Segment 2 Of 5 Previous Hearing Segment(1) Next Hearing Segment(3)
SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 69 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
MEMBER POLICY INITIATIVES AND REQUESTS FOR HIGHWAY AND TRANSIT IN THE ISTEA REAUTHORIZATION
TUESDAY, MARCH 4, 1997
U.S. House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Surface Transportation,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, D.C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 9:37 a.m. in room 2167, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Thomas E. Petri (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. PETRI. The subcommittee will come to order.
We're meeting today to receive testimony from Members of Congress on policy initiatives on transportation projects that they have requested to be included in the ISTEA reauthorization, and we will continue these hearings next week on the 13th
In many cases, Members will be accompanied by local officials who also support the request. And while it's still uncertain whether or how projects will be handled in the reauthorization bill, this hearing will give us an opportunity to thoroughly review the merits of these requests.
Page 70 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Subcommittee hearings will continue on Thursday and also next week.
I think the senior minority member, Congressman Rahall, may have an opening statement, and it will be made a part of the record. The statements from the Chairman of the Full Committee, Bud Shuster, and Congressman Oberstar, the Ranking Minority Member of the Full Committee will be included as well.
I'd like to welcome our colleague, The Honorable Paul McHale, who is accompanied by Ms. Jane Baker, Lehigh County executive. They will be joined shortly by Mayor William Heydt, also accompanied by Mr. Kurt Zwikl, president of the Allentown Development Corporation.
As you know, we encourage people to try to restrict their testimony to roughly 5 minutes, and full statements will be made a part of the record.
Would you like to proceed, Paul?
TESTIMONY OF HON. PAUL MCHALE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM PENNSYLVANIA, ACCOMPANIED BY JANE S. BAKER, LEHIGH COUNTY EXECUTIVE, HON. WILLIAM HEYDT, MAYOR, ALLENTOWN, PA, AND KURT D. ZWIKL, PRESIDENT, ALLENTOWN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Mr. MCHALE. Mr. Chairman, good morning. Thank you and the members of the subcommittee for this opportunity to make a presentation on those projects that we believe to be the most important transportation priorities affecting the Lehigh Valley of Pennsylvania.
Page 71 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
I do have a formal statement. I'll submit that for the record. But, in the interest of time and to afford the maximum opportunity for our other witnesses to address the specifics of the projects, I'll make an informal opening statement that will be very brief.
The three transportation projects we present for your consideration today address a full range of requested ISTEA funding proposals which, when considered as a group, reflect the most important past, present, and future economic and transportation development needs of Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley.
The future is the Route 222 Bypass, which would relieve intolerable congestion on a major transportation artery now serving western Lehigh County, an area experiencing phenomenal economic growth.
In a few moments our Lehigh County executive, Jane Baker, will discuss the details of this funding proposal.
The present is the American Parkway Bridge, which would complete the long-planned transportation corridor into the heart of Center City Allentown, enabling high-speed access to one of Pennsylvania's oldest and largest urban areas. It is an essential element in the ongoing effort to revitalize the economic life of an inner city now facing the double challenge of a declining tax base and an increased demand for social services.
The mayor of Allentown, who is on his way here, William Heydt, will discuss the details of this project.
Page 72 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Finally, the past is the Delaware and Lehigh Heritage Canal Corridor, which would target the preservation of a historic 19th century canal located adjacent to the Lehigh river and the related reclamation of a brownfield site along the opposite riverbank in downtown Allentown, thereby creating a real opportunity for the commercial rebirth of the city.
Mr. Chairman, again we appreciate the opportunity to appear and to address the Route 222 Bypass.
It is my pleasure to introduce Lehigh County executive, Jane Baker.
Ms. BAKER. Good morning. Thank you, Congressman McHale.
Mr. Chairman and distinguished Members, my thanks to you for this important opportunity.
My chief concern for the economic future of my community is the U.S. 222 Bypass. I hope to convince you that this project is essential for safety, congestion management, orderly growth, and prosperity. As you share my conviction, you will make Route 222 a cornerstone of the reauthorization of ISTEA.
This project involves the construction of a nearly five-mile, four-lane, limited access bypass of existing Route 222 just west of Allentown. It also involves a four-mile limited access relocation and widening of Route 100.
Page 73 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
The main objective is to relieve congestion along a road bounded by historic structures in an area that has become the principal industrial growth corridor in our region.
Federal dollars are needed to construct the bypass, which is directly linked to Interstate 78 on the eastern and western ends.
Route 222 is estimated to cost $93 million, and this morning I am asking the subcommittee to support an allocation of $74 million, approximately 80 percent of the cost of the project. Nearly $1 million has been spent or committed locally by my county, two townships, fourteen local businesses, including AT&T, Kraft Food, and Air Products and Chemicals.
We are poised to receive a record of decision by the Federal Highway Administration in August of 1998. The cooperation we have received from the various State and Federal agencies has been excellent.
With ISTEA funding on line, we can proceed to final design in 1998, right-of-way acquisition in 1999, and construction in 2001.
This is widely acknowledged as a critical project for our region. It was the focal point of my state of the county address in 1994, and it has been identified as a priority by the three mayors of Allentown, Bethlehem, and Easton, the two county executives, myself and the executive of Northampton County. We have all been working on this project for over 15 years.
Page 74 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Route 222 is critical to the Lehigh Valley, but beyond our region the corridor ties directly to I-78, the principal transportation link between south-central Pennsylvania and the New York and New Jersey metropolitan areas.
Route 222 is a needed improvement for Pennsylvania, generally regarded by the trucking industry as having the worst roads in the United States.
The large number of State roads across a broad geography endures a brutal freeze/thaw cycle, and Pennsylvania's population is the second-oldest population in the United States. For our economy, for jobs, for the future of our young people and the elderly they support, our infrastructure must be competitive.
For the past 30 years, the western portion of the Lehigh Valley has been undergoing a dramatic change from an agricultural community to an industrial corridor with residential growth. This evolution has been anticipated and included in regional planning. Major investments have been made in public water, sewer, and parks. It is all there except for the Route 222 Bypass.
This highway project is needed to complete our picture. With the improvements in place, all intersections and the main line will operate at service level ''C.'' Traffic safety will be vastly improved. The project will decrease travel time, fuel consumption, and commuter delays, while improving our air quality.
Aside from the safety and congestion benefits, the Route 222 Bypass will enhance the economic base of the Lehigh Valley, a region that is transitioning from manufacturing to tourism, service, and high-tech jobs. Major employers already in the region include Coca-Cola, Strohs Brewery, Perrier, Kellogg's, and Nestle's.
Page 75 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
If you build it, they will come. They are already here, and more are coming.
The reauthorization of ISTEA comes at a good time for the Lehigh Valley and Route 222. We are winding down the environmental studies and are poised to launch into final design, right-of-way, and construction. We have done all that we are expected to do. It's time for Congress to make an investment in our future.
Time is growing short. Today, as we speak, one of the host municipalities is struggling with how to cope with the development that isn't waiting for the project. Will they shut the door for further growth, or will Federal money provide the ray of hope for which we've all been waiting? You hold the answer.
Thank you very much.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you. I see the mayor has joined us.
Mr. MCHALE. Mr. Chairman, we're delighted that Mayor Heydt has just joined us.
We have a contrast in the next couple of moments between the description provided by County Executive Jane Baker covering western Lehigh County, an area of phenomenal economic development, where the main artery now going into that area is hopelessly inadequate to carry the necessary transportation. That's the future of economic development in the District that I represent.
Page 76 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
The mayor of Allentown, Bill Heydt, is here to talk about the present, and that is Center City Allentown and the ability of those who seek to visit and shop in Center City Allentown to gain high-speed, rapid access to a major urban core in Pennsylvania.
Mayor Heydt is the first-term mayor of Allentown, and he'll describe the extreme importance the construction of a new bridge across the Lehigh, thereby enabling access to downtown Allentown.
Mayor Heydt?
Mr. HEYDT. Thank you, Congressman.
Back in 1962 we started the development of a spur route into Center City Allentown, which was tabled. Over the next years, Allentown had accumulated parts of the area that were designated for the spur route and we've completed over $5 million of expressway that ends at the Lehigh River.
The Lehigh River is a very large river, and it would, therefore, take a bridge to go across there.
On the other side of the bridge we have accumulated all the land and we own all the right-of-way for the American Parkway Expressway. This will develop a road that goes directly from 22, which is the main highway north of the city, right into Center City.
Page 77 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
The development of this is extremely important for several reasons. One is we are in the process of trying to put together a major office building downtown to connect a manufacturing plant which is on one side of the river and their office downtown, which is on the other side of the river.
The second part is there are two major highways that flow north of the city that are going to be a problem. One is Route 22, which is going to fail in about 10 years, and the other one is Tilghman Street. The first-rated problem area is 22, and Tilghman Street is the second-rated problem area. This bridge would alleviate all of those.
We are in the process of completing a Sumner Avenue Expressway, which will also take traffic around this congested area of Route 22.
We are in the process of developing Lehigh Landing, which is a major tourist attraction, to the east of this route, this American Parkway, which you'll hear more about in a moment, and, of course, the Center City, which is to the west of the American Parkway.
This is extremely vital. We have 12,000 people a day that travel on this road that goes nowhere that ends at the bridge. It's something that we've done without Federal funding up to this point. We have accumulated, as I said, all the right-of-way, and we have completed the intermodal transportation at the exit of 22 and American Parkway, which will give us the opportunity to have bus transportation, which is vital to our connection to New York and to Philadelphia.
We've been working on this, as I said, since 1962, and we are at a crossroads that we can't handle as a city. This is the first time that we are going to the Federal Government for funds, and with the help of your committee we can complete this project which is so important to give Allentown a direct access to major transportation north and south of the city of Allentown.
Page 78 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
We thank you for your time and your consideration.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. MCHALE. Mr. Chairman, if the future is the Route 222 Bypass providing adequate transportation access to an area of burgeoning economic development, and if the present is the new bridge across the Lehigh River, I would emphasize to you what the mayor said a moment ago, and that is most of this highway, the American Parkway, has been constructed. Only the remaining link, a major bridge, a new construction project to cross the Lehigh River, remains in order to complete access to an urban core desperately in need of revitalization.
Finally, if that is the present, the past is the Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor. In order to speak on that issue and its extreme importance in terms of brownfield reclamation, we have Kurt Zwikl, a former member of the Pennsylvania General Assembly and the current president of the Allentown Economic Development Corporation.
