Segment 4 Of 5 Previous Hearing Segment(3) Next Hearing Segment(5)
SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 405 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
MEMBER POLICY INITIATIVES AND REQUESTS FOR HIGHWAY AND TRANSIT PROJECTS IN THE ISTEA REAUTHORIZATION
TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 1997
U.S. House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Surface Transportation,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 9:32 a.m., in room 2167, Rayburn House Office Building, Honorable Thomas E. Petri, (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. PETRI. This meeting will come to order.
This morning we are continuing our series of hearings to receive testimony from Members of Congress on policy initiatives for transit projects and requests to be heard in the ISTEA reauthorization. In many cases, Members will be accompanied by State and local officials who are also in support of the request.
These hearings will provide important information so that the committee can fully assess these requests during the development of the ISTEA reauthorization legislation. Subcommittee hearings, as has been publicly noticed, will continue on Thursday.
Page 406 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I now yield to the senior Democrat on the subcommittee, Nick Rahall.
Mr. RAHALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have no opening statement, Mr. Chairman, just to welcome our distinguished colleagues from Massachusetts. Let the games continue.
Mr. PETRI. Any statements by any Member, including our Chairman and ranking minority member, will be made a part of the record for this hearing.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Petri and Mr. Costello follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. We are delighted to recognize a colleague, Joe Moakley, accompanied by the Hon. Peter Blute, executive director and CEO of the Massachusetts Port Authority.
Gentlemen, welcome.
TESTIMONY OF HON. JOHN JOSEPH MOAKLEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM MASSACHUSETTS, ACCOMPANIED BY PETER BLUTE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND CEO, MASSACHUSETTS PORT AUTHORITY
TRANSITWAY, LOGAN AIRPORT INTERMODAL TRANSIT CONNECTOR
Page 407 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I thank you very much for this opportunity to testify today on the reauthorization of ISTEA and its importance to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
I am also happy to be here with the director of the Massachusetts Port Authority, Hon. Peter Blute. I thank Peter for his efforts on behalf of the transportation needs of Massachusetts.
Today, Mr. Chairman, I would like to discuss two critical transportation projects to the metropolitan Boston area that will have a profound impact on alleviating traffic and congestion for the people of Boston. The South Boston Piers Transitway is a critical component of the State implementation plan for the Clean Air Act and will be integrated with the extensive network of transit, commuter rail, and bus service at South Station.
By using the bus-in technology, the transitway will be a catalyst for continued development in the South Boston Piers area. Currently, a $92 million expansion of the World Trade Center to provide a new hotel, conference center, and office complex is underway and the Boston Wharf Company is planning to convert 3.5 million square feet of warehouse space to office and retail use. The completion of this project will significantly diminish congestion and increase accessibility to this growing part of Boston. The Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority estimates that 6.4 million people will ride the transitway each year.
The second project I would like to mention, Mr. Chairman, is a logical extension to the continued construction of the transitway, the Logan Airport Intermodal Transit Connector. This project is a critical element of the Commonwealth's regional transportation plan for the Boston region. The project solidifies key linkages between Logan Airport and Boston's metropolitan transit system and builds on the substantial investment already made in commuter rail, mass transit, and intermodal stations such as South Station. The benefits to this project are enormous in terms of potential passengers, passenger convenience, and improvements to regional congestion and air quality.
Page 408 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. Chairman, I know your committee will have some difficult choices to make through the reauthorization of ISTEA and I thank you for your consideration of these two environmentally sound, energy-efficient transit projects of great importance to our district.
I would now like to introduce a fellow who is doing a great job at the Massachusetts Port Authority, who is very, very interested in implementing these projects, Hon. Peter Blute, who needs no introduction to this committee.
Mr. BLUTE. Thank you very much. I thank my distinguished colleague, Mr. Moakley.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is very good to be back in front of this committee on which I had the honor to serve for 4 years. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today on the reauthorization of the Intermodal Surface Transportation and Efficiency Act, ISTEA, and on the transportation needs of the Boston metropolitan area.
Let me also thank Joe Moakley for his support of Massport's efforts and for facilitating our appearance here today.
Mr. Chairman, in my new capacity as executive director of the Massachusetts Port Authority, I have the responsibility of overseeing the operation of Logan International Airport, the port of Boston, Hanscom Field, and the Tobin Memorial Bridge. Since assuming these responsibilities just a few short months ago, I have become familiar with the many transportation challenges confronting Boston, and indeed the entire New England area.
Page 409 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Our primary purpose for being here today is to discuss Massport's massive Logan 2000 Modernization Project, of which the cornerstone is the Logan Airport Intermodal Transit Connector. This transit connector is a series of initiatives that will improve significantly the intermodal connection between Logan, New England's primary domestic and international airport, and the Boston metropolitan transit system. This exciting, three-phased project will establish two transit routes connecting Logan Airport to the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority's Blue Line and the South Station Intermodal Center with smart alternative fueled vehicles. Completion of the first phase of this project will result in the operation of buses on existing and new airport roadways and the utilization of the South Boston Transitway, which Congressman Moakley has so ably championed.
Phase two will include the construction of an exclusive guideway on which these transit routes will operate. This guideway will provide relief to Logan's complex traffic operations, reduce curb and roadway congestion, and increase passenger convenience. This new guideway will support catenary and other electric pick-up potential, expanding the ability of the system to decrease air pollutant emissions.
Completion of phase three of the intermodal connector will involve the conversion of vehicles and operating systems to a fully automated operation. The automation will further increase system capacity, decrease operating costs, and improve environmental conditions.
The intermodal transit connector will make Logan one of only six major cities in the United States with direct connection between the airport and regional transit. The project will complete the intermodal connection between Logan Airport and all surface transportation systems in the Boston region and Northeast Corridor.
Page 410 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The completion of this project will result in the reduction of as many as 860,000 annual vehicle trips to Logan and vehicle miles traveled will be reduced by 9.4 million miles annually in the Boston region.
Congressman Moakley and I are here today to request Federal support through an authorization in ISTEA in the amount of $29.9 million for the implementation of phase one and the design of phase two. Massport is committed to a 20 percent match of $7.5 million. This project has the strong support of Governor William Weld and our secretary of transportation and construction in Massachusetts, Jim Kerasiotes. In addition, the intermodal transit connector is included within the Boston region's transportation improvement program.
Once again, Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to come before this subcommittee. I ask for your serious consideration of an authorization for this exciting project.
I also want to thank my distinguished colleague, the dean of the Massachusetts delegation, for testifying with me here today.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you. It certainly does sound like a world-class or world-leading effort, which will be a great benefit to the region. There is no question about that.
Are there any questions?
Page 411 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. MCGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to associate myself with the remarks of Mr. Blute and Mr. Moakley. As a member from the Massachusetts delegation, I can attest to the importance of the projects they have highlighted today.
As you know, I was a former staff member of Mr. Moakley, so I have to support everything he suggests before this committee, otherwise I will be excommunicated from this Congress. But supporting the transportation needs of Boston are very, very vital to not only Massachusetts but to the entire New England region. Just as I support the projects in Boston, I know that Mr. Moakley and Mr. Blute support Union Station and other projects in my area.
But I want to commend both Mr. Moakley and Mr. Blute for being here today. They have provided eloquent testimony that I think deserves the support of this committee.
Mr. RAHALL. This gentleman would like to add—since Mr. Moakley is our ranking Democrat on the Rules Committee and Chairman in waiting of that committee and former Chairman of that committee—we all support everything he requests.
[Laughter.]
Mr. RAHALL. And our former colleague knows very well how non-partisan this committee is.
Mr. PETRI. It shows that the national sport of Massachusetts isn't a blood sport.
Page 412 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
[Laughter.]
Mr. RAHALL. Although I missed it, Mr. Chairman, I guess our weekend retreat is paying off.
[Laughter.]
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Horn?
Mr. HORN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to congratulate both gentlemen. I would particularly like to congratulate the board of the port authority that hired Mr. Blute. We have a truly bipartisan effort now in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. As one who has probably made 50 trips from Logan Airport into Boston and other assorted suburbs, this is long overdue.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you, gentlemen.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Moakley and Mr. Blute follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. The next witness is our colleague, Hon. Bob Filner from southern California. He is accompanied by Mr. Leon Williams, chairman of the Metropolitan Transit Development Board, and Michael McDade, chairman of the San Diego Unified Port District, to discuss a project involving the San Diego and Arizona Eastern Railway.
Page 413 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I should have mentioned at the beginning for witnesses are not familiar with the procedure—but I suspect you are—that we will include your full statements as a part of the record and encourage you to summarize for about 5 minutes. You don't have to use the full 5 minutes, but we try to limit it to no more than 5 minutes.
Bob?
TESTIMONY OF HON. BOB FILNER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM CALIFORNIA, ACCOMPANIED BY LEON WILLIAMS, CHAIRMAN, METROPOLITAN TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT BOARD, AND MICHAEL MCDADE, CHAIRMAN, SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
SAN DIEGO AND ARIZONA EASTERN RAILWAY
Mr. FILNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. Rahall, for this opportunity to testify. I of course am proud to serve on this subcommittee under your leadership and I look forward to working with you as we go through the process of authorizing ISTEA.
I do have a full statement for the record, but I want to focus my remarks this morning on the need for what we call order infrastructure. I represent much of the California-Mexico border in my district, and much of the needs of our infrastructure has been created by the new demands that that border commerce has created.
Page 414 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I am glad to be joined today by two of San Diego's transportation leaders to highlight our transportation and border infrastructure needs and to show the unanimity that we have for our infrastructure priorities.
With me today are the chairman of the Metropolitan Transit Development Board, Mr. Leon Williams, a former Chair of the San Diego County Board of Supervisors and also a long-time member of the San Diego City Council; and Mr. Michael McDade, the chairman of the San Diego Unified Port District, who serves in the one occupation lower than an elected official, an attorney.
We are of the opinion in our area that it is the Federal trade policies that have created unfunded mandates on our region, and we lack the infrastructure to support those policies. Our top economic priority is the reestablishment of what we call the San Diego and Arizona Eastern Railroad, sometimes called the ''jobs train'', and what is now officially called State Route 905.
Currently, all the commercial traffic to or from San Diego must travel through the crowded port of Los Angeles. A rail line will provide an important and direct transcontinental commercial railing between San Diego and the rest of the Nation. This is critical to our economy and for the whole region and is the top priority of every governmental body in San Diego and every business group, whether it is the San Diego Association of Governments, our port, our Chamber of Commerce, and the total business community.
An essential element for reestablishing this rail line is an intermodal freight yard. Without this facility, obviously a railroad would be unable to handle sizeable volumes of freight. And we are requesting an authorization in ISTEA for a public-private partnership on this freight yard. It will be a model ISTEA project. Private investors are committed to raising almost $8 million. Hopefully, ISTEA authorization would complete the job.
Page 415 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The other most pressing economic need for our city is a highway connector from the border crossing to our Nation's interstate system. By Federal order, all commercial traffic between San Diego and Tijuana goes through the border crossing we call Otay Mesa. In fact, two-thirds of all commercial traffic between the United States and Mexico use this road. That is almost 300,000 trucks every week. And it is only a four-lane city street, never intended for the purpose of all this truck traffic and the traffic tie-ups and fatalities that occur are choking our city's economic development.
We need a road that will carry the commercial traffic between the international border and our interstate highway system. Since Federal action created this situation—whether the passage of NAFTA or the movement of all commercial traffic to this port of entry—we think it is time for the Federal Government to make sure that it is funded.
Obviously, there is a severe shortage of funds. All of us who have requests into ISTEA are not going to get them. We would like to see this committee create a new mechanism in ISTEA whereas border infrastructure can be funded without competing for other funds. We have several approaches in here. We have a bill in the Senate in which we create a border infrastructure fund paid for not by gas tax but by surplus customs duties. I think that is a way to go that will in fact make the people who are using the border contribute to the infrastructure that will make it work better.
I urge you all to look at that mechanism as we proceed here today.
After my 5 minutes are up, let me move to my good friend in San Diego, the chairman of the San Diego Port Authority, Mr. Michael McDade.
Page 416 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. MCDADE. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. It is a pleasure to appear before your committee today regarding a project of great importance to the economy of the southern California region. We would like to express our thanks to Congressman Filner for being out front and representing our interests.
The future of San Diego's seaport and perhaps its role as a major binational trade center may rest with the opening of the San Diego and Arizona Eastern Railroad. San Diego lost its direct rail link to the east in 1983 when a series of storms, landslides, and fires blocked the railroad line. This leaves us with only one rail line going through the crowded Los Angeles region to the north. The operator of the railroad at that time was too financially weakened to restore service.
Since that time, San Diego's economy has grown by half, NAFTA has come into play, numerous tariff barriers have fallen, the Metropolitan Transit Development Board has purchased the track, and a new much stronger rail operator now runs the freight trains on the approximately 50-mile portion between San Diego and Tecate, Mexico. Recently, the freight operator of the railroad has injected life into the plans to reopen the damaged rail link to the east with an offer to spend as much as $7.9 million on reopening the line.
We at the port of San Diego believe that the eastern rail link is vital to our plans for economic revitalization of our maritime trade. The port, in many respects, is the economic engine for the San Diego region and our mission is to assist in developing infrastructure that supports the creation of jobs—well-paying jobs—in our maritime, international trade, and related industries.
Page 417 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I might point out that a fairly little recognized fact is that along the San Diego-Mexico border there is an amazing manufacturing complex being developed in the Maquiladora industries. For example, more television sets are produced in Tijuana, directly across the border from San Diego, than any place else in the world. We have the potential with this rail line to tap into that market.
