition:

You know Tom we still do not have a solid advocate for our transportation infrastructure. Bridges collapse, our infrastructure moves inevitably toward physical and functional obsolescence and our politicians on both sides of the aisle still run on "a tax holiday" and a no new gas tax pledge. Lack of vision and statesmanship come to mind.

Our civil works, our infrastructure, is the key to economic vitality of our nation's future and competitiveness in the global economy. Financial stewardship shouldn't mean watching the inevitable deterioration of out transportation system - highway, rail, transit AND aviation. Very troubling -

Harry E. Strate, PE
Senior Vice President
Wilbur Smith Associates

April 8, 2008 in response to Coalfields Expressway Project Back on Track, in the April 4, 2008 TWR edition:

Thank you for including the article on the Coalfields Expressway. It is not an approach that will work in many places. The highway - mining synergy approach, however, is our best opportunity to advance this project in the Appalachian region.

Thomas W. Pelnik III, P.E.
Virginia Department of Transportation
Director of Innovative Project Delivery Division

February 28, 2008 in response to I-80 Tolls may be Drive-Now, Pay Later, in the February 22, 2008 TWR edition:

Tom-

CDs are now out-dated according to a report this AM. More music is downloaded via I-Tunes than bought in stores. The world is certainly moving faster these days, eh?

Robert Leonetti
Business Development Manager (Eastern/Central U.S.)
GRANITE CONSTRUCTION INC.

August 13, 2007 in response to Blast Warns of Age of Infrastructure, in the August 3, 2007 TWR edition:

I appreciate your notes on the August 3rd report regarding the aging infrastructure. It certainly has been a crisis just quietly starting to surface until now. My concern is that we've sunk too much money into the wrong types (or at least a single set) of solutions over the years (and continue to do so) which leaves future managers with incredible burdens to maintain.

I have been trying to shift the mindset from simply 'build new and widen' to considering other options such as supportive land-use regulations, low-cost modifications to existing infrastructure, bike-ped facilities, ITS, signal timing, transit and many other less-burdensome solutions. The latter solutions are often the better approach to solve transportation problems than the former. We, as civil engineers, the drivers of most of the project and policy decisions, have been taught from the beginning that planning, design and building bigger is better. That mindset is what has taken us to where we need inconceivable amounts of funding just to maintain. A shift in transportation policy is now needed to parallel the low funding levels if we want to continue sustainably.

Thanks for your ear....

Brent A. Sweger, P.E.
Division of Planning
Kentucky Transportation Cabinet

July 30, 2007 in response to Missouri Highway Deaths Decline, in the July 27, 2007 TWR edition:

Regarding your report on a decline in Highway deaths, New Mexico too has focused resources and attention to our problem - where we have one of the highest rates of pedestrians killed nationwide.

This summer the department introduced the "100 Days and Nights of Summer." It reflects the summer months are most deadly with traffic deaths claiming 173 deaths with 69 occurring during the summer months of June, July and August. The department's goal to reduce this number by 10% by having a concentration of DWI checkpoints, seatbelts enforcement and focus on moving violations that produces 50 less deaths, and this program will be in place through media outlets until September 9.

You can access more specific information at: http://nmshtd.state.nm.us/upload/images/Que_Pasa/quepasa27.pdf

Thanks,
Nick Mandel
Quality Director
New Mexico DOT

May 22, 2007, in response to BRT Competes for a Spot in Mass Transit, in the May 18, 2007 TWR edition:

Hi Tom -

In response to your comments on the BRT article, you may want to reconsider your assertion that BRT must have a dedicated ROW for the most efficient service.

In Denver, we opened the North I-25 Express Lanes in June 2006, and the buses that use the facility are something like 99.8% on-time. (In March 2006, 6,115 buses were on time, 12 were late.) The fraction of the percent that were delayed were generally within a minute or two of their scheduled arrival time. I would argue that those numbers are every bit as good as for any dedicated bus lane anywhere. More information on that project is available at this link: http://www.dot.state.co.us/CTE/ExpressLanes/index.cfm

I think you will find that the combination of BRT/HOT lanes will be the predominant mode of transit development in the future due to the economics. A HOT lane is NOT dedicated ROW, but provides essentially the same operating conditions -- eg: congestion-free transit operations.

I agree with your point that BRT only works in certain situations (there is no magical solution for transit) -- but I would also note that the same statement is true for LRT. From a technical perspective, BRT applications will be economically viable in a much broader set of circumstances than those needed for LRT, especially in combination with HOT lanes.

I appreciate your report and your perspectives.

Best Regards,

Stephen R. Mueller, P.E.
Pavement and Materials Engineer
Federal Highway Administration Resource Center