Mr. ZWIKL. Thank you, Representative McHale.
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, in 1988 Congress adopted legislation creating the Delaware and Lehigh Canal National Heritage Corridor along the Delaware Canal and Lehigh Navigation between Wilkes-Barre and Bristol borough near Philadelphia.
Congress also funded a management action plan for preserving and developing the corridor's natural, cultural, historical, and recreational resources. These actions have set in motion what some officials have described as the greatest opportunity ever for regional economic development through public/private cooperation.
Page 79 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
The Delaware and Lehigh Canal was in operation longer than any other canal and tow-path system in the United States and is a national historic landmark and a national civil engineering landmark. It encompasses over 150 miles within three Congressional Districts in five eastern Pennsylvania counties.
At the center of the corridor in the Lehigh Valley are the cities of Allentown, Bethlehem, and Easton.
The Delaware and Lehigh Corridor Commission is requesting a $20 million ISTEA demonstration grant to be matched with a $5 million local share for monies allocated to the Pennsylvania Bureau of State Parks through the State capital budget.
The total $25 million would fund seven projects along the corridor including the Lehigh Landing America on Wheels Transportation Museum with $3 million in Allentown.
Congressman McHale has requested that I address this particular project.
Lehigh Landing, originally known as Lehigh Pier, has many strengths and holds great promise for the future. Today, through the Allentown Economic Development Corporation, the city owns two-thirds of the Lehigh Landing site, an area dominated by vacant older industrial buildings along the Lehigh Riverfront.
The key elements of Lehigh Landing's redevelopment include a riverfront promenade, a boat pier, community recreational facilities, and the reuse of several industrial structures.
Page 80 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
The America on Wheels Transportation Museum, a 501(c)(3) organization, will be housed in one of these structures, the historically and architecturally significant former Lehigh Valley Transit Company generating facility.
This building once generated power to run the region's early 20th century trolley system. It is for this historical transportation building that we plan to use ISTEA funding to develop the museum.
The America on Wheels world-class museum will interpret the profound impact of transportation on the industrial and social life of the Lehigh Valley and the Nation, from fledgling animal-powered conveyances to the technology of futuristic vehicles. It will showcase the area's special relationship with the age of the auto and other over-the-road means of transportation.
Allentown precedents for the museum include the Nadig Brothers Carriage Company, developers of one of the first gasoline-powered automobiles in America, and the Mack Brothers Truck Company. Both the Nadig and Mack Companies had their original facilities not far from the Lehigh in Allentown.
Today, Mack Trucks, whose corporate headquarters is located in Allentown, is one of the Nation's leading truck manufacturers. Additionally, Allentown automotive legend, Lee Iacocca, was born and raised in Allentown. The museum will pay tribute to each of these names in American transportation history.
Page 81 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mack Trucks has announced that it will donate its corporate antique truck museum and archives to America on Wheels. The company collection includes 14 rare vehicles, records detailing designs for virtually every Mack vehicle ever produced, and more than 100,000 photos and documents of Mack products and events.
Numerous private automobile collectors also stand ready to assist the museum when it is ready for occupancy, including a donation of the original Nadig car built in the early 1890s.
The following additional funding sources will complement the ISTEA demonstration grant: $4 million coming from the city of Allentown's Federal CDBG entitlement for the city's Lehigh Landing project as a commitment to repay a 108 HUD loan that has been made available to the Economic Development Corporation for site and remediation work; $1.4 million from the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development; $300,000 from Pennsylvania Heritage Parks; and $500,000 from the American Truck Foundation, who will be an operating partner in this museum.
Extensive preliminary planning has occurred and several public and private financial commitments have been secured. There is environmental remediation funded and under contract, as well as demolition and site preservation scheduled
Initial planning for our riverwalk is also underway.
Assuming that final engineering can be completed this year, the project should be completed by the year 2001 to 2002.
Page 82 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
On behalf of the Corridor Commission and the Economic Development Corporation, I thank you for permitting me to testify this morning.
Mr. MCHALE. Mr. Chairman, we've now brought three projects before you for review. We ask only that they be considered on their merits.
The Route 222 Bypass would provide access to a burgeoning area of economic development. The bridge across the Lehigh would provide access to an urban core. The Delaware and Lehigh Heritage Canal Corridor, which Mr. Zwikl just addressed, is one of the most significant brownfield reclamation projects in eastern Pennsylvania.
This is a completely nonpartisan effort. I'm a democrat. County Executive Jane Baker and Mayor Heydt are both republicans. We are united in our transportation policy, and on the merit of that policy, alone, we respectfully ask for your consideration.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you very much. Thank you all for your submissions.
Are there questions of this panel? Mr. Rahall?
Mr. RAHALL. No. I have no specific questions, Mr. Chairman. I'd just welcome our colleague, Mr. McHale, who has done a very effective job of discussing these projects with me and does a very good job of representing your area.
Page 83 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Having had former business interests in the Allentown area, my father having owned WKAP radio station at one point in the past, I appreciate very much the interest in these projects and know the history of the region and your desire to see these improvements.
Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Quinn?
Mr. QUINN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I missed part of the testimony, but I want to say welcome and thanks to my good friend, Paul McHale.
You know, Paul, that you and I are cosponsors of a number of bills. When you talk about that bipartisan cooperation, it's key for me and I know it is for you. And I also take the opportunity not only to thank you and to welcome you, but to get a plug in for our brownfields bill that you and I have together.
Mr. MCHALE. Mr. Quinn, you're not looking for cosponsors, are you?
Mr. QUINN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you. Again, thank you very much for your submission.
Page 84 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
We'll be working on your requests and a number of others from our colleagues. I think you understand, certainly Mr. Mayor, with the county, as well, the number of requests of merit slightly exceed the resources available. But we're going to do our best to try to help meritorious projects move forward.
Thank you, again.
Mr. MCHALE. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
[The prepared statements of Mr. McHale, Ms. Baker, Mr. Heydt, and Mr. Zwikl follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. The next panel is led by our colleague, The Honorable Martin Sabo, and he is accompanied by Mr. Peter McLaughlin, who is the Hennepin County Commissioner and chairman of the Twin Cities Metropolitan LRT Joint Powers Board.
I beg your indulgence. I am going out to meet a number of our county officials who are rallying in support of this legislation on the Capitol steps as we have this hearing, and our colleague, Mr. Pickering, will be presiding.
TESTIMONY OF HON. MARTIN SABO, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM MINNESOTA, ACCOMPANIED BY PETER MCLAUGHLIN, HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONER, CHAIRMAN, TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN LRT JOINT POWERS BOARD, PAUL MCCARRON, ANOKA COUNTY COMMISSIONER, AND TONY BENNETT, RAMSEY COUNTY COMMISSIONER
Page 85 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. SABO. I thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Rahall.
Mr. Pickering, can I call you ''Mr. Chairman'' for the first time?
Mr. PICKERING [assuming Chair]. Yes.
Mr. SABO. Okay. Members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.
I'm here to express my strong personal support for the testimony you are about to hear from Mr. McLaughlin. Let me introduce the panel that's with me.
Mr. McLaughlin is the Hennepin County Commissioner and chair of the Intercounty LRT Committee. He will be presenting testimony. With him is—I might say all three county commissioners are former State legislators.
To my left is Paul McCarron, who represents Anoka County. To my far right is County Commissioner Tony Bennett from Ramsey County, who is also a former U.S. Marshal. Mr. McLaughlin is from Hennepin County. His testimony today and the project he presents is also supported by Congressmen Ramstad, Luther, Vento. It is also supported by our regional metropolitan planning agency, the Metropolitan Airports Commission, and our State Department of Transportation.
We have quarreled for a long time in our area on how to approach transit. Just recently we've reached some agreements. Mr. McLaughlin has been key to reaching that. It is my pleasure to introduce him to this subcommittee.
Page 86 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Mr. Chairman, thank you, and Members. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today as the Chair of the seven-county Metropolitan Joint LRT Joint Powers Board.
I want to offer my thanks to my Congressman, Congressman Sabo, for his support over many years on infrastructure investment that has helped our region to prosper.
I'm offering my testimony here for the record and I'd be happy to answer any questions. I'll summarize the testimony, Mr. Chairman.
We come here today, as Congressman Sabo said, united. That's why we've got all three of the county commissioners here and present. We have letters from the mayors of Minneapolis and St. Paul and from the Metropolitan Council and the Department of Transportation.
We are the 15th largest region in the country, with 2.7 million people. We have more than half of the population of the State of Minnesota represented in our seven-county metropolitan area. This is a proposal from all seven counties with the support, as I indicated, of the metropolitan planning organization, which is the Metropolitan Council.
We have struggled long and hard to come to a united front on our transportation strategy for the region. We have done that and we come here today in conjunction with the Metropolitan Council, which has, as its new growth management options plan for the year 2020, incorporated transitways, which is what we're going to be talking about here today, Mr. Chairman, as a central element of that. We have worked that through and we are coming together today.
Page 87 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. Chairman, that for the Twin Cities metropolitan area, we're asking for authorization from the Congress for help in allowing us to make a change in the mix in the way we provide transportation services to support our economy. It is important that we do that if we are going to succeed.
The project connects all of the key economic centers in the Twin Cities metropolitan area: downtown Minneapolis, with 140,000 jobs and anywhere from 30 to 70,000 new jobs by the year 2010, depending on whose estimates you use; the metropolitan airport, home of Northwest Airlines—where the decision has been made to keep the airport at its current location. They are going to be spending over $1.2 billion in renovations in the next few years, including $200 million on parking ramps. This proposal would provide surface transportation service to that airport—the Mall of America, the third-largest tourist destination in North America; downtown St. Paul, with 68,000 jobs; the State Capitol, in an area that's making major reinvestment in its riverfront; the University of Minnesota—40,000 students, 18,000 jobs, and, of course, number two in men's basketball rankings this year, Mr. Chairman; and, finally, North Town Shopping Center, which is at the northern part of the region. I would refer you to the map in the packet. Northtown is a major shopping center. It now has a transit hub in place, and this would allow for a connection of the northern shopping center, the southern shopping center, downtown Minneapolis in the middle, the airport, and then off to St. Paul, as well.
So we are connecting central city and suburb, the major points within our community. This would give access to our convention center, to the Humphrey baseball stadium, and other major generators of traffic.
Page 88 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
We think that this is essential to the continuing economic prosperity of the Twin Cities region and to the State of Minnesota, and that's why we're here to ask for your authorization and support, Mr. Chairman.