The proposed project, an intermodal facility and staging yard for the railroad, will provide direct port access and accommodate freight transfer between rail, truck, and maritime transportation modes.
Mr. Chairman, this project clearly meets the criterion of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act. It improves intermodal operations, provides for a more efficient use of transportation resources, and provides for a public-private partnership to share costs in this exciting project. We appreciate your courtesy and request your support for our efforts.
Thank you.
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, briefly, with great personal honor I present the chairman of the Metropolitan Transit Development Board, Mr. Leon Williams. On a personal note, Mr. Williams has been a mentor for many of us over the last 25 years in San Diego. His wise and always bipartisan approach has helped our city progress enormously.
Mr. Williams?
Page 418 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. WILLIAMS. Thank you very much, Congressman Filner. It has been a pleasure working with you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for having us.
It is true that MTDB does own the railroad, some 108 miles of short line railroad that goes into Mexico at Tijuana and runs about 40 miles inside Mexico and reenters the United States. It continues eastward about 70 miles through rural San Diego County and into Imperial County where it connects with Union Pacific Railroad to points east and connections to mainland Mexican railroads.
This connection will link San Diego and its port to the rest of the United States and Mexico and vastly improve the region's marketing opportunities. Restoration of the railroad also provides an important connection to the U.S. naval port facilities in San Diego.
The railroad will reduce local transportation costs and air quality by shifting appropriate goods from trucks to rail, particularly the large quantity of manufactured goods from Maquiladora plants in Mexico now being trucked to Los Angeles for shipment by rail.
I didn't know until my colleague to my far right indicated that more television sets were manufactured in that area than any place else in the world, but thank you for informing me of that and the rest of us.
The essence of our request to you is the money, the financing. Basically the opening of the line is estimated to cost around $7.9 million. Additional staging, yards, customs inspection facilities, and reliability improvements would raise that to about $29 million. In order to make the road really, really work for big-time operations, additional tunnel work and track work will allow the handling of longer and taller freight loads as well as the development of intermodal facilities and port facilities could raise the total cost over time to approximately $100 million.
Page 419 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Our contract operator, RailTex, Incorporated, is committed to reopening the line and investing the initial $7.9 million necessary to do that. Federal assistance is sought under ISTEA II for an additional $21.1 million plus future loan guarantees authorized by Federal law but currently unfunded. This will allow RailTex to borrow money from private investors at a lower interest rate, thereby maximizing its ability to fund more improvements.
Federal assistance will encourage private investment in the railroad and provide a greater ability for the private operator to fund ongoing operating and maintenance requirements.
Again, I want to add my thanks to my colleagues.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Are there any questions?
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I don't have any questions, but I would like to commend our colleague from San Diego and a very valuable member of this committee, Mr. Filner, for his doggedness and his determination to represent this project before this committee. He represents his people very well, as he has for a number of years. You gentlemen can rest assured that you are well represented here in Washington, D.C.
Mr. WILLIAMS. We know that very well.
Page 420 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. FILNER. Thank you, Mr. Rahall.
In the spirit of the weekend we just completed, I also want to point out that these requests are support by the bipartisan delegation in San Diego—Congressman Bilbray, Congressman Packard, Congressman Cunningham—all support these requests before you today.
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Horn?
Mr. HORN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I completely agree with my colleague from San Diego. What happens there, particularly on the border relationships under NAFTA, affects all the rest of us in southern California and a good part of the State. So I think you have made some very worthy suggestions.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Thank you, gentlemen, for being here today.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Filner, Mr. McDade, and Mr. Williams follow:]
[Insert here.]
Page 421 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. The next witness is our colleague, Hon. Jerry Weller, our ex-committee colleague, current House colleague. I apologize for our running a little bit behind schedule, but welcome. Please, proceed.
TESTIMONY OF HON. JERRY WELLER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM ILLINOIS
MORRIS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, ROUTE 30 RECONSTRUCTION, RICHTON ROAD RECONSTRUCTION
Mr. WELLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is good to see you and my friend, Mr. Rahall, the ranking member, and have the opportunity to return to this great room here. As some say, once you have been on Transportation, you are always on Transportation, right? So it is good to have the opportunity to be back here amongst friends and talk about some priorities for the 11th congressional district of Illinois.
Certainly, as we look back over the last few years on the transportation and infrastructure needs—and I have had the privilege of having served on your subcommittee on which you have had so much leadership—in a 1995 report to Congress, the Secretary of Transportation concluded that in order to adequately fund future highway capital needs, we need over $65 billion annually to meet the needs of investment, maintenance, and development of a proper infrastructure to create jobs in our Nation.
That is why I continue to stand in strong support with the leadership of this committee and the rank and file of this committee in taking our trust funds off budget, the Truth in Budgeting Bill. I am also anxious to work with you on earmarking the 1993 gas tax for transportation purposes, since it is a user tax on those who use our transportation system.
Page 422 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Each congressional district is geographically diverse and each district has unique funding needs. That is why I very much appreciate the opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to have a chance to appear before you and your subcommittee today, which I see has grown since I was a member of your committee.
There are three projects, all of which are endorsed by the Illinois Department of Transportation, which I would like to briefly share with you and to request your assistance and approval.
The first is in my home town of Morris, Illinois, which is desperately in need of a wider four-lane bridge over the Illinois River. It is estimated today that 20,000 vehicles cross the current two-lane bridge every day. This structure, which is the only river crossing for 12 miles, desperately needs to be widened to four lanes. Area residents and local officials often complain of traffic disruptions caused by commercial or farm wide load vehicles that require a police escort and close the bridge to all traffic.
As recently as a few months ago, a serious safety incident occurred on the bridge involving a snowplow and a passenger car. Because the bridge is so narrow, the snowplow ripped off the side of a car as it passed and traffic was backed up for miles. This is just one example. In fact, Sheriff Olson shared with me that his deputies are required about 800 times a year to stop traffic in order to allow a wide load to cross the bridge which over 20,000 vehicles use every day, disrupting traffic and causing disruption.
I am requesting authorization in this year's ISTEA to replace this two-lane Illinois Route 47 bridge with a four-lane bridge. The phase one engineering is nearing completion, which the Illinois Department of Transportation has moved forward with the support of Governor Edgar, and construction could begin as early as 2001.
Page 423 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
As I noted, the four-lane bridge in Morris has the full support of the Illinois Department of Transportation. I also note that Illinois Route 47 is part of the National Highway System.
I would also like to briefly mention U.S. Route 30. While there are several areas along this arterial street that need work, today I am speaking of the area between Larkin Avenue and Cass Avenue in Joliet, Illinois. This is a major thoroughfare in need of widening and reconstruction. It is vital to State and local officials and business development in the area, and reconstruction will allow for better travel for motorists and improved traffic flow amongst communities in this rapidly growing suburban and urban part of my district.
This project, too, has strong Illinois Department of Transportation endorsement.
The third and last project I wish to share with you and to seek your help and support is improvements for Richton Road in Crete, Illinois that is badly in need of reconstruction. This is a major road serving a rapidly growing suburban area in the Crete and Steger area. Currently, it is in very poor condition. Reconstruction of this road will provide for a much safer situation as increased suburban traffic and prevent accidents. I also want to note that this project has IDOT support.
This touches on three projects which I consider major priorities for the State of Illinois as well as for the 11th congressional district. But these are the three for which I am asking for your help.
Page 424 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I would also like to take a moment to express my support for METRIS, which is our regional public transportation for the Chicago suburban area. METRIS proposes extending their southwest service line 11 miles to Manhattan in my district. This proposed extension upgrade in the line will result in more than doubling the current ridership by 2010. This extension is critical to the future transportation needs of the rapidly growing south suburbs.
After this portion is complete, METRIS will seek to extend this line even further to the site of the former Joliet arsenal, which this committee was so instrumental in helping pass legislation this past year to create a national tall-grass prairie, a national veteran's cemetery, and an industrial park. The metro line will, of course, serve the thousands of visitors to the prairie as well as the veteran's cemetery, and help commuters come to the industrial park.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for your interest in the 11th congressional district. I ask your assistance and look forward to working with you in this coming session to pass ISTEA and put it on the President's desk.
Thank you.
[Mr. Weller's prepared statement follows.]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Page 425 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Are there questions?
[No response.]
Mr. PETRI. We will be working with you and we thank you for calling this to our attention this morning.
Mr. PETRI. The next panel of witnesses is led by our colleague, Hon. Don Manzullo, accompanied by Hon. John Cox, president, Jo Davies-Stephenson Company; Mr. William F. Dwyer, chairman, McHenry Company; Hon. Kristine Cohn, Winnebago County Board of Commissioners; and Hon. Steve Kuhn, Mayor, Village of Machesney, Illinois.
We apologize for having things a little bit fouled up in the schedule of witnesses.
Welcome.
TESTIMONY OF HON. DONALD A. MANZULLO, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM ILLINOIS, ACCOMPANIED BY JOHN COX, PRESIDENT, JO DAVIES-STEPHENSON COMPANY, WILLIAM F. DWYER, CHAIRMAN, MCHENRY COMPANY, KRISTINE COHN, WINNEBAGO COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, AND HON. STEVE KUHN, MAYOR, VILLAGE OF MACHESNEY PARK, IL
ROUTE 20 PROJECT
Page 426 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
ROUTE 62/31 INTERCHANGE
INTERCHANGE AT I–90/IL–173, MIDWEST REGIONAL INTERMODAL STUDY
INTERCHANGE AT I–90/IL–173
Mr. MANZULLO. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee. I appreciate your taking the opportunity to listen to the requests of the good people of the northern district of Illinois. Our congressional district stretches from the Mississippi River to within one county of Lake Michigan. It is the fastest growing congressional district in the State. It has the two fastest growing counties. In fact, the fastest growing county, McHenry County, grows at the rate of over 10,000 people per year. That is essentially a rural county that is experiencing some tremendous growth needs.
I personally screened the requests that my constituents made with regards to ISTEA funds and have limited it purposely to four, believing that the members of this committee need to know the real priorities in our congressional district. Three of these projects involve the National Highway System. Two of the projects involve works that are already in progress with the Illinois Department of Transportation.
First of all, with regard to McHenry County, we are asking for congestion relief for an intersection on Illinois Route 62 and 31 in Algonquin, Illinois. Both of these routes have been designated as part of the National Highway System. This intersection is one of the most congested intersections in Illinois and has reached a critical point at which congestion relief is urgently necessary. The State of Illinois has considered this to be a top priority item.
Page 427 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
As with this project and all the projects we are submitting, the Illinois Department of Transportation has signed on in eager anticipation that they are willing to work with us and with this committee in order to complete the projects.
The second request is the continuation of a 50-mile stretch of U.S. Highway 20 between Freeport and Galena. It is absolutely vital that this part of Highway 20, which is part of the National Highway System, be expanded to a four-lane to safely accommodate the high volume of traffic. Congress has in the past earmarked money for this project. The State of Illinois is currently conducting a feasibility study for a four-lane expansion. It is also designated as a high priority item.
The third request is for construction of an interchange at Interstate 90 and Illinois Route 173. This is the interstate that generally goes from Chicago through Rockford to Madison and up to the twin cities. These highways have also been designated as part of the National Highway System, but there currently is no cloverleaf or other access where they cross. The interchange is needed to provide relief from growing traffic congestion. The congestion will further be exacerbated from an expanding nearby Motorola plant that will eventually employ between 5,000 and 7,000 workers.
Finally, the fourth request is funding for a study for a midwest regional intermodal facility that would improve methods of shipping goods throughout our State and our Nation.
The first witness is Kristine Cohn. She is the chairman of the Winnebago County Board of Commissioners. She will be taking about both the interchange at Interstate 90 and Route 173 and the midwest regional intermodal facility feasibility study.
Page 428 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Ms. COHN. Thank you, Congressman.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee. My name is Kristine Cohn, chairman of the Board in Winnebago County, Illinois. I thank you for the opportunity to speak this morning before your subcommittee on our proposed interchange on State Road 173 and Interstate 90, and also to study the impact and benefits of an intermodal rail and truck facility in Rochelle, Illinois.
When ISTEA was created 5 years ago, it implemented many new programs. One of these programs was our National Highway System. As you know, the National Highway System's central theme is to provide an interconnecting surface transportation system with the Nation's other transportation facilities to move people, transport goods to and from their markets, as well as to assist moving our Nation's defense force and their supplies.
I am here today to ask for ISTEA assistance to construct an interchange where two highways on the National Highway System do not connect with each other. That is Illinois State 173 and Interstate 90. These two highways must connect. This will meet the intent of the National Highway System and address the current void.
It will also provide for more direct access to our region's Illinois National Guard unit that is located just 5 miles west of this proposed interchange. It will also encourage and promote economic development activity in northern Illinois. Motorola is completing their new facility in Harvard, again just 19 miles to the east of Route 173 and Interstate 90. When completed, this facility will raise the profile of northern Illinois as an economic growth area and 173 must be there.
Page 429 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
This will also assist in Rockford's urban area to develop 173. In the long-range transportation plan for our area, this has four components. The interchange at 173 and 90 is just one part of those components. The other two are constructing 173 to be a four-lane highway and then also doing another intersection at 251 and 173.
We are requesting today $16.5 million for the cost of the interchange at 173 and 90. Finally, and most importantly, this project combines not only bipartisan support from community and business leaders, but also the county officials from all three counties in northern Illinois along this 173 corridor.
I would also like to ask you for assistance in my second project today, to study the impact and benefits of an intermodal rail and truck facility in Rochelle, Illinois. This facility will have rail connection to the Greater Rockford Airport that is 21 miles north of Rochelle. Discussions I have had with the Rochelle community leaders indicate that this $600,000 request would study the feasibility for an intermodal facility.
