Before launching into criticism of the funding proposals in the GOP transportation package, which I regard as an unmitigated disaster, let me say something positive. The compromise contains some very promising ideas for reforming land use, aligning transportation and land use and overhauling the Virginia Department of Transportation. It represents only a start, but the proposals, if enacted, would move Virginia in the right direction.
Some of the highlights:
- Establish performance measures for congestion and safety. Currently, the state approves road construction projects for a wide variety of reasons, including “economic development,” a vague term subject to manipulation by regional and development interests. This bill would require VDOT and the Commonwealth Transportation Board to set goals for safety and traffic mitigation and to consider them when funding projects. The impact, presumably, would be to prioritize projects that addressed congestion as opposed to those that open up new land for development.
- VDOT outsourcing. Require VDOT to outsource or privatize functions that can be provided less expensively or more effectively by the private sector. Good idea. My only question: Why stop with VDOT?
- Reclassify roads. VDOT would take a fresh look at state roads to classify them as primary, secondary or urban. The reclassification matters. First, because it affects which roads qualify for which pots of money. Second, because it’s a precondition to transferring responsibility for secondary roads to local governments.
- Electronic tolls. Convert all tolls in Virginia to electronic payment systems. The technology works — why not use it?
- Local subdivision roads. The state would stop admitting local subdivision roads into the state system. Either local governments or homeowners associations would have to maintain them. This is necessary because local governments approve subdivision roads without considering the cost of maintaining them or their impact on traffic patterns. Local officials would make different decisions if they knew they couldn’t pass on the cost to VDOT.
- Urban Development Areas. Require local governments to designate areas where they’re prepared to provide public services. Developers still could build outside these areas, but local governments no longer would be obligated to extend roads and public services to them at public expense. From a high-altitude perspective, I think this is a good idea. But the devil is in the details. Let’s see how the debate goes.
- Urban Transportation Service Districts. These would be developed areas where local governments would take over responsibility for building and maintaining roads. Another idea that sounds good in theory — but let’s see the details. My one concern is a provision that would allow local governments to charge impact fees on development outside the districts. I’d like to get a better idea of the thinking behind that provision.
While this package addresses the problems of fast-growth counties, it is incomplete. It does nothing to stimulate re-development and revitalization of Virginia’s cities or its older, urbanized counties. It does nothing to create communities with a balance of jobs, housing, stores, services and amenities. It does nothing to address the beggar-thy-neighbor competition between counties for commercial tax base or the hostility to permitting affordable, accessible housing, which isn’t perceived as “paying its own way.” Even if this package passes, an iffy proposition at best, there still would be lots of work to do.