The essence of our request, Mr. Chairman, is a $200 million authorization. That authorization would cover three major priorities within our region.
The first priority is the Hiawatha Transitway. Construction of the highway is now underway. The environmental impact statement is complete. It connects downtown Minneapolis with the airport and the Mall of America.
Hiawatha right-of-way is set aside. It is owned by the State of Minnesota and by the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority.
We are proposing to move forward on the construction of a transitway, and we are hoping to put together the local funding to move from it being a busway to being light rail transit, and we're hoping to use a combination of funds from the airport redevelopment, from development rights in and around the stops, including the Mall of America, which would be a major stop, and other development along the way.
We have the local funding available for the initial stages of that and we are now in the process of putting together the necessary funding to make the transition to light rail transit, which we want to do within this six-year authorization window.
The Riverview Corridor to St. Paul goes along trunk Highway Number Five. We are proposing authorization for a major investment study along that corridor. We are looking at a variety of types of transportation service, minor bus service, exclusive busway, commuter rail, and ultimately light rail transit.
Page 89 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
This is, again, the connection to downtown St. Paul, the second part of our Twin Cities region, and is a process where there's a major redevelopment going on, major development and construction along the riverview corridor right now, and this would be hand-in-hand with that.
Finally, the North Star Corridor—again, the environmental impact statement has been complete. We are proposing authorization for a major investment study to allow that project to move forward so that we can link the northern part of the region with access to the northwest, central part, central city, the old central city, airport, and then off to St. Paul, as well.
Mr. Chairman, we are here asking for the support of this committee for the authorization. We think that this can help us move our region forward into the 21st century and support our metropolitan vision for the future.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you. Do we have any questions? Mr. Pease?
Mr. PEASE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. McLaughlin, you were doing fine until you mentioned the Gophers. Indiana and Purdue Universities are in my District.
Page 90 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
I have one question. You mentioned the amount of money you're looking for from the Federal Government and you mentioned State and local funding but you didn't tell us how much has been committed either already or will be committed from State and local funds.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Mr. Pease, we have available—we are seeking appropriation of $45 million in the first year in conjunction with this authorization request. We have all the local match necessary for that. And we are now working with the Airports Commission. They are doing a study of what is necessary for surface transportation improvements that could incorporate this transitway.
As I said, they are about to spend $1.2 billion, and we are in negotiations with them to see what share of that could be used to contribute to this.
We are in discussions with the Mall of America to see what kind of development rights—there is taxing from financing district there, for example, that is generating some revenue.
So we are putting that together. We have land and right-of-way that we have already made available, and we have some money sitting in our rail authority account already, in excess of $30 million already in place.
So we have a number of pieces that we are trying to put together, but the notion of the transition to LRT from just a busway is something that we've finally reached a consensus on just in the past few months here, and so this is what we're trying to put together.
Page 91 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. PEASE. I appreciate that, and I appreciate the amount of money that you say is available. Will you at some point tell us specifically how much you're willing to commit of that that's available?
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Mr. Chairman and Mr. Pease, we have spent, among the seven counties in the metropolitan area, $60 million already, just for the record, in acquisition of right-of-way for these corridors and a number of others, so we have been very aggressive in making sure that that resource, those linear corridors, old railway lines, aren't lost. And so we have shown the ability and the political will to make those purchases.
We are prepared to put these resources—invest them in this project.
We're trying to put together the whole package. I can't make a commitment for the Airports Commission, which is separate and independent.
We are working, though, with the support—again, this is the first time we've had this—State Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Council, and all seven counties in the area.
In the business community we have active support from the downtown St. Paul and Minneapolis business communities.
So I can't give you a number today. We're trying to put that package together for the out years, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Pease.
Page 92 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. PEASE. Thank you.
Mr. PICKERING. I don't believe there are any other questions. I want to thank the panel and Congressman for coming and for your presentation. The committee will give your project full consideration. Again, we appreciate your time.
Mr. SABO. Thank you.
Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Thank you.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Sabo follows:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PICKERING. I'd like to recognize Congressman DeFazio to introduce the next panel.
Mr. DEFAZIO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, what I would like to do is introduce three of our distinguished colleagues. I think the fact that three members of the Oregon delegation made time out of their busy schedules to accompany their mutual and shared constituents points out the commitment of the Oregon delegation to this project.
Page 93 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
As the Chair knows, the committee has visited Portland, experienced existing light rail, which has been a tremendous success, and now we're nearing completion of the Westside—you'll hear more about that today, particularly from Representative Furse, who has been a great advocate of that—and also about the potential for completing the system with the South/North route, and we'll hear in particular about that from Representative Hooley and Representative Blumenauer, whose Districts are particularly impacted by that.
So with that I'd ask my colleagues to come to the table, and then they can finish the introductions with the large multitude that has come here from Oregon today. I only wish that we had reinstated the airline ticket tax a little sooner, given the size of this group.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Laughter.]
TESTIMONY OF HON. ELIZABETH FURSE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM OREGON; HON. EARL BLUMENAUER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM OREGON; HON. DARLENE HOOLEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM OREGON, ACCOMPANIED BY LINDA PETERS, CHAIR, WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, ED LINDQUIST, CLACKAMAS COUNTY COMMISSIONER, AND CHARLIE HALES, PORTLAND CITY COMMISSIONER
Ms. FURSE. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. And thank you, Mr. DeFazio, for that very nice introduction. It's really wonderful to have four members of this delegation in one room.
Page 94 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. Chairman, I'm not going to take a lot of time. I'm just going to touch on two points on the Westside light rail project.
It was authorized by this committee in 1991 and it is on time and, Mr. Chairman, it is on budget.
As I indicated in my February 25th letter to the subcommittee, I'm seeking formal authorization of additional section three new start authority and technical language to complete the Westside-Hillsboro light rail project.
According to the project's current FFGA, $630 million in section three new start authority is needed to complete the Westside-Hillsboro project. Under current law, $555 million is authorized for the Westside-Hillsboro light rail project. Of this amount, approximately $530 million has been appropriated through fiscal year 1995.
I am seeking formal authorization of the remaining $74,056,336 in section three new start funding to complete the project.
In addition, if necessary I will also ask the subcommittee to make a technical change in section 3035(b) of ISTEA to add the word ''construction'' to the Hillsboro extension project.
Mr. Chairman, I want to stress that this is a locally-supported project, and for that reason I would like to turn over the completion of my testimony on Westside light rail to the Chair of the Washington County Commission, Linda Peters.
Page 95 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Ms. PETERS. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity to speak to you this morning.
I want to reiterate what Congresswoman Furse has said about our request of you today. It is that you help us to complete the project to Hillsboro on time for opening in September of 1998 by the inclusion of the $74 million contingency in the ISTEA reauthorization.
I'm not sure how to share this with you, but I have brought along an aerial photograph with labels that shows exactly how the light rail line and its stations, which are in the lower—they kind of make an arc here at the lower part of this photograph—how it fits into our overall economic development plan for the Hillsboro part of our region.
I think you probably know that we really are doing smart growth in the Portland metropolitan region. We've done the land use planning and we've done the transportation planning and we've done the economic development all together, and we have developing along the station, around the stations, communities that are multiple use and that connect housing with employment.
This is a very impressive photograph in terms of the success we have had in locating employment in connection with this light rail line
It is essential that we have this additional contingency so that we can complete it on schedule, and I hope you'll all have a chance to look at this and be as impressed as the rest of us are with how well we're doing and how important it is that we continue this good partnership.
Page 96 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Thank you.
Ms. FURSE. Mr. Chairman, if I may ask unanimous consent to have the rest of the testimony introduced, thank you.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, for the record my name is Earl Blumenauer, and I represent the 3rd Congressional District in Portland, Oregon. I would like to start where my friend, Linda Peters, left off in terms of what the power of ISTEA has done to give local communities the tools to make transportation decisions more effectively in partnership with citizens and the private sector.
We have panel members that are with us to seek the extension of the light rail line from the south to the north, finishing our system. I think the project is going to be an example that the country can be proud of, not just our region, in terms of how people have come together to try to solve problems in a more productive way.
I would like to turn to two of these leaders who are leading that effort in our area, but first my colleague, Darlene Hooley, with whom we share the light rail line.
Ms. HOOLEY. Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.
I am here to support ISTEA and to support the completion of the Westside-Hillsboro project, as well as the continuation of the entire system with the South/North corridor.
Page 97 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
These projects complete the foundation of a light rail system providing fast, efficient service to the four corners of the region. These initiatives are absolutely critical to preserving our quality of life and reducing urban sprawl. We have worked very hard in our region to make sure we've reduced urban sprawl.
The other thing we've done is all of our planning has really been around—I will repeat what Linda Peters said—around the fact that we are trying to make sure that we have good urban planning, as well as good economic development planning.
So they are vital to the area. These are two projects that I would like to see our system complete.
Again, we would ask for your consideration of these projects.
We have with us today Commissioner Ed Lindquist that I served with as a county commissioner, and from the city of Portland Charlie Hales.
Mr. HALES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members. Good morning.
I'm Charlie Hales. I'm one of the members of the City Council in Portland. I'm the commissioner in charge of transportation. Prior to that I was an employee for the last eight years of the local Homebuilders Association. So for most of my career I have seen this effort in Portland aimed at both land use and transportation, seen how effective it is for business, as well as for maintaining our quality of life.
Page 98 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
You know the Portland success story. We're here to celebrate that a little bit and then talk about the next chapter. But I also am here to thank you, because our success in Portland is due very largely to the support that we've had from this subcommittee and to a successful partnership between the Federal Government and local governments in making transit an effective part of our region's liveability.
Our existing MAX line carries crush loads of commuters at peak times and is also a success on weekends. It has fostered private investment of more than five times the initial Federal investment along the line.
I want to tell you just one quick story of one of those investments.
There is a new office tower rising right across the street from a MAX stop. The president of the Liberty Northwest Insurance Company, who is building that tower, asked his employees where they would like to see the new headquarters built, and they answered, ''Right here on the light rail line.''
As a result of that question and that answer, they're building that tower, and they're building it with half the parking spaces that an office tower of that size would typically have because of the proximity to light rail.
Our region, as you have heard, is trying to link land use and transportation planning. Let me just give you one statistic that illustrates that.
Page 99 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Although we've created tens of thousands of new jobs and welcomed hundreds of thousands of new residents to the Portland area over the last 20 years, we've expanded our urban area by a little more than 2,000 acres. That 2,000 acres is all we have added to the infrastructure burden that will need to be carried by taxpayers of the Federal, State, and local governments for decades to come.