Rochelle is served by two of the Nation's largest class one railroads, Union Pacific and Burlington Santa Fe, and interstate highways of the National Highway System, Interstate 39 and 88. Most of the truck and rail freight movement through this community is either coming from or going to the Chicago or the Milwaukee metropolitan areas. However, some of the large quantities of goods are not intended for these areas, but they are supposed to be coming back to the communities in northern Illinois, southern Wisconsin, and eastern Iowa.
Greater Rockford Airport, which is a direct rail line connection between it and Rochelle, is not only a port of entry, but it is also a foreign trade zone. UPS has constructed a regional air hub in the airport and is planning to expand its facility within the near future. This will not only increase the activity at our airport, but also impact UPS and their air hub.
Page 430 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The greater Rockford area local manufacturers export 30 percent of their goods. Currently, trucks must travel to rail facilities in Chicago and Milwaukee or O'Hare International Airport. Transporting these products to either the Chicago or Milwaukee area increases shipping costs, local companies add to congestion levels and air quality levels.
An efficient network of transportation facilities would not only benefit our trading opportunities, but also would promote and strengthen the partnerships between private sector, Federal, State, and local governments.
Mr. Chairman, the communities, counties, and business leaders in northern Illinois are united behind this effort to obtain ISTEA funds for both of these projects. I am here today representing the other elected officials, communities, and counties in asking for your support. The National Highway System is the major link in our Nation's surface transportation system. The financial resources available must be spent where they are needed to complete the objectives of that National Highway System.
The essence of these two projects is that they will establish connections between different urban areas and counties and will finally make it one country.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the opportunity to present these two projects.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Page 431 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. MANZULLO. To also comment on the interchange of Interstate 90 and Illinois Route 173, it is my pleasure to introduce Mayor Steve Kuhn, the mayor of the village of Machesney Park.
Mr. KUHN. Thank you, Congressman.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Surface Transportation Subcommittee. My name is Steve Kuhn, the mayor of the village of Machesney Park.
The project in which we are seeking ISTEA funding assistance is the connection of two highways which have been designated on the National Highway System, Illinois Route 173 and Interstate 90. These two highways currently have no interconnection which is inconsistent with the connection of the National Highway System. To meet the intent of the National Highway System, we are proposing the construction of an interchange at this location.
The proposed interchange is part of a larger plan to improve the Illinois 173 corridor. This plan has been adopted by the Rockford Area Transportation Study, the State Line Area Transportation Study, the Illinois Department of Transportation, and the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority. The corridor plan, which is estimated to cost $54 million, includes the widening of Illinois 173, an interchange at Illinois 251 and Illinois 173, and the proposed interchange at Illinois 173 and Interstate 90. Today, we are respectfully requesting $16.5 million for the interchange at Illinois 173 and Interstate 90. The remaining improvements of the corridor plan will be undertaken by State, local, and private sources.
An interchange at Illinois 173 and Interstate 90 has both regional and national significance. Interstate 90 is a major transportation facility of the northern corridor of the United States. Interstate 90 is a facility which currently is a major tool of both interstate and intrastate commerce. Further, located on Illinois 173, is the region's National Guard Armory Unit. This unit houses the 404th Chemical Brigade. The proposed interchange would greatly enhance the unit's mobilization ability. Also, located on Illinois 173, is Rock Cut State Park, which is the most traveled park within the State's park system receiving more than 800,000 visitors annually. Currently, Rock Cut State Park has no direct interstate access.
Page 432 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
An additional benefit of this project will be the improved access across employment centers of northern Illinois and southern Wisconsin. Further, the interchange will increase the ability of regional manufacturers to move their materials and products. An excellent example of this impact is Motorola. Recently, Motorola located a manufacturing plant in Harvard, Illinois, a community located 19 miles from the interchange. When fully operational, the facility will employ 7,000 people. Much of the work force is coming from the Rockford area and southern Wisconsin, making the interchange at Illinois 173 and Interstate 90 a key. Further, the interchange will allow for quicker access of Motorola products to the National Highway System.
The construction of the Illinois 173 and Interstate 90 interchange will improve regional access to a commuter rail service which runs from Harvard, a community which is located 19 miles east of the interchange, to Chicago. With improved access to the train station, residents of northern Illinois and southern Wisconsin would decrease the number of automobile trips to and from the Chicago area.
In closing, I would like to ask for your support for the Illinois 173 and Interstate 90 project. Your support of this project will improve upon the National Highway System. A strong National Highway System is vital for not only northern Illinois and southern Wisconsin, but also to the country. Once again, thank you for this opportunity. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have regarding this project proposal.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you, Mayor.
Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, our next witness is a good friend of ours, former Congressman John Cox from the 16th district of Illinois. John understands the issue with regard to the 50-mile stretch of U.S. Highway 20 between Freeport and Galena. Because he has been a lifelong resident of Galena, he understands that area very well. He is also president of the Jo Davies-Stephenson Company, a four-lane association.
Page 433 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
It is with great honor that I have the privilege of introducing former Congressman John Cox.
Mr. COX. Thank you, Congressman Manzullo. All of us in northwestern Illinois appreciate support and commitment you have made to Highway 20.
Mr. Chairman, Congressman Rahall, and all members of the committee, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to be here again and talk about this issue. As some of you may recall, in 1991 I was here testifying essentially on the same project. You were kind enough to provide support in the amount of $4 million to back up the work of the State of Illinois to complete a feasibility study that involved environmental impact issues and corridor. That study has been extended for a year because of a huge citizen involvement in northwestern Illinois both in commitment to the project and in commitment to doing this road in the right way to protect the beauty of northwestern Illinois.
Highway 20 runs from Freeport to Galena. It is about a 48-to 50-mile stretch of two-lane highway. It is one of the most dangerous highways in the State of Illinois. Over 2 million people travel across Highway 20 to visit my hometown of Galena, the second largest tourist attraction in the State of Illinois. People find great frustration in the amount of hills and curves and inability to pass slower moving vehicles, heavy trucks, et cetera. So the need for a four-lane highway in this area is clear both to the general population in northwestern Illinois, but also to the Illinois Department of Transportation.
If you were to look at a map, you would see that this is a stretch across central Illinois that has somehow been avoided. The fact of the matter is in 1965 a portion of Highway 20 was built from East Dubuque, Illinois, which is right on the Mississippi River, toward Galena, and stopped about 3 miles west of Galena and was never finished.
Page 434 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
So when I was here in the early 1990s, I brought this project before you. Now Congressman Manzullo is very aggressively supporting the continuation of this work.
The specific work that is being proposed at this point—because that study is not yet completed—is an upgrade of an intersection on Business 20, immediately off existing Highway 20 and Illinois Highway 26. This is fundamental to the ongoing success of the Highway 20 improvement project.
We very much appreciated your support in the past. We are asking at this point for a commitment of Federal funds of $6.1 million to the completion of this upgrade project and your ongoing and continued support for the four-lane upgrade of Highway 20.
One of the reasons this project has been delayed somewhat over the years is that although it is an extremely beautiful portion of Illinois, there are a large amount of hills, ridges, and highway construction problems that need to be faced. Without the assistance of this subcommittee, Congress, and the Federal Government, this project will probably be delayed even longer, again jeopardizing lives, harming economic development throughout northwestern Illinois. We certainly do need your support in this regard.
We thank you for the opportunity to be here and ask for your support at this point.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Page 435 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. MANZULLO. Our next and final witness is Mr. Bill Dwyer, chairman of the McHenry County Transportation Committee Board. He will be testifying on behalf of the Route 62 and 31 intersection.
Mr. DWYER. Thank you, Congressman.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and the committee.
On behalf of the citizens of McHenry County, I want to thank you for the opportunity to appear before this committee to discuss our search for solutions to the approaching gridlock at the intersection of Illinois Route 62, Illinois Route 31, and Algonquin Road. This is one of the most congested intersections in the State of Illinois.
McHenry County is the fastest growing County in Illinois and the sixth fastest growing county in the United States. Because of this rapid development, an ever increasing strain is being placed on the transportation infrastructure of the county. Traffic volumes at this intersection have steadily increased since the 1950s when McHenry County first began to experience sustained suburban development.
Illinois Route 62, Algonquin Road, and their intersection with Illinois Route 31 are all part of the National Highway System. This designation is indicative of the regional significance of this highway corridor, which provides the primary link between residential population in southeast McHenry County and the gateway to the employment center in northwest Cook County. As part of the National Highway System, this route is eligible to receive Federal funding for improvements.
Page 436 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Illinois Route 62 and 31 provides an important regional function by feeding traffic in southeast McHenry County directly to the Interstate Highway System. Illinois 62 provides access to both the Northwest Tollway and Illinois Route 53 and Interstate 290 Extension.
McHenry County has seen a consistent population growth pattern. Between 1950 and 1995 the population of the county has increased 300 percent, doubling between 1950 and 1970 and again between 1970 and 1995. The majority of this increase has occurred in the southeast section of the county.
This growth is expected to continue over the next 25 years. A look at the ever changing traffic patterns at this intersection provides a vivid insight of the approaching traffic gridlock. The traffic in 1985 was 24,700 vehicles per day; 1989 traffic, 27,800 per day; 1996 traffic, 38,000 per day; and the estimated 2020 traffic, 63,000 vehicles per day. In the morning and afternoon rush hours, traffic is backed up for at least half a mile and many times up to a mile.
What have been the local initiatives during the past 5 years by the McHenry County Highway Department to alleviate this situation? The Illinois Route 31/Rakow Road/Randall Road corridor forms part of the National Highway System. The total cost of these improvement projects totals $16 million with the funding generated entirely from local revenue sources. In 1997, the McHenry County Highway Department will commence the first stage of widening Algonquin Road west of the Illinois Route 31 and Illinois Route 62 intersection. When completed, an additional investment of approximately $11 million will have been made. While these local initiatives have helped the overall traffic congestion in this corridor, the problem still exists at the Route 31 and 62 intersection.
Page 437 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The McHenry County Board has formed a transportation advisory panel consisting of mayors, presidents of villages, McHenry County EDC, and concerned citizens to oversee an $800,000 study of the intersection, with joint dollar participation by the Illinois Department of Transportation and McHenry County. Mr. Chairman, 13 alternatives are being examined by this committee and our consultants. These alternatives will be pared down to final recommendations to McHenry County Board and Illinois Department of Transportation.
The improvements recommended by this study will be the ultimate decision to reduce traffic congestion at this intersection. The estimated cost of implementing these improvements is as follows: environmental and engineering studies, $5.6 million; right-of-way acquisition, $5 million; construction costs, which includes a bridge over the Fox River, $40 million; for a total project of $50.6 million.
Today we are requesting $10 million for the engineering and environmental studies and right-of-way acquisition over the next 5 years and ask your support.
I thank the subcommittee for your time in listening to our problems. Thank you for your help.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Are there questions of this panel?
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I have no questions, but I would like to commend the panel and to tell my colleague, Don, and former colleague, John, that I have been on this stretch of Route 21 and know full well the problems that exist there. I am glad to see the feasibility study is well underway. I appreciate your testimony here today.
Page 438 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Pease?
Mr. PEASE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I had a question for Ms. Cohn, but since she is not here I will ask you, Mayor. It is based on her statement, so this may not be fair.
Mr. KUHN. I think the fact that our comments were very similar helps demonstrate our cooperative nature.
Mr. PEASE. It deals with the Interstate 90 and State Route 173 project. That request is for $16.5 million for that interchange. It was presented as part of a larger package that included widening of the highway and another interchange between two state roads for a total of $50 million plus.
It wasn't clear to me from the presentation whether the request is for this committee to approve the $16.5 million, which is the total cost of that intersection, on the assumption that the State and local governments will fund the rest of the project later.
Mr. KUHN. That is correct.
Mr. PEASE. So there is no State or local participation in the request for the interchange at 173 and Interstate 90?
Page 439 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. KUHN. Their participation would be for the balance of the project.
Mr. PEASE. But nothing on this project?
Mr. KUHN. That is correct.
Mr. PEASE. Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you all. I have to say that Don is a persistent and effective representative of the interests of your area. We have spoken a number of times about it. I know you all are wrestling with the tremendous growth you are experiencing. We will be trying to work with you as the process moves forward.
Mr. MANZULLO. I appreciate that very much. I would just like to make a comment.
Whatever State and local participation the committee would request—we of course would not turn down Federal funds in order to do that.
[Laughter.]
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Manzullo, Mr. Cox, Mr. Dwyer, Ms. Cohn, and Mr. Kuhn follow:]
Page 440 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. I see we are ready for the next group, which is led by Hon. Ken Calvert. He is accompanied by Marge Tandy, councilwoman from Hemet, California, Riverside County Transportation Commission; and John Tavilogne, the supervisor of Riverside County, California, and also a member of the Riverside County Transportation Commission.
TESTIMONY OF HON. KEN CALVERT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM CALIFORNIA, ACCOMPANIED BY MARGE TANDY, COUNCILWOMAN, RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, HEMET, CA; AND JOHN TAVILOGNE, SUPERVISOR, RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS
Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Rahall, for conducting these hearings on the upcoming reauthorization of ISTEA. Your leadership is vital to ensure that this worthwhile endeavor moves forward.
I want to bring your attention to today's USA Today newspaper. I have always said that California is number one and San Bernadino and Riverside County unfortunately is number one in bumper-to-bumper gridlock in a chart that was put in the front of USA Today. Mr. Horn, I was going to point out to you that Los Angeles was way down the list. It was number four.
