Road EcologyProposed $545 Billion Blueprint for Transportation Spending - 10/08 |
Route 2 "Transportation Improvement" Project BEAT is getting a copy of the SEIR to review. We want to be sure that MassHighway is following the Massachusetts River and Stream Crossing Standards (pdf), and if there are areas of high Conservation Assessment and Prioritization System (CAPS) status in uplands, that dry wildlife passages are included as well. For the Route 2 project in Concord, MA wildife passages were included and have been well documented to be wroking very well. Route 2 Transportation Improvement Project - Orange, Athol and Phillipston - 1/7/09 Submitted January 7, 2009 For copies: John Yaney (617) 723-8882 |
Proposed $545 Billion Blueprint for Transportation Spending - 10/08The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) has adopted a proposal for the 2009 surface transportation policy calling for $545 billion in spending over six years. Keep in mind that SAFETEA-LU, the last such funding enacted in 2005, was around $286 billion. AASHTO ‘s board of directors has representatives from all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The proposal calls for no more than 5 percent of the total funding available for member earmarks – a response to the famous “bridge to nowhere” Alaskan earmark in 2005. The proposal focuses on six main areas: preservation of the current transportation system, interstate commerce and freight movement, safety, mobility enhancements such as congestion reduction, system operations, and environmental protection. Much of this sounds like what Massachusetts has been trying to do with the “Fix It First” policy. We still do not know what money will be available for ecosystem/wildlife mitigation. With our storms getting "flashier" (short, but intense storms), we need money to replace culverts and bridges that do not meet current River and Stream Crossing guidelines (pdf). In an Oct. 24 release, AASHTO said increased federal funding would be coupled with national performance standards established to achieve the national goals. States would self-define targets that would deliver accountability for the investment of federal funds, similar to the way counties self-define projects in MA. AASHTO’s goals include:
In addition, AASHTO reform recommendations call for:
Funding The recommendations include funding levels of $375 billion for highways, about 69 percent of the $545 billion total. The rest is divvied up as $93 billion for transit, $42 billion for freight, and $35 billion for intercity passenger rail. Highway spending would increase over the six years from the current $43 billion annually to $75 billion, and transit spending would climb from $10.5 billion to $18.5 billion. The major spending increases are due to soaring construction costs that have doubled in the past five years. Reducing project delivery time could provide substantial savings. Providing incentives for faster delivery is one way the group suggests for speeding delivery times. BEAT would suggest having contracts that specify heavy penalties for exceeding delivery times as another. Funding Options Suggested The fuel tax is only one way to sustain the program. AASHTO will put several options before Congress, including: tax credit bonds, using 5 percent of customs fees for infrastructure improvements, a per-container freight fee, and a fee based on vehicle miles driven as a more accurate representation of driving than the current gas tax. This last one, BEAT believes may be a disincentive to driving more fuel efficient vehicles. AASHTO also suggested that should some form of a carbon tax come before Congress next year, using perhaps 30 percent of that money for transportation would be logical, in that transportation accounts for 30 percent of carbon emissions. The policy positions approved by the AASHTO Board of Directors are available online (pdf). |
Landmark Court Decision Rules MassHighway Water Pollution Violates Federal LawVictory for Environmentalists Will Lead to Clean Up of Stormwater Pollution Statewide - 5/08In a precedent-setting decision, a federal court judge has ruled from the bench that the Massachusetts Highway Department violated federal clean water laws by failing to develop an adequate stormwater cleanup plan for its 2,500 miles of urban roads and bridges. The decision, by Judge William G. Young, stems from a lawsuit filed by environmentalists charging MassHighway was not properly implementing a provision of the federal Clean Water Act requiring them to control and clean up polluted water that flows off roadways into neighboring lakes and streams. Rivers, streams and lakes throughout Massachusetts are suffering serious water quality problems due to untreated stormwater from MassHighway’s roads and bridges. The court’s ruling is a landmark victory for every resident concerned about the impact this major source of water pollution has on their rivers, lakes and streams,” said Chris Kilian , Director of the Clean Water and Healthy Forests Program at the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF), a New England environmental group whose legal victories paved the way for the clean up of Boston Harbor and protection of Georges Bank, a critical ocean fishing ground. "MassHighway has long ignored their legal responsibility to protect the Commonweath’s water resources for the health of all residents. The Court has asked them to live up to that responsibility,” said CLF Staff Attorney Cynthia Liebman who helped argue the case in Court. After a six day trial, Judge Young ordered MassHighway to commit to a two-year schedule for adopting a new, revised stormwater pollution cleanup plan. The Judge also said the agency must quickly move to address pollution hot spots in Lancaster and the Charles River watershed. Polluted stormwater is a significant factor in the ongoing failure of Massachusetts' rivers and lakes to achieve basic water quality standards. Rain water that falls during storms flows off roads picking up pollutants along the way - including oil and grease, toxic metals (such as zinc, nickel, and lead), salt and other de-icing chemicals. Unless steps are taken to control and treat the polluted stormwater, it flows directly from roads into rivers, streams and lakes, affecting the health of the entire ecosystem. BACKGROUND ON LAWSUIT: In 2006, the CLF, the Charles River Watershed Association (CRWA), and the Leominster Land Trust (LLT) filed the federal lawsuit to improve water quality in the state’s water bodies after the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ruled for a second time in as many years that the MassHighway’s stormwater cleanup plan was deficient and refused to issue them a permit under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. In 2007, while the case was being prepared for trial, MassHighway re-submitted its plan and EPA gave it tentative approval. |