We are trying to continue our record of innovation. We're going to try to be a model in that sense, as well. We are going to be adding the first low floor accessible rail cars in North America with the opening of the Westside line.
Our voters continue to support light rail in Portland. In 1994 Portland area voters voted to tax themselves $475 million through general obligation bonds to fund the South/North extension of our system.
So we are here with strong local support, a 20-year record of consensus building among local governments, and a 20-year record of land use and transportation coordination to ask for the continuation of this partnership and for the authorization of the South/North extension as the next piece of the spine of Portland's light rail system.
Thank you very much.
Mr. LINDQUIST. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.
I'm Ed Lindquist. I'm a Clackamas County commissioner. I'm chairman of the Board of Commissioners. I serve another role as the chairman of the Transit and Rail Committee for the National Association of Counties, and also the chair of their task force on ISTEA.
Page 100 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
I just wanted to comment that it came out of that body of all the county commissioners of the United States with unanimous support for the rewrite of ISTEA. I thought I'd make that comment before I talk about the South/North.
The South/North is very important to the Portland metropolitan area. It will tie together the cultural, business, and education centers of the metropolitan area, downtown Portland and Milwaukee, the Oregon Institute of Technology, Portland State University, the Portland Convention Center, and the Rose Corridor Arena, which is the home of the Portland Trailblazers.
It's a 15-mile South/North line that completes the east-west and the north-south of the whole metropolitan area. It will provide 13 million trips per year, or 28,000 trips per day, on major freight and commuter corridors. It will save $1.6 million in reduced air quality costs per year to business.
The project will be constructed in two phases, with the first phase costing about $1 billion.
The region is asking $487.1 million in section three funds from ISTEA. Local funds we have already matched $475 million from the general obligation bond you've heard about, $55 million of STP funds, and $10 million of local taxing commitment financing from my own county.
The region is also looking at an airport extension to be built with local funds only. The funding plan for the South/North anticipates Federal recognition of this local effort in the overall project.
Page 101 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
It's a pleasure to be here today and I'd be happy to answer any questions.
Mr. PICKERING. Are there any question?
Mr. RAHALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to say to the panel that I firmly believe that Portland has been on the cutting edge, devising technigues that have proven to be effective transportation alternatives to the simple act of adding more highway lanes.
I think this is, in part, due to our colleagues from Oregon. Peter DeFazio, as a member of this committee, and I have discussed these technologies very often with him, and Earl and Elizabeth have been very effective leaders, as well.
We appreciate this panel's testimony and the leadership that your delegation has shown us over the years.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you.
Mr. PETRI [resuming Chair]. I would like to join my colleague, Mr. Rahall, in saying that you are very energetically represented on this project out here in Washington. Your representatives have brought it up a number of times, and I know we've had meetings with delegations from the Portland area discussing the long-term plan and how broad the support is for this project in your community.
Page 102 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
We appreciate your again calling it to our attention this morning.
Mr. DEFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, if I might—
Mr. PETRI. Yes.
Mr. DEFAZIO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to emphasize something that Representative Rahall said and just point out to the committee that when some people look at the price tags on these light rail mass transit projects, despite the very substantial local match, some of our colleagues say, ''Boy, that's a lot of money.'' But when you look at the avoided cost in terms of I-5, which runs right through the heart of this area, which is the main commercial transportation route on the west coast of the United States, which is at and above capacity in the Portland metropolitan area, the loop around the east side of Portland, and other potential investments by the Federal Government or other requests, we are avoiding tremendous costs for those vital transportation routes, while also dealing with some of the other problems you've heard about here today, dealing with congestion, air quality, and fostering a very, very, very substantial investment, as Charlie pointed out, from the private sector in conjunction with these projects.
So I would urge the committee's favorable consideration as we move through the bill.
Mr. PETRI. All right. Any other questions?
Page 103 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. PEASE. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. PETRI. Yes, sir.
Mr. PEASE. Mr. Chairman, I just want to make sure I did understand the scope of those numbers. Did I hear $487 million request?
Ms. FURSE. Yes.
Mr. PEASE. Thank you.
Ms. FURSE. On one project. There are two projects.
Mr. PEASE. And $74 million on the other project?
Ms. FURSE. To complete—
Mr. PEASE. So over half a billion total?
Ms. FURSE. Right. And in our region on Westside we have an overmatch. We overmatch locally over the general match in Federal versus local funding.
Mr. PEASE. Thank you.
Page 104 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. Well, thank you very much for your testimony this morning.
[The prepared statements of Ms. Furse, Mr. Blumenauer, Ms. Hooley, Ms. Peters, Mr. Lindquist, and Mr. Hales follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. Is our colleague, Diane DeGette from Denver, here yet? Yes. Great. It's still early in the Congress and we're getting to know each other. I knew Mrs. Shroeder very well. I think you're keeping up her tradition.
Ms. DEGETTE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETRI. You understand that your full statement will be made a part of the record, and you're welcome to proceed as you wish.
TESTIMONY OF HON. DIANNE DEGETTE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM COLORADO
Ms. DEGETTE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.
I'm particularly glad to see so many members of my freshman class here, but disappointed that Mr. Pickering didn't stay in the Chair so that I could have my first hearing in front of this committee in front of one of my freshman colleagues.
Page 105 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
I am glad to be here. Even though I don't have half of the city of Denver with me today, I'm here to talk to you about several very important projects. I know that you have quite a challenge ahead of you with reauthorization of the ISTEA program.
These are three projects which are not only important to Denver, but which are important to the entire western region. If I might, I'll just briefly talk about the three of them and then highlight the one which is most important to the Colorado Department of Transportation, the outstanding Regional Council of Governments, and to my own District.
The three projects are the I–70/I–25 Interchange Complex funding, known locally as ''the Mousetrap,'' for an appropriation of $32 million for fiscal year 1998, and a total of $81 million over three years.
The second one I'd like to talk about is the intermodal center at the former Stapleton Airport along the route from downtown Denver to our new Denver International Airport—which, by the way, I invite you all to fly through at your earliest convenience because it's a lovely facility—and, finally, the Broadway Viaduct project for an appropriation of $8.8 million for fiscal year 1998.
I'd like to focus my testimony on the Mousetrap authorization project, because this project is the top priority for the Colorado Department of Transportation, the Denver Regional Council of Governments, which is not just Denver but includes areas of the entire front range of Denver, and, as I say, also my constituents.
Page 106 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
For those of you unfamiliar with this Mousetrap interchange, it is the only intersection in Colorado of two interstate highways, and it passes right through downtown Denver. Interstate 25 runs north-south from Colorado Springs up to Laramie, Wyoming. Interstate 70 is the major east-west highway which runs all the way here. We drove right on Interstate 70 to our new house that we're renting here. It goes all the way from the east coast to the west coast.
The Mousetrap has been a problem ever since I was a child, frankly, and the reason is because so much traffic congestion consolidates there, not just commuters going to and from work, but also interstate transportation of hazardous waste, interstate trucking. There are many vehicles trying to make an interchange on this Mousetrap.
Since 1951 population in the area has grown 200 percent, and traffic is projected to grow from the current 250,000 vehicles per day to an astounding 325,000 vehicles per day by the year 2010.
Mr. Chairman, to show you the kind of problems we have with this interchange, in 1984 we had an accident where there was a truck carrying a torpedo which rolled over. This shut down the entire city of Denver for an entire day.
Just a couple of weeks ago a tractor trailer spilled pipes onto the road, closing the ramp and backing up I–70 for hours and hours.
The reason we have these problems is because the lanes on I–70 are not wide enough and the ramps that go onto I–70 are not sufficient to carry the traffic. That is what this request is for.
Page 107 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
The Federal Government has never funded this particular portion of the Mousetrap, and it is absolutely critical that we bring these ramps up to date and expand and widen them.
I just drove on this area last weekend when I was home in my District. I was pleased to see some of the progress we've made over the years, but I was still disturbed to see how traffic merges into these areas.
Finally, just to mention the other two projects, the Intermodal Center at the former Stapleton Airport is an area where we will bring several types of transportation together—hard rail, light rail eventually, we hope, and cars—in order to take traffic to DIA and in order to move it through the regional area.
Finally, the Broadway Viaduct project, is a continuing project that we're requesting money for this year.
I would just submit the rest of my remarks, Mr. Chairman, for the record. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you very much. Are there any questions? Yes, Mr. Pease?
Mr. PEASE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Page 108 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Congresswoman DeGette, I got the figures for the Mousetrap and the Broadway projects, but I didn't catch the figure for the Stapleton project.
Ms. DEGETTE. It's $20 million a year for three years, so it would be $20 million this year and then a total of $60 million.
Mr. PEASE. Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. What you describe as the Mousetrap—I've also driven coming down out of the mountains to Stapleton Airport. You can get downtown on 70 or you can take 76 north, and then you go off to the airport?
Ms. DEGETTE. Mr. Chairman, with Denver International Airport, 76 does not bypass. You can't get there from 76 if you're coming in from the mountains west.
Mr. PETRI. So you take 70 more or less downtown and then go north?
Ms. DEGETTE. Yes. What happens, Mr. Chairman, you take 70 past the old Stapleton Airport site to Pena Boulevard, and then Pena Boulevard will take you around to DIA, but 76 does not go to the new airport.
Mr. PETRI. I was there the weekend they blew up the bridges by the old airport. I guess it was bridges—because of modernization of the airport or the closing of it down so they could use part of the area for other purposes.
Page 109 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Ms. DEGETTE. Mr. Chairman, what happened was——
Mr. PETRI. The Sunday morning, as I recall—there was supposed to be very little traffic, but it was backed up.
Ms. DEGETTE. And that's the problem, since I–25 and I–70 are our major interstate highways. Even when you do construction in a slow period it still gets backed up. We have skier traffic and so on.
What those particular tunnels were, I–70 goes past Stapleton. We had a runway going over. That was what the tunnels were for. Since we closed down Stapleton, we didn't need the runways and the tunnels were quite a risk for hazardous waste with all of the trucks that we have coming through, so they thought it would be safer if they eliminated the tunnels.
Mr. PETRI. Good. Well, thank you very much for your testimony.
Ms. DEGETTE. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Ms. DeGette follows:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. And our colleague, Mr. LaTourette, is the leader of the next panel.
Page 110 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Steve will be joined by Dennis Kucinich, our new colleague, and also will be accompanied by Mr. Duane Feher, Ashtabula County Commissioner, The Honorable Walter Ehrnfelt, the mayor of Strongsville, Ohio, and The Honorable Gregory Kurtz, the mayor of Independence, Ohio.