Mr. HORN. Thank you for your sympathy. I will remember it well in the markup.
Page 441 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
[Laughter.]
Mr. CALVERT. Washington, D.C., by the way, was number two.
Mr. RAHALL. Ken, did West Virginia make the chart?
Mr. CALVERT. It was probably 50 on the list.
I know you have many witnesses to hear from today, so I will be brief.
I would like to introduce a gentleman I have known and worked with for many years, especially on transportation issues, Riverside County Supervisor John Tavilogne. Also with him today is councilmember Marge Tandy from the city of Hemet. They are going to share with the subcommittee their expertise on transportation issues in southern California, which is number one in bumper-to-bumper traffic. I know you will find their testimony informative and very helpful.
I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Rahall, and the rest of the committee, and look forward to working with you in the upcoming weeks on this very important subject.
Now let me turn over the presentation to John and Marge.
Mr. TAVILOGNE. Thank you, Congressman Calvert. We very much appreciate your representation as well.
Page 442 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, and Mr. Rahall, we had a very nice dinner last night. I enjoyed the opportunity to meet with you. My name is John Tavilogne. I am a member of the County Board of Supervisors for Riverside County. I am here today representing the Riverside County Transportation Commission.
We want to thank all of you for allowing us to make our presentation today on projects that are critical to us as you go through the reauthorization of ISTEA and provide for earmarked projects.
We know that you have a very difficult task ahead of you as you work through the many requests throughout the Nation, but we believe ours will be a high priority. As our congressman mentioned, we suffer from great strain on our highways due to the congestion that has been occurring over the last 12 years. Many of you may know that the two-county region of Riverside and San Bernadino over the past 12 years has experienced tremendous growth. In fact, our population has more than doubled in that period of time.
Along with that increased population, we have seen the great strain on our highways. There is a tremendous need to provide for safety measures on the highways we currently have, as well as congestion mitigation, air quality, and technology improvements, as well as improvements to help improve our economy, which you know has suffered like so many throughout the Nation.
We have submitted our request of these earmarked projects under the four categories of highways and bridges, new rail start projects, bus capital projects, and intelligent transportation systems. Under the highway and bridge projects, we have two that have been identified. The first is what we call our ''four corners'' project. The four corners project is in the northwest section of the county in the area of Corona, butting the San Bernadino County line. Highway 71 is a State route that travels north and south between Riverside and San Bernadino.
Page 443 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
San Bernadino County has a project to improve that highway into six lanes. However, in Riverside County it dumps out into two lanes upon its completion. We need an additional $20 million just to improve it to the minimum standards of four lanes, which would also provide meter ramps as well as a transition lane.
We bundled this project in with three other segments that are of critical importance to the four corners project. The second in terms of priorities is what we call our Galena overpass. The Galena overpass is on the 15 freeway less than a mile to the east of the 71. The Galena overpass will be a major goods movement corridor travelling east and west from the 15 freeway over to the 71 and into Los Angeles and Orange counties. We need this project desperately. We are asking for $5 million for that segment.
Two other parts of the four corners project are the Green River overpass, which will add a capital improvement of additional two lanes on the overpass, which will help mitigate ongoing congestion, and also environmental and investment studies for what we propose as the South Corona bypass, which will eventually be a north-south bypass connecting to the 71 into the southwestern portion of Riverside County to connect to the northwestern portion of the county.
The total request for this four corners project is $38.5 million. Overall, our county has provided and allocated $15 million to the total project at this point.
Additionally, another project of extreme importance to us on the highway and bridges is State Route 79. Some of you may know that in Riverside County metropolitan water district—I am sure Congressman Horn is familiar with the metropolitan water district and their major reservoir that they are currently constructing in the southwest portion of the county in the city of Hemet—this is the largest public works project in the country, a $3 billion project. When completed, it will be the largest reservoir in the State. It will be serving approximately 2 million visitors each year.
Page 444 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The roads serving this reservoir is a two-lane highway and it must be improved to four lanes. It will take our traffic from the southwest portion of our county—from the 15 freeway to Temecula—on through to the 10 freeway to the north into the cities of the desert in the Coachella Valley.
My colleague, Councilwoman Tandy, will be speaking more on that when I finish my testimony and I am sure she will be able to add more to the benefits of the project at the reservoir.
In terms of new rail start projects, I will very briefly touch on two and Marge Tandy will also touch on those as well. We have the intercity rail project which will serve the cities in the Coachella Valley, Palm Springs, from Los Angeles. We also have the rail passenger service along the I–215 corridor, which is a north-south corridor.
As for the bus capital projects, we have two as well. One will be our bus and rail maintenance facility in the city of Perris, which will help service our southwest portion of the county in terms of bus maintenance, and also the rail service we intend to provide.
An exciting project that we hope to have funds for is the Ballard bus project. The Ballard Bus Company is out of Canada and they are producing hydrogen fuel cell buses that are excellent in terms of air quality. They actually have provided one in our area for a demonstration. It is very exciting to see these in operation. As you know, our air quality in the southern California region is in desperate need of assistance.
Page 445 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
This panel has a little time left for your colleague.
Ms. TANDY. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee.
Like all other districts in the land, we have a transportation urgency. The regional water supply agency, Metropolitan Water District, is building an enormous water storage reservoir and major recreation facility in Hemet's backyard. In a few years, there will be 2 million visitors a year. The access route, SR 79, is a two-lane road largely runs on the main streets of our city. SR 79 is on the National Highway System and is not scheduled for rebuilding for over a decade.
We cannot wait with the impact of these people coming into our city. We need to start an environmental planning and engineering work now. Currently the traffic from Palm Springs and east of San Diego uses 79 because it is an essential city street and detours over 18 miles would translate into an hour of additional time and congestion through one of the busiest intersections in three major highways.
Right now, this highway needs to be connected with Highway 10 to Highway 15. It will enhance the traffic from San Diego. It will also help the NAFTA group coming up through and going out to the desert. It will serve more than one purpose. And right now, when you come off Highway 10 with the trucks, they come out on Highway 60 to 215 and it is a bottle-neck and takes at least an extra hour. That will cut an hour when getting through from one area to the other.
Page 446 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Also, my colleague has touched on the rail corridor. Right now to get into Los Angeles or Orange County, we would have to drive to Riverside and take the metro in. If we could have the link in from Riverside to Perris, it would be a big help. Some day we hope to come back and ask for it all the way into Hemet and San Jacinto Valley. But right now, we would like to get it to Perris.
I do thank you for your time this morning. Thank you very much.
Mr. PETRI. We thank you all.
Are there questions?
Mr. Horn?
Mr. HORN. I would just say, Mr. Chairman, that Long Beach is 60 to 80 miles away from this constituency that Ken Calvert so ably represents. Thousands of the workers in southern Los Angeles County come from the areas they are talking about. So we are talking about 120-mile and 140-mile round trip for thousands of workers that find low-income housing, four bedrooms that they can afford, in this area. It is the greatest growth area in the State of California.
So this is all interconnected between home and job and these projects provide access to jobs. We want our workers from there to be on time. So these are all worthy projects as far as I am concerned.
Page 447 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. Well, it is startling to hear that while we are talking about projects to accommodate other things, you are doing a $3 billion projects in your region for your water growth needs. It is very impressive.
Mr. CALVERT. In California, we have a saying, ''Whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting.'' We need all the water we can get.
[Laughter.]
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman and Mr. Rahall, I appreciate your indulgence and look forward to working with you to get these projects all funded.
Mr. PETRI. Up in Wisconsin, we wouldn't agree with you. We drink and fight about whiskey up there.
[Laughter.]
[The prepared statements of Mr. Tavaglione and Ms. Tandy follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. Our next witness is our colleague, Jim Bunning, from Kentucky. He is accompanied by his neighbor across the now-flooded Ohio, Hon. Roxanne Qualls, mayor of Cincinnati.
Page 448 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Welcome.
TESTIMONY OF HON. JIM BUNNING, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM KENTUCKY, ACCOMPANIED BY HON. ROXANNE QUALLS, MAYOR, CINCINNATI, OH, AND HON. THOMAS L. GUIDUGLI, MAYOR, NEWPORT, KY
I–71 PROJECT
Mr. BUNNING. And also having joined me at the table is the mayor of Newport, Kentucky, Tom Guidugli.
I would like to thank the Chairman and the ranking member, my good friends on the subcommittee, for giving us this time to testify in support of our request for $329.7 million in section 3 new start funds, and $50.5 million in Federal-aid highway funds for the I–71 corridor project between Southern Ohio and Northern Kentucky.
Because time is limited, the mayor of Cincinnati, the Hon. Roxanne Qualls, will be making a more detailed presentation to you today. I have already submitted for the record my detailed testimony.
However, I do want to mention to this committee—and I want them to know how important this project is. The I–71 corridor which connects Southern Ohio and Northern Kentucky is going to become a devastating bottle-neck. We need to continue the work on this project so we can prevent that from happening.
Page 449 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
This is certainly my top priority and I hope the subcommittee will give us favorable consideration to this request. I want to point out to the subcommittee that this going to be a 50/50 match. The local communities are matching whatever the Federal Government is able to put in 50/50, not the usual 80/20. We have put that in so that you know how seriously we think this project needs to be funded.
It is my pleasure to present Hon. Roxanne Qualls to you.
Ms. QUALLS. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, before I start my testimony, I would like to introduce two councilmembers from the city of Fairfield, Sterling Uhler and Terry Sonnger. They are participants in our regional council of governments and supporters of this project.
I want to thank you for this opportunity to ask for your support for $329.7 million in section 3 new start funds and $50.5 million in Federal-aid highway funds for the heavily traveled Cincinnati, northern Kentucky I–71 corridor. I want to thank the subcommittee for its past support.
Funds for this project were authorized in the National Highway System legislation passed by the House in 1994 and 1995. Funds were appropriated in the fiscal years 1994 and 1995 Department of Transportation Appropriations Acts for a major investment analysis, and in the fiscal year 1996 and 1997 Department of Transportation appropriates all for draft environmental impact statement and preliminary engineering.
Page 450 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We also are seeking $500,000 in the fiscal year 1998 Department of Transportation appropriation to study additional transit options in northern Kentucky. We already have obligated the fiscal year 1994, 1995, and 1996 appropriations and are currently in the process of preparing and filing the formal grant application for the fiscal year 1997 appropriation with the Federal Transit Administration.
The Cincinnati/northern Kentucky corridor extends from Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, northeast through Covington, Kentucky and Cincinnati, Ohio to southern Warren County. The funds requested in this reauthorization are for the first operable segment of the corridor from the city of Covington across the Ohio River into the city of Cincinnati, north through the University Medical Center and the city of Norwood, to the cities of Montgomery and Blue Ash. Included is the renovation of the Fort Washingtonway highway, which will reconnect downtown Cincinnati with the river front. It is scheduled to coincide with the construction and opening of the new riverfront stadium. The renovation includes a multi-modal transportation center to serve all the types of transit services currently and anticipated to be operational in the metropolitan area.
The Ohio/Kentucky/Indiana Regional Council of Governments, of which I am the immediate past president, has moved quickly to implement the project. We are currently nearing completion of the analysis, with three of the phases already completed and selection of the locally preferred alternative scheduled after reconsideration of several technologies in northern Kentucky.
We are committed to an aggressive community involvement effort, which has attracted hundreds of citizens. The project is advancing because of broad support among government officials and private sector leadership. The magnitude of the local support for this project is evidenced by the fact that our request to you today, as Congressman Bunning referenced, is based on a 50 percent non-Federal share. The leadership of the cities and counties of northern Kentucky and the Commonwealth of Kentucky strongly support the project. The city of Cincinnati, southwestern Ohio counties, and the State of Ohio also strongly support this project because of its impact as a catalyst for economic development and improved service.
Page 451 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
This corridor is among the most heavily travelled and congested in the metropolitan area. These problems are particularly severe in downtown Cincinnati and the University of Cincinnati Medical Center area. Potential ridership, availability of rights of way in the corridor, projected capital costs, and other factors justified the selection of the corridor and the need for the major investment analysis.
The corridor serves the city of Cincinnati, Ohio and is anchored on each end by major travel generators. On the Ohio northern end is southern Warren County, a major employment center. On the southern end is the Greater Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, which is the fastest growing hub in the country because of Delta Airlines' hub expansion, which means we anticipate going from 5 million enplanements in 1991 to a projected 14 million enplanements after 2000.
The city is planning major downtown and river front development. The region's adopted long-range transportation plan gave the corridor the highest priority for study. The Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky metropolitan area is classified as an ozone non-attainment area and does not conform to mobile-source nitrous oxide rules. We must have new transportation solutions if we are to achieve air quality improvements mandated by the 1990 Clean Air Act.
And last but not least, we have obtained an unusual degree of regional and interstate cooperation in the planning and operation of our transportation system.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the Greater Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky community and the city of Cincinnati, we look forward to your positive consideration of our request.
Page 452 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Thank you very much.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. Bunning has been in a number of times talking to members of the committee and our staff about this project. A lot of deliberation and thought has gone into a variety of different options. This is the thing that seems to have come together. I know also he has put in a lot of personal time and effort into helping to provide leadership in the region on this.
Ms. QUALLS. Mr. Bunning has provided tremendous leadership for the entire region on this program.
Mr. BUNNING. Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Are there any questions?
