Cover Image

Not for Sale

View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 66

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 65
68 Road Pricing: Public Perceptions and Program Development publicprivate partnerships for toll roads in Dallas and legislation authorizing tolling in Los Angeles, Minneapolis, Portland, and Seattle. State DOT support, advocacy, and involvement of key actors and high-level staff are important for moving RP projects forward. In the case of the San Francisco Bay Area toll network, the state DOT was one of the key actors agreeing to and developing the network; in Dallas, the former chair of the Texas DOT was a key advocate for supportive legislation; in Los Angeles, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Director was essential in moving forward the RP plans and analysis; in the D.C. metropolitan area, three DOTs on the Transportation Planning Board bring project proposals for consideration, supported by sophisticated analysis; in the Twin Cities, Minnesota DOT (MnDOT) planning and policy groups nurtured the idea and brought the gov- ernor on board. In New York City, the New York State DOT (NYSDOT) helped in conducting analysis of regional impacts of RP. The involvement of the NYSDOT and the Metropolitan Trans- portation Authority (MTA) was important to the New York governor's support of the New York City congestion pricing proposal. Technical support: State DOTs typically provide support with technical analysis and studies as seen in almost all interview sites. In addition, state DOTs provide guidance on public outreach and can encourage involvement of the MPOs and others as was the case in the D.C. metropolitan area (Maryland DOT), Minneapolis, Portland, and Seattle. Funding support: The state may provide funds to match the federal government's pilot program grants, as in the case of Portland, or other funding sources to support RP. In Minnesota, the legis- lature authorized use of state funds to accelerate HOT lane conversions. Role in implementation: The state role in implementation varies by type of RP policy--in New York City where most roads are owned by the city, the state DOT had no key role. However, City officials sought support from state tolling agencies (MTA and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey) for use of certain tolling facilities and operations for the proposed congestion pricing program. In Portland, for the mileage-fee pilot program, ODOT was the key implementing agency. States are typically not involved or minimally involved in parking pricing, e.g., in the case of New York City, Los Angeles, and San Francisco, city agencies have been taking the lead. 4.5 Role of Federal Government in Planning for RP This section discusses the ways in which the federal government has played a role in support- ing RP programs and proposals. Support through funding and pilot programs: The federal government has been providing important funding for infrastructure and pilot support through the Value Pricing Pilot Program, Urban Partnership Agreements, and similar grants. This was a prime impetus to the RP programs in almost all interview sites. Experiences in Los Angeles, New York City, Minneapolis, Portland, and the D.C. region show that the role of federally supported pilot and demonstration programs is important in initiating technical studies, raising awareness, bringing RP into the public debate, catalyzing exploration of RP by states and local governments, and fostering collaboration among agencies. Federal encour- agement of a "learning process" has been important in advancing RP. Overall, federal RP pilot programs and project support, technical assistance via project evaluations and RP reviews, and involvement of key actors and advocacy is evident in RP development. Federal planning guidance: Planning guidance from the federal government was not believed to have much influence on RP planning, as experience in San Francisco and Dallas shows; however federal research studies, support for technical analysis, conferences, and best practice documents are valuable in RP planning; e.g., in Los Angeles, a federally supported symposium helped gain