We have a bipartisan effort here this morning.
TESTIMONY OF HON. STEVE LATOURETTE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM OHIO, ACCOMPANIED BY HON. DENNIS KUCINICH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM OHIO, DUANE FEHER, ASHTABULA COUNTY COMMISSIONER, HON. WALTER EHRNFELT, MAYOR, STRONGSVILLE, OH, AND HON. GREGORY KURTZ, MAYOR, INDEPENDENCE, OH
Mr. LATOURETTE. We do. And in the spirit of the new bipartisanship and the 105th Congress, Mr. Chairman, I'm joined not only by our new colleague, Dennis Kucinich from the west side of Cleveland, but among our local elected officials today we have one democrat, one republican, and one independent, so you really can't get more balanced than that.
I appreciate very much the opportunity, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, to present to you today the testimony of three outstanding local officials in northeastern Ohio. Two of the projects affect directly my Congressional District, the 19th of Ohio. The third—and the reason our new colleague, Mr. Kucinich, is here—the Route 82 project covers not only Mr. Kucinich's District to the west but also our other colleague, Sharon Brown's District to the south.
Page 111 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
You'll hear this morning, in addition to testimony from Congressman Kucinich, who may want to make some remarks, from our first witness, who is going to be Commissioner Duane Feher from Ashtabula County. He will discuss with the committee the importance of widening, leveling, and flattening State Route 45 in Ashtabula County.
In my previous life I was a county prosecutor and had the chance to work with the highway patrol, and in addition to economic development, this route has been dangerous and has incurred a number of traffic fatalities, which can only be improved by paying attention to this important artery from Interstate 90 north to Lake Eerie.
Our second witness will be Mayor Walter Ehrnfelt from the city of Strongsville, and he will discuss a project that affects not only his community but three others in northeastern Ohio—Brecksville, Broadview Heights, and North Royalton—and it's the project that Congressman Kucinich is most interested in. It's a project that has been promised for about 20 years.
We have seen an explosion of growth in that area of northeastern Ohio, and the mayor will discuss with the committee the importance of widening and paving Route 82.
Our third witness is going to be from the city of Independence, Mayor Greg Kurtz. Mayor Kurtz will speak today of the importance of authorizing a new interchange on Interstate Route 480 to relieve daily congestion problems and provide dramatic economic development opportunities in the region.
Page 112 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
One of our District offices is in the mayor's city down in Independence, and I can tell you when you try to get there during rush hour you wait in about a mile long traffic that resembles more a parking lot than an interstate highway.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the fact that the committee is providing this opportunity for us this morning to present testimony from these outstanding local elected officials, and I look forward to working with the subcommittee in proceeding with this reauthorization of ISTEA.
I'd like to yield just for a moment to my colleague, Mr. Kucinich, for any observations he'd like to make.
Mr. KUCINICH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I'm pleased to join my friend and colleague, Congressman LaTourette, in support of not only our friend, Mayor Ehrnfelt of Strongsville, but also in support of the kinds of projects which will benefit northern Ohio.
It does take bipartisan support to make these projects a reality. I'm here in that spirit and I look forward to cooperating with the members of the committee, as well as Steve LaTourette, in moving projects like this ahead.
So thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you. Mr. Commissioner?
Page 113 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. FEHER. Thank you, Mr Petri.
I want to thank Congressman LaTourette and Congressman Kucinich and yourself, Mr. Chairman, and the subcommittee here for providing this opportunity to talk about a project in Ashtabula County.
Ashtabula County is in northern Ohio. We're on the shores of Lake Eerie. We're on the Ohio/Pennsylvania border. We are also approximately the break-even point for the ten-hour manufacturing centers on the east coast and within ten-hours of the manufacturing centers in the Chicago and Detroit area.
I come before you today on behalf of the citizens of Ashtabula County to request that the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation allocate $20 million for improvements to Ohio Route 45.
The Route 45 project is about people. It's about people and their families competing in a global economy. It's about a better tomorrow for our working men and women. It's about moving people from welfare to work. It's a bridge from today's manufacturing processes to tomorrow's new manufacturing technologies. It's about public, private, and bipartisan partnership. It's about investing ISTEA dollars after good public/private dollars.
The improvements to Ohio Route 45 are intended to correct safety concerns related to sight distance deficiencies, to provide a new bridge over Interstate 90, and bring the highway up to current design standards to safely carry the traffic load it serves. To accomplish this, the proposed project has been divided into three phases.
Page 114 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
The first phase, estimated to cost $7 million, would correct sight distances, make lane and shoulder improvements, and upgrade the various major road interchanges between Interstate 90 and the golden rail known as ''Conrail'' between Chicago and New York.
Phase two would make similar improvements between Interstate 90 and Ohio Route 307, including a new structure of Interstate 90 and related work at the interchange.
Phase three would complete the project by making lane and shoulder improvements north from the golden rail of Conrail right-of-way to Ohio Route 531, Ohio Route 545's northern terminus.
Phase two and three would cost approximately $13 million.
Ohio Route 45 is a major transportation artery that connects industrial and commercial facilities at either end of Ashtabula County with the Port of Ashtabula, a deep sea port, the major rail carriers that serve the area, and interstate 90. Furthermore, Ohio Route 45 is connected via Interstate 90 with Ohio Route 11 and the Ohio River. It is part of the Northeastern Ohio Coalition effort to promote economic development.
The corridor served by Ohio Route 45 has been the focus of significant development growth in recent years and has benefitted from public and private sector investment, both State and local government, in infrastructure improvements and expansion. Within the last five years, alone, a number of manufacturers have located or expanded operations in this corridor.
Page 115 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
In June, 1996, paper manufacturing giant International Paper located a modern distribution facility totaling 500,000 square feet into the area, and just last month International Paper, in less than one year, has announced their intent to construct an additional 400,000 square feet of state-of-the-art manufacturing space in access from Route 45. This increase will increase truck traffic by approximately 300 to 400 vehicles per week.
That section of Route 45 has the interest and the commitment of several large midwest developers to go forward and develop marketing plans to develop over 400 acres to 500 acres of industrial land along the Ohio Route 45 access.
Because of these developments and potential of the area in the near future, improvements to Ohio Route 45 have become the number one transportation priority of the local government, the local economic development groups, and the State House and the governor's office.
But, because of the scarcity of highway construction funds in the State and at the local level, it appears that this important project cannot go forward without the ability to secure an allocation of funds during the 1998 Federal fiscal year.
This important project not only has the commitment of local government, but it also has the commitment of our elected officials at the State level, who have provided funds through the Ohio Department of Transportation to initiate environmental evaluation and simultaneously initiate project design work to begin and be ended by 1998.
Page 116 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Improvements to Route 45 have long been an important element in the Ashtabula County and northeastern Ohio economic development strategic plan. The county's economic development strategic plan's purpose is to create and retain jobs that stimulate private sector investment.
This plan and the Route 45 project will eliminate Ashtabula County's designation as an EDA redevelopment area, a labor surplus market area, and a State of Ohio rural enterprise zone distressed area.
Once again, the Route 45 project is a road to tomorrow for our citizens. It's helping people to get better jobs. It's a mode of transportation that will move families off of welfare. It will bridge the old manufacturing processes with the new technologies.
Since 1999, the development effort in our county has produced over $800 million in private sector investment and created nearly 5,000 jobs. We know how to implement a project and complete it.
We believe this trend will continue and the need to improve and expand transportation access to the county's industrial areas is more important than ever to the county's future.
The ISTEA funds in Route 45 is investing good dollars with good public sector local dollars.
In closing, I would like to state that we are pleased that we have had the opportunity to share our concerns and hope for the future of northeastern Ohio with the House Subcommittee on Surface Transportation.
Page 117 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
We would like to express our thanks to you, Mr. Chairman, to the entire committee, and especially to our Congressman Steven LaTourette in his efforts to improve the economy of our local community of northeastern Ohio. He has seized our vision of a better and safer highway system. He shares our belief in investing good dollars with good local public dollars. He shares our knowledge that this project is about a better way to tomorrow.
I hope that the subcommittee will support our request for a Federal fiscal year 1998 allocation and help Ashtabula County complete this important and necessary project.
ISTEA is a good example of public/private partnership. It can work. ISTEA is an example—Public dollars and common sense.
Respectfully, on behalf of the Board of Ashtabula County Commissioners and our citizens, Robert J. Boggs, L. George Distel, and myself, Duane Feher.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
We have a small logistical problem, and that is that our colleague, Bill Thomas, is on another committee, a bipartisan committee, Ethics Committee, and they are having a—not a Star Chamber proceeding, but a proceeding down there. He wondered if he could break in and very briefly introduce his Tulare County Supervisor, Bill Maze, and make a short presentation, and then we'll return to the balance of this panel.
Mr. LATOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, it will be a pleasure to yield to Mr. Thomas.
Page 118 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. THOMAS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to introduce the chairman of the Board of Tulare County Supervisors, Bill Maze. He will be in front of you on a panel in a few minutes. I would ask unanimous consent that my written testimony be made a part of the record.
Just two points, because obviously everyone has good arguments in terms of how this money ought to be used.
Tulare County—and you'll hear from the chairman—is the second-largest value-added agricultural county in the United States. The county to the north, Fresno, is number one traditionally, and the county to the south, Kern County, is number three. So you have three counties next to each other, first, second, and third in value-added in terms of agriculture.
Tulare County is the seventh-largest county, but it's the fourth-largest in terms of its roads. Notwithstanding that, the eastern portion of Tulare County is the High Sierras. The county line between Inyo County to the east and Tulare County runs through Mount Whitney, which is the highest point in the continental 48, so you can understand the eastern side of the county. Notwithstanding that, it's fourth in roads. There are a lot of roads that are necessary to bring product from farm to market.
Page 119 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Their request is, I think, a totally reasonable one in terms of the size of the economy of the county.
The other county, Kern County, is requesting funds for two highways. Kern County is the southernmost county in the San Joaquin valley. It is a principal east-west national route, Highway 58 connecting to Highway 178, for most of the trucks. It is also the principal north-south route internationally for Interstate 5. So it is at the juxtaposition of a major east-west route and a major north-south route. Both of those cross very near the center of the largest city, Bakersfield.
Over time we have tried to adjust in terms of freeway off ramps and on ramps, but the roads as they extend need to be improved because on one major residential area 20 to 25 percent of the highway traffic is now large trucks on interstate travel.