Mr. HORN. I just want to say, Mr. Chairman, that this is an unbelievable growth area. A few years ago I Chaired a Federal agency that looked at 72 cities in this country as to where it should locate. The top two were Covington, Cincinnati, and Louisville. Kentucky won on both counts among 72 cities in quality of life. As we looked at it in terms of the airport expansion, we knew that would happen, good fares in terms of getting people in and out of the airport, but it is a tremendous growth area and a beautiful area. So I can see where you have major problems. You are to be commended.
Page 453 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. BUNNING. Thank you.
Ms. KELLY. I would like to congratulate you all for coming before the committee with a well thought out plan that is 50/50, showing the extent of your commitment to it, but also the fact that it is a true intermodal plan and isn't focused in one thing. I am glad to hear you thinking along true intermodal lines.
Thank you.
Mr. BUNNING. Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you all very much.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Bunning and Ms. Qualls follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. It is a great pleasure for me to introduce and for me to ask to take the stand our colleague, Hon. Chip Pickering, who is accompanied by Hon. Kirk Fordice, the governor of the State of Mississippi. Mr. Pickering will introduce the rest of the panel.
Please, proceed. Welcome
Page 454 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
TESTIMONY OF HON. CHARLES W. PICKERING, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM MISSISSIPPI, ACCOMPANIED BY HON. KIRK FORDICE, GOVERNOR, STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, ART NEAL, VICE PRESIDENT, LOWNDES COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, AND ROBERT ROBINSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PEARL RIVER /AIRPORT CONNECTORS PROJECT
MISSISSIPPI HIGHWAY–45
MISSISSIPPI HIGHWAY–15
Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for this opportunity to testify before the committee.
It is with great honor and pride that I introduce this panel this morning: the governor of Mississippi, Governor Kirk Fordice; Art Neal, the supervisor from Lowndes County, Mississippi; and the executive director of the Mississippi State Department of Transportation, Dr. Robert Robinson.
This panel represents the type of cooperation and planning the committee wants to see, the strong support of the State, the local community at the supervisor and mayor level, and working closely with the congressional delegation. The projects we will discuss this morning have broad support. I will submit for the record—along Highway 15 a project that is important to the middle part of our district—letters of support from all the boards of supervisors along that corridor as well as eight mayors. I will also submit for the record letters from Senator Lott and Senator Cochran supporting these projects. So it has strong support both at the local, State, and the Federal level.
Page 455 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I will turn this testimony over to Governor Kirk Fordice, who was elected in 1991 running as a straightforward, straight-talking businessman. He has taken Mississippi to the heights of economic development. He understands the importance of infrastructure and construction. He was the CEO of Fordice Construction.
During his tenure, he has become a leader in welfare reform and other innovative programs, but most importantly he has taken our State's economy to the highest levels we have ever experienced with the lowest unemployment in 17 years and the highest growth, recognized by U.S. News and World Report and corporations all across this country for the business climate and the growth we have experienced over his term. He is the first Republican governor since reconstruction to be elected to two terms.
It is with great pleasure that I introduce Governor Kirk Fordice.
Mr. PETRI. Welcome, sir.
Governor FORDICE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would say, Mr. Chairman, that I had a delightful dinner with your governor, Tommy Thompson, last night. He is one of my best friends in the governor's organization, and a great man from Wisconsin.
Mr. PETRI. He is my most prominent constituent. He lives in the district I represent.
Governor FORDICE. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, Mr. Chairman and other members of the committee.
Page 456 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
As Congressman Pickering said, I have been in construction all my life. I am a civil engineer and a contractor. I fully recognize the inexorable relationship between economic development and transportation infrastructure. They just can't be separated.
Nowhere I think is this vital connection more significant than in the south of the late 20th century. The economic outlook for the southern States improves continuously, but we must have the necessary transportation infrastructure and support in order to proceed with our development.
As the past chairman of the Southern Governors Associations and as the chairman of SGA's report on transportation infrastructure in the south, I have witnessed a clear consensus that transportation is vital to the continued economic expansion of the south. It is not an accident that we refer to roads as traffic arteries because transportation infrastructure is the absolute life blood of commerce.
Throughout history, those nations that provided the best and most efficient transportation services have been the most powerful and prosperous societies on earth. Witness the Roman Empire. The United States of America has met this challenge and in one lifetime we have gone from dirt roads to the magnificent super highways of the interstate system.
But we cannot rest on our laurels. When something that has served us well becomes antiquated and no longer meets our needs, we must not hesitate to provide the necessary innovations and maintenance to ensure continued excellence. As a private sector businessman and economic development governor, the flagship of my administration has been and continues to be economic development. Outside of the legislative session, I spend almost all my time on economic development.
Page 457 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I would state simply, Mr. Chairman, that the current Federal-aid highway formula is far too complex, unwieldy, and outdated to provide an equitable, efficient, and productive distribution of funds for my home State and for many others. I offer my support today for the streamlined transportation efficiency program, otherwise known as Step 21, for the 21st century.
As a coalition of donor and non-donor States, Step 21 offers a flexible, streamlined, and equitable proposal to reorient the Nation's surface transportation program to today's and tomorrow's needs instead of yesterday's. Step 21 builds the traditional ISTEA partnerships and modernizes Federal-aid formulas to meet the economic development needs of 21st century America.
In Mississippi, we have several pressing transportation issues in need of immediate attention. One critical need for the State of Mississippi's transportation system consists of the Pearl River/airport parkway connectors between Jackson International Airport and the central business district of our capitol city of Jackson. The project will amplify economic development along this important corridor and open adjacent areas to direct access from Jackson to the international airport, which I think is very important for traffic congestion and the fact that there is really only one way to get there now from Jackson to the international airport.
In addition, the airport parkway connectors will improve energy efficiency and reduce accidents. The APC meets the eligibility criteria established in the 1991 ISTEA and the project is on the National Highway System. The total cost to build the airport corridor is approximately $149 million. Congress has authorized $3.1 million for the initial stages of acquisition and planning. An additional $65 million is now necessary for the project's preconstruction work.
Page 458 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Dr. Bob Robinson, executive director of the Mississippi Department of Transportation, can provide additional details on this crucial project for Mississippi's continued economic health.
Our second goal consists of two additional lanes for U.S. Highway 45 between Columbus and Brooksville, Mississippi. Construction of these two additional lanes to parallel existing lanes will substantially reduce accidents and is fundamental to continued economic development along the corridor. This segment of U.S. 45 is a vital link between Columbus and Meridian where we have the Columbus Air Force Base and the Meridian Naval Air Station.
This project is also eligible for Federal-aid funds and is on the National Highway System. Art Neal of Columbus will talk to this in more detail.
I also ask for your support for the provision of two additional lanes for Mississippi 15 from Laurel, Mississippi to the Winston County line. This highway serves as a lifesaving role of Mississippi's hurricane evacuation route.
Mr. Chairman, I would also like to put in a word of support for the I–69 corridor that will go from Canada to Mexico eventually. We certainly would like to have as much of I–69 as we can run through the State of Mississippi.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, let me say a word about the Tennessee Tombigbee water system, which is so important for the commerce in our area. We are deeply disturbed to learn that the funds for TenTom this year have been cut by 29 percent and ask for your attention to this important component of our regional and national economic health. This excessive reduction in waterway funding will impact lock maintenance and dredging, which are absolutely essential to keep the waterway going.
Page 459 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for your time and for your interest in Mississippi, the hospitality State.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you for joining us.
Mr. NEAL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and honorable members.
I will confine my remarks to the 15-mile section of the U.S. highway just south of Columbus, Mississippi, located in southwest Lowndes County.
This is the only stretch of U.S. 45 that is not four-laned or has not been funded for four-laning. Along this stretch of Highway 45 is a giant warehouse complex where there is already $1 billion of capital investment. We have another $600 million slated there, and the four-laning of this section is very important to that project. From a safety standpoint, we have over 500 trucks per day entering and leaving that facility alone.
In addition to the warehouse facility, which will employ up to 1,000 in our area, we have an industrial park that utilizes U.S. 45. There are many industries there. We have upgraded the roads leading to and from U.S. 45, but we still have a bottle-neck on that 15-mile section.
As the governor pointed out, the Meridian Naval Air Station and the Columbus Air Force Base are two fighter pilot training facilities that are connected by this direct link of U.S. 45. Both of these training facilities use the Sea Raid bombing range, which is located approximately half-way in between the two facilities. They could enjoy the use of this four-laning or building of two parallel lanes along 45 at this 15-mile stretch.
Page 460 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We have identified many new industrial sites and have willing sellers ready to go to help with industrial development in my county should this four-laning come to pass. This would be a great help to us.
The port facility on the TenTom waterway is located there where we need rail and truck transportation. We have good rail transportation in there, but the four-laning of this stretch of 45 would enhance that situation.
We have the third largest airport in our State located in Lowndes County. Many of the passengers and the commerce that takes place in and around that airport use U.S. 45.
The safety requirements—we have many schools there, log trucks, gravel trucks—you name it—and other regular commerce on U.S. 45. We think from a safety point that it would be very advantageous to us to build these two additional lanes on U.S. 45.
We have numerous farmers, both row crops, ranchers, tree farmers, and here of late many people raising and processing catfish in this area. This would be a great help to them.
In summary, this 15-mile section of U.S. 45 is the only section that is not four-laned or slated for four-laning, as we speak. Any help you can give us on this would be greatly appreciated.
I request permission to revise and extend my remarks.
Page 461 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. Without objection, your prepared statement will appear in the record.
Dr. Robinson?
Dr. ROBINSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen of the committee. I am Robert L. Robinson, executive director of the Mississippi Department of Transportation. I am indeed honored and grateful for an opportunity to express support for the reconstruction of State Road 15 through the heartland of Mississippi.
Transportation agencies throughout this country are faced with the same overwhelming problem: that is, a demand for improvements to their State's transportation infrastructure far exceeds available funds.
Mandated State-wide transportation plans are useful tools in assisting transportation agencies in determining deficiencies and prioritize needed improvements. However, it is frustrating and demoralizing for the staff of State agencies to be knowledgeable of their State's transportation needs, feel the constant pressure from the State's citizens to provide needed improvements, and having to settle for an abbreviated improvement program due to a lack of funds.
This situation is amplified in a donor State such as Mississippi. Because of a State's inability to meet the expectation of their customers, they must turn to Congress to seek additional Federal funds for specific projects. Mississippi is no exception.
Page 462 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
That brings me to my reason for appearing before this distinguished committee. State Road 15 is a vital part of the State's overall transportation system. This can be substantiated by the fact that it is the longest highway in the State of Mississippi, 327 miles in length. State Road 15 extends from the Gulf Coast to the Tennessee State line. The southern end of the route is a lifeline for residents of the Gulf Coast when an emergency occurs. The northern end weaves through a number of municipalities and industrial areas, highlighting the State's spectacular growth in the furniture industry.
The central segment of State Road 15 is the segment for which we are requesting your help, which begins with the city of Laurel and extends for 104 miles to the Neshoba County/Winston County State line. The winding, hilly, two-lane roadway with no shoulders currently has volume capacity ratios far in excess of the minimum requirement for a multi-lane facility.
Eight municipalities, four of which are county seats, numerous communities and schools, as well as two colleges are located along this segment of State Road 15. Traffic congestion and traffic accidents are routine occurrences with the end being frustrated motorists, property damage, injuries, and death. We recognize the deficiencies that must be addressed and have feasible solutions, but we need your financial support to reconstruct the existing two lanes in accordance with the current geometric standards and to construct two additional parallel lanes.
The construction of a four-lane divided highway between the city of Laurel and Neshoba County line will provide our customers with a facility badly needed and richly deserved. There will be significant benefits to the entire State of Mississippi, to the State of Alabama, and to the State of Tennessee if this project becomes a reality.
Page 463 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
This four-lane highway will reduce accidents, thereby saving lives; eliminate existing capacity problems and provide an acceptable level of service; expedite the evacuation of the Gulf Coast during times of emergencies; connect I–59 and I–20; generate economic growth in the highway corridor; complement existing economic growth in Philadelphia, Mississippi; and not significantly impact the environment in this highway corridor.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen. I will be glad to answer any questions.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Are there any questions?
Mr. Pease?
Mr. PEASE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Neal, your project request on U.S. Highway 45 was estimated at $40 million, but I couldn't tell from the materials provided if that is 100 percent request from this committee, or if there is going to be State and local funds involved in that project as well.
Mr. NEAL. It is my understanding that it would be 100 percent.
Dr. ROBINSON. We would certainly match the Federal funds at the normal match ratio.
Page 464 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PEASE. And my second question was for you, Dr. Robinson.
Appended to your remarks are a series of other proposals that come close to $1 billion. I assume those are not all in Mr. Pickering's district, that those are State-wide?
Dr. ROBINSON. No, sir. That is State-wide.
Mr. PEASE. And are those actually being requested through various Members?
Dr. ROBINSON. Yes, sir, they are.
Mr. PEASE. Thank you very much.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
As you know, Governor, you are very ably represented on this committee by our vice chairman, Mr. Pickering, who as a freshman comes with considerable Hill experience for one of his maturity.
Governor FORDICE. We are mighty proud of Congressman Pickering. We are glad to have him here.
Mr. PETRI. We will be working with him and the other members of your House delegation and your Senators as we go forward.
Page 465 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I don't know if you have any overall advice for us—we would hate to see you go without asking—on what we can do to make the Federal Highway Program a little more user friendly from the point of view of the States and State departments. You have to wrestle with your own legislature and your own counties and everything else; you might have some advice for us that we would appreciate receiving.
Governor FORDICE. Mr. Chairman, you gave me the opening, so I am going to have to take it.