I believe that request is an imminently appropriate one, as well. Not to say that any particular request is greater than another, but, Mr. Chairman, given the volume of the ISTEA requests, I think it is fairly evident that this committee and this Congress needs to look at the infrastructure in its current condition, because these requests are not frivolous. Indeed, many of them are essential. And it speaks more to the state of our infrastructure or our collapsing infrastructure than it does to what someone might call ''traditional pork barrel politics.''
All of these requests are critical. We believe ours are, as well. I thank the chairman in his difficult task.
Page 120 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. Well, thank you. We will look forward to hearing from Mr. Maze when this panel is completed.
Godspeed.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Thomas follows:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Ehrnfelt, would you care to proceed?
Mr. EHRNFELT. Yes. Chairman Petri and Mr. Rahall—I see the ranking member was here—and all members of the subcommittee, certainly of Surface Transportation Committee, I want to thank you for allowing me to be here, as well as my representatives, Mr. LaTourette and Mr. Kucinich, to voice our concern.
I am speaking today for four cities, which would be Strongsville, North Royalton, Broadview Heights, and also Brecksville.
I'd like to share with you a recent Ohio Department of Transportation release dated January 30, 1997. It states the following: ''Based upon ODOT's projections that revenue will remain flat on both the State and the Federal levels, Director Wray announced that 43 projects that appeared on last year's list will be delayed beyond the year 2001.'' And I got word yesterday it's 2005. ''ODOT will be forced to concentrate almost all of their construction programs on the maintenance and preservation of the existing transportation system.''
Page 121 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Needless to say, this is very disturbing to me and my fellow mayors from the cities of Broadview Heights and North Royalton and Brecksville. Much attention has been given to the north-south interstate highways, and the burden for expansion has been created upon the east-west routes which, for the most part, are limited to two lanes, as is the majority of State Route 82 within the four communities.
In recent years, we have spent a substantial amount of public funds in securing plans and specifications by our consulting engineers for this widening project, with assurances from ODOT that this project would become a reality. We have been working on this since the 1960s. We've had public hearings, no opposition.
The city of Strongsville, alone, has spent approximately $1 million on these plans and the specifications. Now we are being told that, due to a lack of funding, many projects throughout our State are being delayed for an indefinite amount of time. We are in tier three. That won't even be funded even with a new gas tax, they tell us.
State Route 82 is in poor condition, at best, with narrow pavement, dangerous curves, and other pavement conditions dangerous to the motoring public.
The additional benefits of this project would be associated primarily with the reduction in traffic congestion. Currently 35,000 vehicles daily use this portion of Route 82 in Strongsville, alone. Economically, this project will reduce lost time, provide better access to the Stongsville Industrial Park, and reduce fuel costs.
Page 122 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Finally, widening the roadway to current acceptable widths and providing additional lane capacity should provide an overall safer highway.
The total estimated project cost for the entire State Route 82 corridor from the westerly Cuyahoga County line east to Interstate I-77 is approximately $50 million, of which $15 million is the Strongsville portion, alone.
The State Route 82 corridor has regional significance, and its regional importance is crucial to the growing communities of Strongsville, North Royalton, Broadview Heights, and Brecksville.
The widening of State Route 82 is of great economic importance, and that's importance to Strongsville, as well as the other cities.
Also, land to both the north and the south of Route 82 is zoned general industrial. The undeveloped portion of land in Strongsville is approximately 1,300 acres, one of the few large sites left in Cuyahoga County, and they include sites of 100, 140, and 500 acres, as well as many smaller sites.
When this area is developed at a realistic 30 percent land coverage, and with the city's existing industrial employee density, this industrial area would represent the creation of about 30,000 new jobs in Strongsville, alone. Most important is the retention of a minimum of 1,100 jobs.
Currently, in the Strongsville Industrial Park several of the major industrial employers located in this park are having second thoughts about adding to their buildings because of the increased difficulty in the receiving of raw materials and shipping of their finished products. Future growth is tied to this improvement of Route 82 within the city of strongsville, as well as the cities of North Royalton, Broadview Heights, and Brecksville.
Page 123 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Certainly, the upcoming issue of the reauthorization of ISTEA is vitally important to all transportation projects for the region, and I ask your support for its reauthorization. ISTEA works.
At the same time, it is apparent to our four communities that we need attention towards this project and we seek funding that will be earmarked for this specific project.
I look forward to working with you regarding this most important issue to these cities.
I offer my thanks for the support given by Congressman LaTourette and Congressman Kucinich. They are always there for us, and I trust that this committee will support our efforts as well as the Congressmen.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Kurtz?
Mr. KURTZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the committee, Congressman LaTourette, and Congressman Kucinich. I would like to thank you for providing me the opportunity to testify today on behalf of the citizens of Independence, Ohio, regarding a request recently submitted that would partially fund a critical transportation need in northeast Ohio.
Page 124 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
We are a small city, about 6,500 residents, but on any given day 25,000 people will come to the Rockside Road Business Corridor, the preeminent office building corridor outside of downtown Cleveland.
We're unique—or at least I thought we were unique until I heard previous testimony—having two major interstates intersect in our community. But what we're suggesting is that instead of doing lane widening what we propose is that we build an interchange just west of the I-480 interchange, a valve or back door interchange that would help do two things. It would help mitigate traffic. As Congressman LaTourette mentioned earlier, there are times when traffic backs up on the interstate to a stop.
We're suggesting that by building this interchange we can not only mitigate traffic, but we can also create an economic development boom for the area.
We're estimating that an additional three million square feet of prime class ''A'' office space would be created from this additional interchange, and approximately 15,000 jobs.
The project consists of a $20 million interchange that would include a north-south roadway connecting Rockside Road in my city of Independence and our partner, the Village of Brooklyn Heights, to the north.
The proposed funding plan calls for the interchange for $6 million of Federal funds, $6 million from the State of Ohio, $1 million from Cuyahoga County, and the balance of $7 million to be provided by local sources.
Page 125 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
The economic development byproduct of this traffic solution will help pay for the interchange.
We realize the complementary relationship between transportation and economic development. We are a prime example of how transportation access spawns economic development.
The use of innovative financing will now require the private sector, or those who benefit most from this proposed interchange, to pay their fair share.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, let me say that the 15,000 or so jobs that will be created from the nearly three million square feet of development that will become a reality because of this interchange will have a dramatic impact not only on my city but on northeastern Ohio and the region.
I'd like to thank the chairman and members of the subcommittee and Congressman LaTourette for your support and help.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you. Thank you all for your testimony.
Are there any questions? Mr. Rahall?
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I just want to add—no questions to the panel, but I just want to add that simply because Independence, Ohio, is the home town of my chief counsel here, Mr. Jim Zoia, it does not mean the project is going to get any special consideration.
Page 126 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
[Laughter.]
Mr. PETRI. I think they already have.
Are there any other questions? Yes, Mr. Pease?
Mr. RAHALL. And the home town of Jimmy Miller.
Mr. PETRI. Oh, my. Mr. Pease?
Mr. PEASE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Kurtz, just an observation. It appears to me that your State and your local government have already invested quite a bit of money in this project, and I think you are to be commended for that, that you have not come here for the great majority of the funds that are necessary on this project.
I had one question, though, for Mr. Feher. There was, in your materials and in your presentation, a discussion that the Ohio Department of Transportation has, I assume, expended some funds in the environmental evaluation of the project and the design and engineering work. Do you know how much the State has invested or will invest in this project?
Mr. FEHER. It's our belief that between the State and local commitment we're talking between $3 to $5 million, depending upon which phase we get into. Over the life of the project we're looking at about 20 percent.
Page 127 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. PEASE. Okay. Total request is $20 million from this committee?
Mr. FEHER. For the total project. Yes.
Mr. PEASE. Thank you.
Mr. LATOURETTE. Congressman Pease, last year in the last Congress, through the national highway system bill, this committee and our full committee developed the opportunity for States to enter into a State infrastructure bank. Ohio is one of the 10 pilot projects in that, and the State infrastructure bank—our Department of Transportation used a small amount of money to leverage a large amount of money to already contribute to the Route 45 project.
Mr. PEASE. Okay. Thank you.
Mr. FEHER. Congressman, one of the key things about this project is that the State Department of Transportation and the Legislature and the governor's office have put an accent on monthly meetings to help guide the project, and we're trying a lot of innovative approaches and trying to take this through a significant initiation and completion.
Mr. PEASE. Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Well, I thank you for your testimony.
Page 128 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
One observation I would make is that it's very clear that the rust belt is back. If you're worrying about accommodating 30,000 new jobs in your community and you're the hub of the whole two-thirds of the country in the greater Cleveland northeast Ohio area, that's good news, indeed, for our country.
You're very ably represented by an active and respected member of our committee in Mr. LaTourette, and so I assure you we will be giving every reasonable consideration to your concerns.
Mr. KURTZ. Thank you.
Mr. EHRNFELT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. FEHER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statements of Messrs. LaTourette, Feher, Ehrnfelt, and Kurtz follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. Now we will hear from Mr. Maze.
TESTIMONY OF HON. BILL THOMAS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM CALIFORNIA, ACCOMPANIED BY BILL MAZE, CHAIRMAN, TULARE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Page 129 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. MAZE. Good morning again, Chairman Petri and members of the subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you this morning and discuss a matter of the greatest importance to Tulare County, California. Of course, I also appreciate the introduction by the Congressman this morning, and we are certainly fortunate to have a Congressman of his stature representing our interests here in the Nation's capital.
To understand the needs of the project, Mr. Chairman, it is important for you to know a bit about Tulare County and its people.
Tulare County lies in the southern part of the world-renown San Joaquin Valley near the geographic center of the State of California. We're the second-largest producer of agricultural goods in the Nation, and we had exports in 1995 to 76 foreign countries around the world.
Unfortunately, our unemployment rate is currently at 16.6 percent, which is over double the State's average and triple the Nation's. Our median household income is 32 percent below the State of California, and about 23 percent of our population lives below the poverty level. One out of every three residents in our county is currently receiving some form of public assistance.
We know that to improve these tragic numbers it must be through expanded agricultural production and processing. Such gains can only be possible through improvements to our road network. Our road system of about 3,100 miles is the fourth largest in California, as mentioned by the Congressman. Incredibly, though, we receive about $1.5 million in Federal aid highway apportionments a year.
Page 130 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Our highway program in Tulare County, the second-largest agricultural producer in the Nation, is not a construction program; it is merely a resurfacing project.