One thing that I am very interested in—I mentioned Step 21—is the correction of what we see as a great anomaly in that Mississippi—I don't like to say it, but we might as well face it—is the poorest State in the Nation, yet we are a considerable donor State in the Federal Highway System. That really doesn't make a whole lot of sense, particularly when you see some very rich States up in the northeast that get back twice the dollars they send to Washington, D.C. We are something like 81 cents at the max, down to in the 70 cents range.
I really think that needs correcting. It is an anomaly that has existed for awhile and I hope that we will be able to correct that.
Mr. PETRI. I know my colleague from West Virginia will be quick to point out that there are geographic differences in different States and that affects the cost of construction.
Page 466 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Governor FORDICE. Indeed. And I recognize that fully as a contractor. My classic example is the State of Montana. Obviously there is no way you could tax the citizens enough to put the highways through Montana to carry the rest of us across the State of Montana. But I think there are some obvious inequities in the system as well.
Mr. PETRI. We thank you for being here. We are happy to see you are back in the saddle and doing so well.
Governor FORDICE. Mr. Chairman, could I leave you a book the Southern Governor's just put out on highway infrastructure in the south? I think it has some good numbers in there.
Mr. PETRI. We would appreciate having that. It will be made a part of the record of the hearing.
Thank you.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Pickering, Gov. Fordice, Mr. Neal and Dr. Robinson follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. Now I believe we have our colleague, Merrill Cook. Would you like to introduce your panel?
Page 467 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. COOK. I certainly would.
TESTIMONY OF HON. MERRILL COOK, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM UTAH, ACCOMPANIED BY TOM WELCH, PRESIDENT, CEO, SALT LAKE OLYMPIC ORGANIZING COMMITTEE, TOM WARNE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, HON. DEEDEE CORRADINI, MAYOR, SALT LAKE CITY, UT, RUSSELL C. WIDMAR, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SALT LAKE CITY AIRPORT AUTHORITY, HON. MAX R. HOGAN, MAYOR, WEST JORDAN CITY, UT, AND HON. TOM DOLAN, MAYOR, SANDY CITY, UT
2004 WINTER OLYMPIC GAMES, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH TRANSPORTATION REQUESTS
OTHER UTAH PROJECT REQUESTS
Mr. COOK. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am honored to have been appointed to serve on the Transportation Committee and the Surface Transportation Subcommittee. I believe our work here will be of vital importance both to the people of my own State of Utah and the ongoing economic well-being of the Nation as a whole. I thank you for this opportunity to serve.
Today I will present for the subcommittee's consideration a new section of ISTEA addressing the special transportation problems which may be encountered by American cities hosting the Olympics. Building on the lessons learned in the Los Angeles and Atlanta Olympic Games and at the suggestion of Chairman Shuster, this new section would be included in the ISTEA reauthorization to provide a source of funding and give Federal transportation officials discretion to help host cities avoid or solve such transportation problems.
Page 468 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Although Salt Lake City would be the first city to benefit from this new section of ISTEA when it hosts the 2002 Winter Games, many other American cities would benefit in the future. Already more than 30 American cities have expressed interest in bidding for the 2008 Summer Olympic Games including Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Charlotte, Phoenix, San Francisco, Honolulu, Las Vegas, Dallas, Houston, Philadelphia, Orlando, and Pittsburgh, among others.
When the International Olympic Committee selected Salt Lake City to host the 2002 Winter Games, it capped 30 years of effort by Utah officials. Since Salt Lake's selection in 1995, local support and enthusiasm have continued to build.
We know that Utah must do its part, and we have already begun. Just last week, our State Legislature raised the gasoline tax by 5 cents per gallon, increased vehicle registration fees by $10, and changed the collection of diesel taxes in order to fund these transportation needs.
As a further demonstration of my State's support for the Olympic Games, I am honored to have as my guest here today many State and local dignitaries who will discuss the many facets of transportation required to successfully host this prestigious international event, America's Olympics.
First, beginning on my right, Mr. Tom Welch, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Salt Lake Olympic Organizing Committee of 2002; next to him, Mr. Tom Warne, Executive Director of the Utah Department of Transportation. Mr. Warne will testify on behalf of Utah's Governor, Michael Leavitt, who wanted to be here but is testifying right now before the Senate Finance Committee as one of two governors asked to speak on Medicaid reform. The Governor may be able to appear briefly before the subcommittee later this morning. I respectfully request that if he can attend that he be granted 1 or 2 minutes to address the subcommittee.
Page 469 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Ms. Deedee Corradini is Mayor of Salt Lake City in my district. Mr. Russell Widmar is the Executive Director of the Salt Lake City International Airport. Mr. Max Hogan is the mayor of West Jordan City in my district, and also chairman of the Wasatch Front Regional Council, which is the MPO impacted by the Olympics. Mr. Tom Dolan is the Mayor of Sandy City, also in my district, will speak on behalf of all those cities within the circumference of the Olympics venue.
In addition, I am also delighted to have several other distinguished guests joining us, including Mr. Jim Clark, President of the Utah Transit Authority; Mr. Craig Peterson, Majority Leader of the Utah Senate; Mr. Will Jeffries, Executive Director of the Wasatch Front Regional Council; and representatives from my constituent cities, including Mr. Gerald Wright, mayor, and Mr. John Patterson, City Manager, of West Valley City; Ms. Mary Lynn Liddiard, Councilmember, and Mr. Dave Millheim, City Administrator, of South Jordan City.
Mr. Chairman, I am sure you and the subcommittee will find their comments very helpful.
Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you very much. We are delighted that you are all here. You have a very exciting international world assignment, hosting the Winter Olympics. As we know, that requires a lot of infrastructure, but it also provides an opportunity for people to look at their area and do things that they have felt needed doing now these needs have become more essential in order to accommodate the needs of the world community for an event of this sort.
Page 470 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We are very eager to hear you. We are under a little time pressure, so all of your statements will be included in full in the record and we invite each of you to abbreviate them the best you can. We have done a pretty good job of staying on schedule. We will be going on without breaking for lunch until about 5:00 or 6:00 or whenever we finish tonight. Thank you for being part of helping our train run on time.
However you would like to proceed is fine.
Mr. WELCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.
I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you today on behalf of the citizens of the State of Utah who have been entrusted with the honor and responsibility to host America's Olympic Winter Games as they come to our country in 2002. In 1989, after nearly 30 years of pursuing the opportunity of becoming America's choice, the people of Utah relished in that title and today come to say to you that we recognize that these are not games just of our community, of our State, but truly are games of our country.
Since the modern day Olympics were established over 100 years ago, only seven times have we had that honor and that responsibility of hosting the games. In 1984, with the successful games that brought new life to the Olympic movement that were held in Los Angeles, all in the Olympic movement thought it would be some time before the games came back to the United States. How surprised we all were as first Atlanta was selected and then Salt Lake City for the 2002 Olympic Winter Games.
Page 471 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
A lot has happened in that period of time. Between 1984 and 1996, the size of the Olympic Games doubled; 191 countries participated. They brought with them press and media from around the world that created the most covered peace-time event in the history of mankind. Atlanta found that the task of hosting the games was one that really rested not only on its city and the surrounding area, the State of Georgia, but in fact a partnership needed to be formed not only with the private sector that supports the majority of the costs of the games, that sends our athletes to those Olympic Games every 2 years, but in fact they needed the support of the Federal Government.
With the growth of the Olympic Games, it no longer is a period where an individual can buy a ticket, get in his car, and drive to the arena and observe an Olympic event. It has truly become a mass transit experience, moving nearly 1 million people a day.
The people in Utah were not naive as we undertook this responsibility. We have planned well. Our venues and infrastructure are primarily in place. The challenge we face is upgrading our roadways, accelerating the construction planned over the next 10 years, to make sure it is ready in 5 years, that at the time the world comes they will find America at its very best, that the people who come from around the world will not only experience the joy and experience of the peace-time event of the Olympics, but they will see the commitment that comes from our people, the goodness of our hearts as we open our homes.
We ask that this subcommittee take into consideration the responsibility we have as Americans when we invite the world to our country.
Page 472 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Thank you very much.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you. You have a big job, too. Good luck.
Mr. Warne?
Mr. WARNE. Mr. Chairman and members of the Surface Transportation Subcommittee, I speak on behalf of Governor Leavitt and express our appreciation for the opportunity to speak before you today and express issues and concerns we have relating to a topic we share mutually, that being the 2002 Winter Olympic Games.
For 17 days in February of 2002, Utah will be the window through which the world will view the United States of America. The impressions we make will be lasting and memorable. It is our intent to make sure that the views that people see will be ones that we can all be proud of as Americans. We share a challenge, however. That challenge being that Utah and this Nation must join together in a partnership in order to deliver on the Olympics and to build the kind of transportation system necessary to support the 2002 Winter Olympic Games.
We believe that this proposal we have submitted is the first step in that partnership. We have prepared a document that you have before you, ''Utah Transportation Infrastructure Needs for the 2002 Winter Olympic Games.'' This is our attempt to convey an estimate of the transportation needs for the 2002 Winter Olympic Games. It is a balanced approach to transportation. It is multimodal in its approach to transportation. This partnership that we are suggesting today is important so that we can join together in delivering on a transportation system that will support the Olympic Games.
Page 473 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
One of the imperatives of our process, however, as we put this document together, was that these projects needed to be legacy in nature. It doesn't make any sense to build projects for 17 days in February 2002. All the projects in this document are legacy projects which have value for our State before the Olympics, during the Olympics, and after the Olympics. All of the projects, with the exception of a couple that go to specific venues, are in our short-and long-term transportation plans and are just being accelerated as part of this initiative prior to 2002.
The bottom line is that there are no throw-away projects in this proposal. These are all part of Utah's transportation future.
In about 30 days we will sign a contract for the largest highway construction project in the history of our State, the I–15 reconstruction project, which is valued at $1.36 billion. It is also one of the largest construction contracts ever embarked upon in the interstate system since it was begun in 1956. We are going to reconstruct 17 miles of interstate, add HOV lanes, build many interchanges. And the bottom line of this is the centerpiece of our transportation package in preparation for the Olympics.
We are accelerating this project by 3 or 4 years in order to have it completed prior to the Olympics, and we are using the private sector strategy of design build in order to do that. This represents a significant effort. It must be built. It will be built before 2002.
We have worked closely with the Salt Lake Olympic Committee in order to provide projects and improvements that will help them deliver athletes and spectators to the various venues as part of the Olympic effort. In fact, they have come up with a plan that is included in our transportation package. You will find that it is a modest plan, a realistic plan, something that is important for the success of the Olympics.
Page 474 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
In addition to our I–15 project, our Legislature, as Congressman Cook said, passed a tax last week which was focused on transportation, a 5-cent gas tax and other taxes that are focused on funding transportation improvements in our State. We have tried to address these improvements as they relate to the Olympic, and we are working with our communities. This group you see before you today is a representation of those communities and a representation of the spirit of cooperation that exists in the State of Utah as we bring about transportation improvements in our State.
Our plan includes intelligent transportation systems to move people efficiently through Salt Lake City and in the mountainous regions around our State as part of the Olympic venue transportation plan. We are known for our creativity and ingenuity in the United States of America. The fact is that those who visit us and participate in this modern transportation system will come away with a lasting impression of those attributes.
Our plan includes mass transit, a light rail project, and bus systems for support of the Olympics. We have some challenges that weren't faced in Atlanta. Our mountainous terrain and the other issues related to delivering spectators to venues located in remote parts of our State are issues we must address as we move forward in our transportation system. In addition, we have a commuter rail system planned for the Wasatch Front to address the urban areas of our State.
These will be the first Games of the 21st century. The spirit of the Olympics will bring many people to Utah. Many millions will view our State from afar. This is not a Salt Lake City issue. This is not a State of Utah issue. This is an issue that is a reflection of the United States of America. So that is why we are here: to discuss a partnership, a partnership where we together provide transportation systems for the 2002 Winter Olympic Games.
Page 475 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Thank you very much.
Ms. CORRADINI. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, as the mayor of Salt Lake City, it is a pleasure to be here today. I would like to compliment the subcommittee on moving forward so swiftly in the process to reauthorize ISTEA. It is a critical issue for Salt Lake City, the State of Utah, and our MPO. We have developed partnerships over the years that are working very well. As Chair of the Advisory Board of the United States Conference of Mayors, I would also like to thank you on behalf of all the Nation's mayors on your process to reauthorize ISTEA and would urge you to move forward this year to maintain its current status. It is critical for all of us around the country.
As has been said already, we are very proud to be the host of the 2002 Winter Olympics. I would like to just reiterate again that this is not Salt Lake City's Olympics. This is the United States' Olympics. We want to be well prepared to showcase our country to the rest of the world.
I can assure the members of the subcommittee that the projects that are in this package are projects that are sound transportation projects to take our State and our part of the country into the next century. These are projects that when the Olympics are over, you will feel as though our national dollars, our Federal dollars, in partnership with what we spend in the State, have been wisely spent for future transportation projects.
I would also like to mention that we have a wonderful working relationship on these transportation projects, starting back with former Secretary Pena. We have been working closely with Secretary Slater, with acting FHA Administrator Jane Garvey, and FTA Director Gordon Linton. We have a wonderful partnership here in Washington and we look forward to continuing that process as we move forward into the next century.
Page 476 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Thank you very much.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. Widmar?
Mr. WIDMAR. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee. My name is Russell Widmar, the executive director of the Salt Lake City International Airport. I, too, appreciate your leadership on transportation issues during the 105th Congress, particularly on ISTEA reauthorization.
As our mayor has indicated, the transportation projects contained in the Utah transportation plan for the 2002 Winter Olympic Games are crucial to the region's ability to accommodate the millions who will visit during the Olympic Games and to meet the economic development and mobility needs of the next century.
It has been estimated that 95 percent of all visitors to the State during the Olympic Games will arrive by air, most through the Salt Lake City International Airport. To meet the demand that will be placed on the airport during the Olympics, we have proposed a full-scale rebuilding of the airport and its linkages to highway and transit. These projects will not only enable the airport to effectively address current service needs, but also to receive the large volume of passengers that are expected during the Olympics and to enhance their safety.
I want to thank the Utah congressional delegation for their ardent support of our efforts to improve the regional transportation network in our State, including the rebuilding of the airport. This process will directly affect the success of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games and will contribute to the quality of life in Utah and indeed America's western region for generations to come.
Page 477 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Thank you for your time. I urge your favorable consideration of our ISTEA reauthorization request, and look forward to working with you in the future.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you. We appreciate you summarizing your remarks.
Mayor Max Hogan?
Mr. HOGAN. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, my name is Max Hogan. I am honored to speak to you today in my capacity as chairman of the Wasatch Front Regional Council, a metropolitan planning organization representing 50 cities and 5 counties in Utah, and also as a representative of the other transportation planning organizations across the State of Utah. I am the mayor of West Jordan City, one of the many high-growth areas in Salt Lake County. Like all my fellow mayors, I am committed to preparing adequately so that all those attending the Olympics, both as participants and as spectators, may travel from one venue to another safely and without delays.
The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, ISTEA, has provided the framework within which we are developing multimodal transportation systems to meet the mobility needs during the hazardous winter conditions when the Olympic Games will be conducted.
Each of the projects contained in our project request represents a very necessary transportation cog to the success of the total program. The combination of highway, transit, rail, and aviation facilities proposed are planned to meet the urgent demands of the Olympic Games and afterwards to provide transportation capacity and flexibility needed by Utah's growing urban population and economy.
Page 478 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Most of these projects were identified in our long-range plans years ago, but with the selection of Salt Lake City as the 2002 host city, our planning has accelerated. Our goal is to complete projects for the Olympics, to allow subsequent annual appropriations to be directed toward emerging needs in Utah's high growth areas. The proposed transit projects are particularly important. The completion of the light rail system in Salt Lake City will move Olympic visitors between the airport, the downtown hotels, the venues for figure skating and ice hockey, and the Olympic Village located at the University of Utah.
In addition to the light rail, development of commuter rail between Ogden, Salt Lake City, and Provo will relieve our overburdened interstate system and improve air quality. New intermodal terminals will interconnect these modes and for the first time make transit an attractive option for more than 1 million Olympic participants and for Utah's commuters for many years afterwards.
We know that it is important for our State and local governments to contribute, and we are ready and willing to do our share. But without Federal assistance over the next 4 years, we will be unable to provide the balanced multimodal transportation system that will allow us to host the 2002 Olympic Games with pride and confidence.
We appeal to you to help us meet these needs in the reauthorization of ISTEA. The success of the Games is dependent upon safe and efficient transportation infrastructure. We recognize how important your help will be and we look forward to working with you.
Page 479 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I appreciate the opportunity to testify today. I hope I have left you with some of the enthusiasm we share in Utah as we move forward to solve Utah's transportation challenges for the 2002 Winter Olympics.
Thank you, sir.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mayor Dolan, any comments?
Mr. DOLAN. As you mentioned, Mr. Chairman, you have my remarks. Let me summarize, if I can.
During the 17 days that Utah and Salt Lake City will host the world, it will be necessary for us to increase regional mobility throughout Salt Lake City, Utah, Davis, and Weber Counties. In order for the Games to be a success, it will be vital for us to build the roads that are necessary to host the Games.
Of necessity, the Olympic visitors will be housed in our communities and will be travelling throughout our communities. As mayors, we are extremely anxious to convey to the Congress our full and united support of the Olympic transportation request, especially the section that would provide funding for regional mobility.
On behalf of my fellow mayors, I thank you for this opportunity to testify. We will now be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Page 480 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Are there any questions of the Utah panel?
I would just say that when everything else is said and done, it is actually a great place to ski.
[Laughter.]
Mr. PETRI. I have done it myself. I know that you have Park City, Alta and Snowbird. Different people approach it differently. I have stayed in downtown Salt Lake City and driven up each day because you have a lot of beautiful restaurants and other things in the area. The Olympics actually emphasizing several additional areas that are as good or better for skiing that have not been as well developed in the past. It is a tremendous year-round recreational area. I think Olympic athletes will be quite surprised at the quality of the sport they will be able to accomplish in your region.
Thank you all very much for coming. We thank Merrill Cook for leading the charge and we look forward to working with you.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Cook, Mr. Welch, Ms. Corradini, Mr. Widmar, Mr. Hogan, and Dr. Dolan follow:]
[Insert here.]
Page 481 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. The next panel is our colleague from Connecticut, Chris Shays, accompanied by the mayor of Bridgeport, Connecticut, Hon. Joseph Ganim.
As an old budgeteer, we're adding to your problems over on the Budget Committee as we meet. After a number of days of hearings like this, Chris, we've discovered that if there ever is an economic catastrophe in the United States and we need to find projects to put America back to work, we have a big list of files that are worthwhile projects if we could find the resources or free them up to do it.
But please—you know the drill.
TESTIMONY OF HON. CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM CONNECTICUT, ACCOMPANIED BY HON. JOSEPH GANIM, MAYOR, BRIDGEPORT, CT
SEAVIEW AVENUE CORRIDOR PROJECT
Mr. SHAYS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'm going to summarize my statement, and I appreciate the opportunity that I have to appear before your Committee. I realize you have limited sums so you're going to want the most cost-effective and beneficial project.
Sitting with me is Mayor Ganim from the City of Bridgeport. He is a nationally renowned mayor. He's been in a number of national media—recognizing the extraordinary job that he has done. What is the job he's done? He has taken a city that literally was scheduled to go bankrupt, petitioned to go bankrupt, and taken the city from bankruptcy, had a review board that dealt with this issue and no longer has the review board necessary because the city has moved forward.
Page 482 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We're here to speak on the Seaview Avenue Corridor Project. This is a project that would connect the City of Bridgeport—Bridgeport didn't get its name by accident. It is a bridgeport. It has a wonderful, deep harbor—not a large harbor—but it can take 73 percent of all the world's ships—obviously, not the large ones—but 73 percent of all the world's ships. We are looking to revitalize the east end and east side of Bridgeport and connect this port to a 435-acre area that was owned by Remington Arms.
What you may not know is that Bridgeport in World War II was considered one of the most economically viable and important cities in the country. It made 25 percent of all munitions used by our allies in World War II, and this 435-acre area of Remington Arms was an area that was used to test the munitions used throughout the World War II theater. We are now—the city is now, and the developers are now, cleaning up this 435-acre site, and we're looking to connect this site to the port and have the industry along that route from the port to this site also benefit along with the major hospital that is isolated and has no thoroughfare.
We're petitioning your Committee for $16 million to step forward with the $4 million, and at this time I would like to introduce the mayor and have him speak on the specifics of it.
Mr. GANIM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to thank Chris Shays, our Congressman from Bridgeport, obviously, for being here supporting and being as supportive as he has been on this, as well as other initiatives and being so sensitive to the needs of an urban center like Bridgeport and cities across this country. A lot of what he mentioned early on is the result of the support we've received from him and from many of the Federal level.
Page 483 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
This project, I think—to note your comments before we begin testifying, could and would create jobs—it actually is a stretch of highway but focusing on a viaduct under a railway dock—would allow for the retention—we've done a survey and interviewed these businesses in the area—it would retain some 2,000 jobs and provide the opportunity to create an additional 8,000 jobs.
Now, in my venue on a day to day basis one of the biggest challenges that I have, as I'm sure we all have as elected officials, is you try and provide people the opportunity through jobs. So what I see here is, as Chris pointed out, as Congressman Shays pointed out, we would be able to connect in Bridgeport the great deep water port that we have potentially with 400 acres of undeveloped real estate that is presently being cleaned up in a brownfields type of initiative through the DuPont Corporation, but via the Seaview Avenue Corridor. And in that process we would be able to not only retain 2,000 jobs but create an additional 8,000 jobs.
It was also pointed out that we've created a partnership on this—or it should be pointed out anyway—that we've created a partnership on this with the private sector. In this case, with our largest employer in the City of Bridgeport, Bridgeport Hospital. They've entered into and began a process of urban reinvesting and urban redevelopment along the Seaview Avenue area, which is very close to where they're located, and with that I've started what is called the Seaview Avenue Business Alliance so that as we're working on a public level to try and create the atmosphere to deal with this as an infrastructure project, a road project, that will connect the port along with the Remington Woods, which is the DuPont cleanup, we're creating jobs and we're seeing the private sector step up.
Page 484 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Let me close just by saying that this project has been one that we've worked on since I've been in office for 5 years, and through prior Administrations it's been worked on longer than that. It's got some initial funding. This is a critical piece. It has the support of the Bridgeport Regional Business Council, the Greater Bridgeport Regional Planning Agency, the Stratford Economic Development Commission, which is a surrounding town, which it has the support of, Connecticut's Governor, obviously our Congressman, Congressman Shays, and we support it because it means the retention and creation of jobs, cleaner neighborhoods and an economic future, a better economic future, for the people of the City of Bridgeport.
Mr. PETRI. Are there questions?
[No response.]
Mr. PETRI. I just want to say, Mr. Mayor, that your representative often discusses Bridgeport, and it is very much on his mind; I know that he will do everything he can to help your accelerating economic renaissance.
Mr. GANIM. He's been a great supporter, obviously, of the city and I think cities across the country. We appreciate having him as our Congressman.
Mr. PETRI. Okay, well, we're under lots of different pressures, but we'll be doing our best to work with you to be as helpful as we can.
Mr. SHAYS. Thank you, and we'll be glad and eager to work with you, as well. I thank you.
Page 485 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. GANIM. Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Shays and Mr. Ganim follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. We will stand informal for a minute of two. Representative Rosa DeLauro is in route and will be here momentarily.
[Recess.]
Mr. PETRI. We're ready to accommodate you if you're ready to accommodate us.
Mr. ORTIZ. We're ready, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETRI. We're bumping Representative Rosa DeLauro, but she's on her way and I think if we proceed in an expeditious manner, we don't delay her too much.
So, Mr. Ortiz, it's good seeing you again. You're familiar with our hearings. We had a wonderful hearing down in your part of the world last summer. We had events that were memorable on both sides of the border.
Page 486 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. ORTIZ. You all have an open invitation to come back again and visit with us.
Mr. PETRI. He has one of the best drive-ins south of the border.
Would you like to introduce your witnesses?
Mr. ORTIZ. Yes, sir.
TESTIMONY OF HON. SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM TEXAS, ACCOMPANIED BY HON. RICHARD BORCHARD, COUNTY JUDGE, JOHN F. KENNEDY CAUSEWAY ELEVATION, I–69, NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS, ALAN JOHNSON, CHAIRMAN, HARLINGER TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE, AND ED WEEKS, PRESIDENT, BROWNSVILLE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
JFK CAUSEWAY ELEVATION, I–69
INTERSTATE HIGHWAY CONNECTION TO THE RIO GRANDE VALLEY
US 77/83 EXPRESSWAY INTERCHANGE, I–69
Mr. ORTIZ. Mr. Chairman, and members of the Subcommittee, I want to thank you for this opportunity to voice my strong support for projects of great importance to the 27th Congressional District in Texas.
Page 487 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
You know that the infrastructure requirements of my Congressional District is among the highest priorities every year. My constituents and I were happy to emphasize this point last year when many of you attended hearings and site visits in South Texas. It was my privilege for you to personally see how much progress we have made on infrastructure in my District.
The side visit to Brownsville showed you that I have a constituency who knows the significance of infrastructure and transportation resources to their communities. Even though my District average is one of the lowest incomes per capita ratios, they continually support local funding for projects. It is with their determination and your support that we will have met the challenge of NAFTA and Interstate 69.
I have submitted several projects on behalf of constituents for authorization this year under ISTEA. These projects are very important to my District, and I look forward to working with the Committee and Subcommittee members on this project.
I will not belabor my testimony. I would like to include it for the record, but let me introduce my friends here today in support of projects in my District: Judge Richard Borchard—he's a Nueces County Judge for Nueces County; Mr. Alan Johnson—he's President of the City of Harlingen Transportation Committee; and Mr. Ed Weeks, President of the Brownsville Chamber of Commerce.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit an extension of remarks with testimony of Mr. Victor Gonzales, Chairman of the Board for the Corpus Christi Regional Transportation Authority, for the record.
Page 488 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Now I would like to turn to my County Judge, Richard Borchard, for his testimony, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you, your full statements will be made a part of the record; if you would like to proceed.
Mr. ORTIZ. Thank you.
Mr. BORCHARD. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I welcome this opportunity to testify about critically needed additions to the transportation systems in Texas and within Nueces County. This includes the development of Interstate 69, the construction of the Northside Highway within the Port of Corpus Christi and the elevation of the John F. Kennedy Causeway that connects North Padre Island and Mustang Islands to the mainland of Texas.
You've heard a great deal about the growing traffic moving to and from Mexico through south Texas. Current projections are that United States exports to Mexico will increase as much as 70 percent by the year 2000. Mexican exports to the United States are expected to grow by a staggering 120 percent. Our current infrastructure is not likely to be able to support this great growth.
We critically need Interstate 69 as an alternative to spread border traffic out of several points of entry. That will allow for the most efficient cross-border movement of goods and is a part of the multi-modal trade system that will provide American access to vast international markets.