We know that our roads must be periodically reconstructed to prevent deterioration and more-costly work in the future, but we cannot afford it. We know that our economic needs are dependent on road improvements, but they are impossible.
Mr. Chairman, we have a critical need for improved farm-to-market roads that are essential to support existing and promote future agricultural roads. We need better roads to improve access to rural areas in the county and thereby encourage agricultural development in those areas.
When such development occurs, operations expand, production increases, jobs are created, and economic benefits are realized.
The impact radiates to related commodities, businesses, and services, as well. Recently, studies by the University of California suggest that for each dollar of income directly produced by an agricultural commodity another $2.50 to $3 is generated as a result of the added value activities such as marketing, shipping, facility construction, and the many services that directly support farming operations.
Knowing of our needs, Congressmen Thomas and Dooley have each submitted a project to the subcommittee on our behalf. The project submitted by Congressman Thomas would require about $36.1 million in Federal assistance, matched with 20 percent of non-Federal funding. That funding would be used to reconstruct and resurface 14 roads in the county, all of which are eligible for funding under the surface transportation program.
Page 131 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
The need for the project submitted in the county's behalf by Congressman Dooley is similar, yet none of those 23 roads in this package are on the Federal aid system. Nonetheless, there is an unmistakable Federal interest in providing assistance in the amount of about $16.3 million, as requested, to improve these county roads.
The agricultural products that will travel on these roads will be exported through our Nation's ports and airports, as I said earlier, to 76 countries, reducing our balance of trade deficit.
Of course, they will also wind up in each of our 50 States. Chances are good that you have or will enjoy a product that you consumed today that came from Tulare County.
As the members of this subcommittee know better than I, a significant part of the cost of any good is in its transportation. If our roads are improved, transportation costs will be reduced, which translates into a reduced cost that is recoverable by the consumer three times a day at the kitchen table.
I have been told that there is a great debate in Congress about the devolution of our highway system. Well, in Tulare County devolution refers to the slow, ample process by which we are watching our roads return to dirt, literally. That is happening, and it is not an exaggeration.
At this time, when other supplicants are appearing before you seeking funding for amassing new highways, which I am sure are needed, we are here today asking for relatively modest amounts, that being $36 million in one request and $16 million in other, both in part to prevent further deterioration and the total collapse of our system, and in part so we can improve our roads to allow further growth of our agricultural industry, a growth that will allow us to work hard, improve our economy, and reduce the dependence that so many of our residents have on public assistance.
Page 132 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to appear here today and be a part of this reauthorization of ISTEA.
Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you. Thank you for your submission.
Are there any questions? Yes, Mr. Pease?
Mr. PEASE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Your proposal, as I understand it, at least in one portion calls for $16 million in assistance for resurfacing roads that are not even in the Federal system?
Mr. MAZE. That's correct.
Mr. PEASE. How much has the State of California contributed to this effort?
Mr. MAZE. They are not contributing to this effort. This is one of the major concerns that we have. Certainly, with the reduction we've had through property tax shifts in California, that leaves us without a resources.
Mr. PEASE. I presume the State is spending money somewhere on highways. They've decided this is not one of their higher priorities?
Page 133 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. MAZE. Certainly most of it is being emphasized with the earthquake issues in the last few years of restructuring overpasses in those areas there, so we've seen a disproportionate share going to those metropolitan areas. And yet this food base that we all survive by is coming from this production area.
Mr. PEASE. Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Are there other questions?
[No response.]
[The prepared statement of Mr. Maze follows:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. If not, we will hear from our next panel, consisting of The Honorable Tim Holden of Pennsylvania.
TESTIMONY OF HON. TIM HOLDEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM PENNSYLVANIA
Mr. HOLDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Rahall, for allowing me to testify today on two critical projects to my District: the Warren Street Bypass/U.S. Route 222 in Berks County, and upgrades to Route 61 in Schuylkill County.
Page 134 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
The Warren Street Bypass/U.S. 222 project is critically important to my District and to Berks County, Pennsylvania. The project would provide a critical link from the Lancaster County line through Berks County, and would significantly improve the traffic flow around the city of Reading.
This project is critical to the economic and infrastructure development of Berks County and the entire region, as it would create a continuous link from New York City and Route 78 through the Lehigh Valley to the city of Reading, and then south to the Pennsylvania Turnpike and the city of Lancaster.
This project would address the serious traffic congestion problems in the region and would provide a road which is safe for the heavy volume of commercial traffic which uses the route.
I cannot under-state the local support and enthusiasm for this project. This project has been in the making for 30 years, and now is the time to finish it.
This project has strong community support, and there has been an unprecedented level of local participation. The local governments have already contributed $4.7 million for this project, and $16 million for this project and its sister project, the Park Road Corridor.
This project is a high priority for the State of Pennsylvania. In 1995 Government Ridge announced a delay in this project because the State did not have the economic resources at the time to complete all of the high-priority projects that were planned. The governor at that time decided that projects that were in construction should be completed before new projects were begun.
Page 135 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Since then I have worked with Governor Ridge, Secretary of Transportation Mallory, and the Berks County legislative delegation in Harrisburg to move this project forward. Everyone agrees that this is a top priority. Now it needs the funding to push it ahead.
Designation as a demonstration project in the ISTEA reauthorization will be critical in hastening this much-needed project. The total project cost would be $169.8 million. Funding as part of the ISTEA reauthorization will move it through the first phases and put it on the fast track to completion.
I have also submitted a request for funding of safety improvements on Route 61 in my home county of Schuylkill. Route 61 runs across Schuylkill County, connecting two major interstates, I-81 and I-78, through the city of Pottsville. I am asking for funding for two of the most dangerous sections of Route 61 in the borough of Deer Lake and between Cressona and Mount Carbon.
Every week there are accidents on these two sections of Route 61, and many fatalities have been attributed to the dangerous conditions of these roads. The combination of speed, bad weather conditions, uneven terrain, heavy use, and dangerous road designs makes for a very serious safety problem.
It is well known in Schuylkill County and by PennDOT how dangerous Route 61 can be. These projects are in the first of four years of PennDOT's 12-year plan and have strong local support.
Page 136 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
I appreciate your consideration and ask for your support of both of these projects and would be willing to answer any questions if the committee has any.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you very much for coming here and for your submission.
Mr. Rahall, any questions?
Mr. RAHALL. No questions, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Are there any other members of the panel who seek recognition?
[No response.]
Mr. PETRI. If not, we thank you again and we will be reviewing this request and trying to be as helpful as we can.
Mr. HOLDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Holden follows:]
[Insert here.]
Page 137 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. Now we welcome back home to our committee The Honorable Ron Packard, who is accompanied by Lori Pfeiler, the chairperson of the North San Diego County Transit District.
Ron?
TESTIMONY OF HON. RON PACKARD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM CALIFORNIA, ACCOMPANIED BY LORI HOLT PFEILER, CHAIRPERSON, NORTH SAN DIEGO COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT
Mr. PACKARD. It is good to be back. I feel like I'm coming home after sitting 10 years on this committee. We were seatmates for most of that time, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure to be back in this room.
Before I begin my brief comments, I'd like to ask unanimous consent that Duke Cunningham, my colleague who represents part of the District of this project we're talking about, has submitted a statement, and I'd like to just have it entered for the record if you would, please. He's unable to be here.
Mr. PETRI. Without objection it will be made a part of the record.
Mr. PACKARD. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, Mr. Rahall. It's a pleasure to be back.
Page 138 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
I would like to introduce the mayor pro tem of the city of Escondido, Ms. Lori Holt Pfeiler. She's also on the Board of Directors. She's chairman of the Board of Directors of the North County Transit District, a board which I sat on for several years. Ms. Pfeiler will be testifying in support of an Oceanside-Escondido light rail project.
Actually, when I was on the board 15 years ago of this transit district we started, and I was involved in negotiating with Santa Fe Railroad the right-of-way that this light rail project will be constructed on.
The project is within both my District and Randy Duke Cunningham's District. I wholeheartedly support it, and I have submitted to the committee for your consideration in the ISTEA reauthorization bill this project as one of my top priorities.
I do not wish to take a lot of time, and so I will simply let Ms. Pfeiler share with you the details of this Oceanside-Escondido light rail project, and want to thank you for allowing me to introduce her. She certainly is very familiar with the project and has been working with it as chairman of the board of the North County Transit District.
I give to you Ms. Pfeiler.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you. And, Madam Mayor, I apologize for mangling your name, but please proceed as you wish. Your full statement will, of course, be made a part of the record. Welcome.
Ms. PFEILER. It wasn't until I ran for office that my father learned how to spell my name, so that's all right.
Page 139 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
[Laughter.]
Ms. PFEILER. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to speak regarding the Escondido-Oceanside light rail line.
We are requesting $107 million, which is 55 percent of the project cost, and we have been working on this project for 15 years. The Escondido-Oceanside line is one leg of a triangle in a regional system. We have San Diego in the south, the north coastal and the north inland, and this rail line would connect the north San Diego cities together.
Our agency already operates the COASTER, which connects Oceanside with downtown, and we built that project on time and within budget, and our ridership is ahead of our projections. So southern California can ride public transit.
This project is located in the fastest-growing region in San Diego County. The cities of Oceanside, Vista, San Marcos, and Escondido recognize that growth will continue. We also recognize that State highway 78, which is already congested, is highly unlikely it would ever be widened.
People will have to move along this corridor, and there are two community colleges, as well as a new California State university which will have 25,000 to 30,000 students attending along this corridor.
This corridor has been geared to accept rail travel. Each city recognizes that our quality of life is tied to public transit. Our city policies encourage an increase in density of employment and housing within walking distance of the planned rail stations. We already have transit centers at four of the planned rail stations, and there will be fifteen.
Page 140 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
This project provides environmental benefits to the region by improving clean air quality. It also complies with Clean Air Act.
We also, as a board, studied the differences between diesel multiple units and electrical multiple units and determined that the diesel would be cleaner and cheaper for our agency to use.
We have continued to work with the FTA, and we are included in the proposed report.
I am proud that the east-west line has a cost effectiveness indicator of $4.61 and will cost only $8.8 million per mile, which is far less than other southern California projects.
We expect upon implementation we will have a fare box recovery ratio of 59 to 63 percent, so we expect heavy ridership.
This project was approved by voters in 1987, when we voted for proposition eight, a local sales tax initiative. Since that time, we've continued to implement parts of this project and continue to support it on a regional basis.
Of the money, 27 percent will come from local funds—that's sales tax initiative; 18 percent from proposition 108, a State bond; and we have these funds in hand and are ready to go, and our board is especially ready for this project to be built.
Page 141 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
I ask the subcommittee to look favorably on our request for $107 million, which is 55 percent of the total cost, which would allow people to continue to move along this corridor.
We are also thankful and grateful for the continuing support of this project by Congressman Packard and Congressman Cunningham.
Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you. Are there questions? Mr. Pease?
Mr. PEASE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Pfeiler, the bonds that were approved in 1987 were specifically designated for your light rail project?
Ms. PFEILER. This project was listed in a list of projects that proposition eight included. This project was included in the list.
Mr. PEASE. Okay. And those monies are now available for use?
Ms. PFEILER. Yes, they are.
Mr. PEASE. Okay. And I just had a question that really isn't directly related, but the new campus at San Marcos, is that a converted military facility or is that—
Page 142 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Ms. PFEILER. No, it isn't. It's a brand new—
Mr. PEASE. Is this a ground-up facility?
Ms. PFEILER. Yes.
Mr. PEASE. What's the current enrollment there? And you projected it to be at 25,000 to 30,000?
Ms. PFEILER. It's 6,000 right now, between 6,000 and 7,000, and we expect it to be 25,000 to 30,000.
Mr. PEASE. In how long?
Ms. PFEILER. It has been open for four years.
Mr. PEASE. So you intend to hit your 30,000?
Ms. PFEILER. I don't know exactly when.
Mr. PEASE. Thank you.
Ms. PFEILER. Soon. Soon enough for this project. We want to be ahead instead of behind.
Page 143 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. Thank you. We appreciate your testimony today.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Packard, Mr. Cunningham, and Ms. Pfeiler follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. The next witness is our colleague, The Honorable Paul Gillmor of Ohio.
We apologize for delaying you a bit, Paul, but we look forward to your testimony. As you know, your full statement will be made a part of the record, and you're welcome to proceed as you wish.
TESTIMONY OF HON. PAUL GILLMOR, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM OHIO
Mr. GILLMOR. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to appear and express my support for Federal funding of environmental and alignment studies and design work for U.S. 24 between Fort Wayne, Indiana, and Toledo, Ohio.
The previous Member you had here could point to his record of 10 years on this committee. I can't do that. But if you get points for that, I did serve one term several years ago.
Page 144 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
[Laughter.]
Mr. GILLMOR. Nearly six years ago my colleagues and I representing the areas in Ohio and Indiana that this segment crosses came before the committee and we requested your assistance in making U.S. 24 a better link and a safer commute. I'm happy to say that this committee, in its wisdom at that time, in ISTEA did grant $300,000 for a feasibility study to assess real needs for this highway.
Based on the recommendations of that report, which was released in late 1994, and more recent developments, I'm here to ask for your help on the next phase of the project.
U.S. 24 is a major connecting artery between I–75 in Toledo and Interstate 69 in Fort Wayne. These two cities are among the largest 100 cities in the United States, yet they are one of the few with only a two-lane highway serving as their connection.
Upgrading U.S. 24 will enhance intermodal transportation connections of national and international importance by providing northeast Indiana and northwest Ohio with more direct access to land, air, and water links, especially the Port of Toledo, Conrail's intermodal rail terminal in Toledo, Toledo Express Airport's international cargo hub, and Fort Wayne International Airport.
Known locally as Fort-to-port, the segment that I and others have singled out in our request is a key road for business. But more than economic competitiveness is a factor, a significant reason to improve U.S. 24 is safety benefits. This is one of the main arguments I hear back home as to why something should be done.
Page 145 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
I would point out that the present two lanes on U.S. 24 are below the 14-foot paved shoulder recommendations of the Ohio Department of Transportation, and one-third of those lanes are below the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials' requirements of 10 feet. Plus, studies show that the current traffic volume on 80 percent of the Fort-to-port route will reach unstable flow speed and freedom by the year 2000.
While those facts, in themselves, can be troubling, I think it's even more significant when you consider that truck traffic now accounts for an unusually high 40 percent of the traffic on this highway, which contributes to capacity constraint and reduced levels of service.
People in my region are very serious about making Fort-to-port a better road for all concerned. It has the backing of the metropolitan planning organizations in both Toledo and Fort Wayne, county engineers along the route. And, in addition, the Ohio Department of Transportation has included Fort-to-port in its long-range transportation plan called ''Access Ohio,'' and the State recently provided $800,000 for environmental studies on a section of this highway.
The project will not become a reality until we at the Federal level provide the aid to push it forward. And to facilitate the effort, I'm requested $23 million, which would be spread out over the life of the ISTEA reauthorization.
That funding would first address the critically important area of environmental and alignment studies which begin in 1998 and proceed to 2001, and that work request would be $9.9 million. I'm also requesting $13.1 million for design work.
Page 146 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
I did have the opportunity to hear the preceding three projects presented. I'd point out, as a testament to the frugality in the way we use funds effectively in Ohio, my request is the smallest of all those that have been presented to you in that time.
I appreciate your consideration, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Are there questions of our colleague? Mr. LaTourette?
Mr. LATOURETTE. If I may, I'd just say, while we have our colleague from Ohio here, Mr. Gillmor, I had the opportunity to try a murder case in Toledo, and I noticed a beautiful riverfront area and their port had really economically become depressed, and I would assume that your request would give a boost in between Fort Wayne and Toledo in terms of restoring the city of Toledo that I believe is represented by our colleague, Marcy Kaptur, to some of the prominence and preeminence that it enjoyed maybe just as long as 10 years ago.
Would that be a fair observation?
Mr. GILLMOR. I think that is a very fair observation, and I would also point out that I believe both Congressman Souder, representing Fort Wayne, and Congresswoman Kaptur, representing Toledo, have submitted statements in support.
Mr. LATOURETTE. I always have to be careful when Mr. Gillmor testifies, Mr. Chairman, because he's my mother's Congressman, and so I have to be cautious in how I regard him.
Page 147 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Thank you very much.
Mr. GILLMOR. I have to be very sure that I represent the area well because I hear from your mother.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. GILLMOR. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gillmor follows:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. And now The Honorable Rodney Frelinghuysen from the State of New Jersey.
TESTIMONY OF HON. RODNEY FRELINGHUYSEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM NEW JERSEY
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member. Thank you very much for letting me testify this morning on ISTEA. It's a pleasure to come before your committee to urge support of transportation projects that are important to my District and important to my State of New Jersey.
Page 148 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
As you may know, New Jersey is our Nation's most densely-populated State, and, as such, has unique transportation needs. In order to move people and goods and provide essential services, our State must have a high-quality and efficient system of highways and mass transportation.
New Jersey was one of the primary beneficiaries of the original Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act. It is one of the few areas of Federal spending where my State receives more in Federal dollars than it contributes to the Treasury. All told, New Jersey receives only $0.69 for each dollar it sends to Washington, ranking it 49th among the 50 States.
However, as you are also aware, the State of New Jersey has invested more of its own State budget dollars in transportation through a very creative transportation trust fund.
Because New Jersey is a corridor State for both people and commerce to locations of a major international seaport and airport, the benefits of investment in its infrastructure transcend its borders to both Pennsylvania and the New York metropolitan area.
One such project that is integral to our efforts in New Jersey to provide an efficient and sound alternative to commuters in the State's suburbs is the New York, Susquehanna and Western passenger service project.
Authorized through ISTEA in 1991, this project will build upon improvements already made to an existing freight line to transport commuters from Sussex, Morris, Passaic, and Bergen Counties to New Jersey Transit's main line in Hawthorne. This will enable passengers to link up with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey commuter services in Hoboken and travel to New York City.
Page 149 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
It is estimated by the year 2010 the New York Susquehanna ridership will approach 4,000 trips, or 300,000 annually, cutting down on already congested highway arteries in northern New Jersey.
Engineering studies have begun on the New York Susquehanna, with funding provided by a $29.7 million grant from the Federal Transit Administration. Since the existing funding will be obligated by fiscal year 2000, I am requesting an additional $79 million be authorized for the completion of the project.
According to a feasibility study commissioned by the four counties involved, this service will be able to operate with a positive cash flow once the Secaucus transfer project, a part of New Jersey's urban core project, is completed in the year 2002.
The New York Susquehanna project enjoys a wide array of support from the communities involved. The Department of Transportation also recognizes the importance of this project and has decided to include it in New Jersey's urban core project.
As a result of an environmental assessment, a finding of no significant impact was issued by the FTA in September of last year, and a memorandum of understanding is being negotiated with the New York, Susquehanna and Western Railway.
In addition to this important project, Mr. Chairman, I am also requesting the authorization of four highway projects. New Jersey has the Nation's most complex system of highways, but it is also one of the Nation's oldest. All of these projects would relieve commuter congestion and facilitate the movement of goods and services in the northern and central parts of the State. Any assistance you can provide would be appreciated.
Page 150 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Thank you very much.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you. As you know, your governor was also here testifying before the committee about not just your State, but the region of which it's a part.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Yes, sir.
Mr. PETRI. We're joined by our—I think it's accurate to say ''our dean,'' Mr. Oberstar. Welcome. I don't know if you have any questions of the witness or any statement you'd like to make.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the work that you're doing with these hearings, you and Mr. Rahall together. I think it has been a great asset for our committee to have had the last two years of intensive oversight work that we've accomplished. We are so well-situated now to begin the detailed legislative work on ISTEA. We appreciate the testimony of our colleagues in support of this legislation, or from their various perspectives. It helps us get this kaleidoscopic view of America and needs of transportation.
Thank you very much, Mr. Frelinghuysen.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you. Are there any other questions of the—yes, sir, Mr. Pease?
Page 151 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
Mr. PEASE. I'm sorry, Congressman. I just—
Mr. PETRI. Would you like us to swear the witness?
[Laughter.]
Mr. PEASE. Would it be possible for you or your staff to provide us information about the extent of the State's financial participation in this project? We've got the Federal dollars here, but it would be helpful to know what the State and/or local—
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I'd be happy to submit that for the record, and certainly we like to put our own money where our mouth is, and we've done it more than most States in terms of our own State budget.
Mr. PEASE. Thank you very much.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I'd be happy to provide that for the record. Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
If there are no other questions, thank you, Representative Frelinghuysen.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Frelinghuysen follows:]
Page 152 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 5
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. This subcommittee hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:22 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned, to reconvene at the call of the Chair.]
Next Hearing Segment(3)