Page 489 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Just as significantly, Interstate 69 will provide improved access to several international gateways, including the Port of Corpus Christi. Combined, Texas ports in 1994 managed 218.5 million short tons of cargo, generating about $43 billion in trade. Interstate 69 guarantees access to top world markets.
The Northside Port Highway connecting the Port of Corpus Christi to existing proposed portions of the United States Interstate Highway system is of vital importance to Nueces County and the region. This linking will greatly improve the efficiency of trade to the Port of Corpus Christi. This proposed roadway would run along the north side of the Port's existing nine-mile long inner harbor. It will be an alternative route to the aging Tule Lake Bridge that now provides road and rail access to docks and terminals on the north side of the harbor. An unexpected shutdown of this bridge would cripple many port-related activities.
The Northside Highway was designated in 1995 as a high priority corridor because of its national significance in addressing intermodal linkage, international trade, economic development, safety in the national defense and air quality concerns.
Finally, the JFK Causeway is the only evacuation route linking the City of Paramus, Mustang Island and North Padre Island to the mainland. These islands, including the Padre Island and Nueces seashore are major vacation and tourism designations for visitors from throughout North America, experiencing almost 10 million visits per year. The current roadway is just a few feet about sea level and is frequently covered by storm tides. It is critically important that we accelerate development of this causeway to the elevation that would allow time for hurricane evacuation.
Page 490 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
This project is vital to the safety of thousands of visitors and residents whom storm tides could quickly strand. It is also expected to provide environmental benefits to the upper Laguna Madre Corpus Christi Bay system. Raising the causeway would address safety, congestion, air quality, energy conservation, economic development and national defense.
Thank you, sir, for your time.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. Johnson?
Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman, and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
I am Alan Johnson, Chairman of the Transportation Committee of the Harlingen, Texas, Chamber of Commerce. As many of you know, Harlingen, Texas, is located in south Texas just 10 miles from the Mexican border in what is known as the lower Rio Grande Valley.
I'm here today to express my strong support for the future Interstate 69 and its routing through south Texas to the Mexican border, as well as to discuss the need for a high speed interchange at Harlingen which would link U.S. Route 77 and U.S. Route 83. Congressman Ortiz has submitted the evaluation criteria required by the Subcommittee for this project.
I want to first thank for the interest they have shown in south Texas. Many of you participated in Congressional hearings there last Fall and have also taken the time to tour our region, and, believe me, we really appreciate those efforts.
Page 491 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
As you are aware, the future Interstate 69 would go through south Texas and link Mexico, the United States and Canada in a way that, when coupled with the North America Free Trade Agreement, would bring tremendous economic benefits to our nation and our area. We in the lower Rio Grande Valley are the largest area in the United States without interstate highway access.
The Texas Department of Transportation has gone on record with this preferred routing of the Interstate 69 corridor into the lower Rio Grande Valley. Known as Alternative 7, this corridor includes U.S. Highway 77. This fact, combined with our need to accommodate a rapidly growing population and traffic brought on by increased trade and economic development, make a high speed interchange at Harlingen essential.
The Rio Grande Valley and Harlingen are part of a bicultural international metropolitan area that will reach or exceed a population of 2.5 million within the next 4 years. We are Texas' fifth largest population center and our region has become a manufacturing and distribution area with trade in Canada, Mexico and South America.
The area currently encompasses eight international bridges, one of which is the state-of-the-art customs processing facility located 10 miles south of our city. It encompasses a highway system with 5,300 center line miles, a freeway consisting of segments of U.S. 77 and 83, four water ports, including a deep draft port at the Port Brownsville, three international airports and 11 general aviation airports.
Currently, over 73 percent of the U.S. trade to Mexico flows through the ports of entry along the Texas Tamaulipas border. This accounts for $13.1 billion in total trade with Mexico. The Valley continues to attract major industry and manufacturing placing a severe strain on existing highway infrastructure and generating 43 percent of total auto crossings to Mexico.
Page 492 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
In the last 8 years, for example, 197 new companies have located here and 45 others have expanded, creating 52,000 jobs.
U.S. 77 is primarily a north-south route, and U.S. 83, east-west. These routes provide important access from the lower Rio Grande to Mexico and major urban centers in Texas. There are currently no direct connectors for southbound to westbound and eastbound to northbound movements along U.S. 77 and U.S. 83. In fact, frontage road access is the only means by which to switch highways to points west and the upper valley.
It is clear that the rapid growth of exports to Mexico has made trade a major component in the growth of the Texas economy. Continued development has resulted, and will continue to result, and constantly increasing traffic movement through Harlingen and specifically along U.S. 77 and 83. The present configuration of exchanges between these two highways will not accommodate this increase. An increase from congestion and delayed traffic movement around this intersection are anticipated.
The missing link, as we call it, at Harlingen has been on the drawing board for 29 years and will provide the entire lower Rio Grande Valley and northern Mexico non-stop access to the current and future industrial markets that are essential to continued growth and prosperity of Texas, the nation and Mexico under NAFTA.
As Mexico continues to develop their infrastructure to correspond with surface transportation improvements in the U.S., a seamless international transportation corridor will unfold.
Page 493 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Harlingen has committed $1.8 million to help fund this construction and right-of-way acquisition on this project. The city, along with State, local and government officials are committed to seeing it completed.
I respectfully ask the members of the Surface Transportation Subcommittee to support the U.S. Route 77 and 83 interchange by authorizing the $28.2 million needed for its completion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the Subcommittee for your time and consideration.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. Weeks?
Mr. WEEKS. Mr. Chairman, and distinguished Committee members, my name is Ed Weeks and I'm President of the Brownsville Chamber of Commerce.
I want to thank you and Congressman Ortiz for the opportunity to speak today. I will keep my comments brief, but the importance of the project to our community is immense and long overdue.
With the passage of the National Highway System legislation by Congress, Brownsville was included in Corridor 18. The studies have indicated that the section of Corridor 18 consisting of U.S. 77 from its juncture with U.S. 59 to the border of Mexico at Brownsville has the highest cost benefit ratio of any of the completed high priority studies. It shares that honor with U.S. 281 from its juncture with U.S. 59 to McAllen.
Page 494 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Both Brownsville and McAllen rank in the top 10 fastest growing population centers in the United States. The Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas is poised to play a vital role in the successful implementation of NAFTA, but without adequate infrastructure, it will be more difficult to achieve our potential. The construction of Corridor 18, commonly referred to as Interstate 69, is essential not only to Texas but to the rest of the country as we increase trade with Mexico. While the products and goods are transferred via Texas roads, the large majority of these goods are produced in other States.
The development of an international trade corridor, such as Interstate 69, must take into account the infrastructure developments on the Mexican side. Currently, the State of Tamaulipas, Mexico, is developing a road system to connect Cuidad, Victoria, Tampico and Mexico City to the Lower Rio Grande Valley along a coastal corridor. It is vital that we connect to that system by completing an interstate road system to the border along U.S. 77 to Brownsville, Texas.
The traditional access to Mexico City has been through Monterrey by way of Laredo. The addition of U.S. 281 to the interstate system will add another access to that route.
Brownsville is the community who has the dubious honor of being the largest city in the United States not served by the interstate system. Not only is Brownsville the largest city at over 130,000 in population, but we also have the only deep water seaport in the United States not connected to an interstate system. The Brownsville and McAllen ports of entry do more in trade than the combined trade of the States of New Mexico and Arizona and almost as much as the entire State of California.
Page 495 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Combine this with the low cost necessary to upgrade the new systems to interstate standards, and it sounds like a no brainer. Both roads are already 4-lane limited access and will need only minor modification to meet interstate standards.
Therefore, I would request that the Subcommittee seriously consider beginning construction of Interstate 69 in the Reauthorization Bill and begin it at the southern terminus where the demand is highest. I believe the justification is more than adequate.
Thank you for your time.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you, and we're joined by a new constituent.
Mr. ORTIZ. That's right, Mr. Chairman.
We're happy that our Mayor from the great City of Brownsville was able to join us, and I don't know if he would like to make a few remarks at this time.
Mr. PETRI. I will say both of us very much enjoyed making your acquaintance and having you show us through the region, Harlingen and the Port of Brownsville. There seems to be sister city relationships on both sides of the border. The cities on the southern border—actually, in just about every case, are two or three times as large as on our side of the border. It's a very interesting region; we have a lot of things to do as NAFTA grows and as the border becomes more used for commerce.
Mr. ORTIZ. That is partly where the action seems to be now because of NAFTA and GATT, and the Mayor just told me—both Mr. Rahall and Mr. Sherman, you and the rest of the members of the staff still have an open invitation to come down and visit with us. They tell me that Brownsville and Harlingen has not been the same since you guys came down.
Page 496 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
[Laughter.]
Mr. PETRI. Nick, do you have any questions?
Mr. RAHALL. Thank you, Solomon. I knew you would say something like that.
Let me ask the panel a question, if I might, just very quickly.
Is my understanding correct that when it comes to the routings of Interstate 69 in the Lower Rio Grande region, you're willing to be inclusive rather than exclusive? Is that correct? In other words, you do not oppose evaluating other routes?
Mr. BORCHARD. That is correct, Mr. Rahall. Yes, sir, we've very inclusive, nothing to the exclusive side of it.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you all. We appreciate your testimony.
Mr. ORTIZ. Thank you very much for giving us this opportunity to testify before your Committee.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Page 497 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
[The prepared statements of Mr. Ortiz, Mr. Borchard, Mr. Johnson, and Mr. Weeks follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. We have from Connecticut our colleague, Rosa DeLauro, who is accompanied by Mayor John DeStefano of New Haven.
Welcome. As you know, we will include full statements in the record and would appreciate any summary that you care to make.
Rosa?
TESTIMONY OF HON. ROSA DELAURO, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM CONNECTICUT, ACCOMPANIED BY HON. JOHN DESTEFANO, MAYOR, NEW HAVEN, CT
I–95 LONGWORTH PROJECT
Ms. DELAURO. Thank you very, very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to say thank you to you, Congressman Rahall and all of the members of the Subcommittee for inviting New Haven's Mayor, John DeStefano, and myself to testify about the improvements to Interstate 95 at the City of New Haven's Longwharf.
Page 498 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
This is a project that is critical, critical to improving the movement of intra-and interstate traffic and will also have the benefit of improving the regional economy and the environment.
While I would like to have Mayor DeStefano provide all of the details about the Interstate 95 Longwharf Project, let me just very briefly give the Committee an overview of why I believe the project needs to move forward.
New Haven once relied heavily on its port for most commerce. The downtown area, which includes small businesses, a Central Green and Yale University, was separated from port industrial sites. In the 1950s this division was accentuated by the construction of Interstate 95. The road created three major problems, including dangerous congestion problems and exit ramps, the inability to handle increased traffic from today's economic development, and a failure to connect the downtown to the harbor for development.
We now have an opportunity to correct these problems through the ISTEA reauthorization. As an added benefit, the project will interconnect Interstate 95 with Amtrak's New Haven high speed rail service, which is scheduled to begin in 1999.
The project is a high state and local priority, and the State is prepared to fully fund its share of the cost. I know that my colleagues on the Subcommittee will carefully study the Longwharf proposal and give it fair consideration, and I look forward to working with you to advance the project.
Before I actually introduce the Mayor, let me just make one additional comment. I hope to have the opportunity to work with the Subcommittee on the State Infrastructure Bank Expansion Act, which I have introduced to build public-private partnership, we need to expand capitalization of the SIBs, in order to help leverage other types of infrastructure projects.
Page 499 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
It is now my great pleasure to introduce to you my mayor, Mayor John DeStefano, of New Haven, Connecticut, to provide you with more details about the Interstate 95 Longwharf Project.
Mr. DESTEFANO. Thank you, Rosa, and on behalf of the City and the State of Connecticut, let me thank the Subcommittee for giving us the opportunity to discuss the Interstate 95 Longwharf Project in New Haven.
We're requesting $50 million in Federal discretionary funds for this project, an amount which is necessary to take advantage of several important transportation opportunities that we in southern Connecticut will not see again for a generation.
The project, as shown on the map to my right, involves construction of an interchange on Interstate 95 to connect with an extension of Church Street from the New Haven railroad station.
Interstate 95 would be widened to four lanes in each direction to respond to existing traffic congestion. It would be depressed through the Longwharf area to allow for construction of a platform providing vehicular and pedestrian access between New Haven Harbor, the second busiest harbor in New England, and the train station in downtown New Haven.
State funds will be used to construct the Church Street extension of the new interchange. This part of the project must be completed in conjunction with modifications to the rail yard and mainline track. They are already underway as part of Amtrak's high speed rail project.
Page 500 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Funding of the Interstate 95 Longwharf Project is also time-sensitive and must be coordinated with the related Interstate 95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Project, which includes reworking the congested east and west approaches to the Interstate 95 bridge over New Haven Harbor.
I would like to emphasize three points:
First, intermodal access Exhibit C shows proximate New Haven service span, which Amtrak will likely attract riders for its high speed service at New Haven. Access to New Haven's Union Station is currently impeded by confusing and dangerous circuitous routes. The Longwharf Project would provide direct access to the train station from Interstate 95, giving an important boost to Amtrak's efforts to meet its ridership and revenue goals.
Second, safety and congestion concerns. The Connecticut portion of Interstate 95 from New York to Rhode Island, the Longwharf section, is one of the two most unsafe segments, with an accident rate more than twice as high as the Connecticut interstate average, as shown on this Exhibit D.
Much of the risk and congestion is created by the need for motorists to change lanes in preparation for the highway interchange that is already there. With the construction of the Longwharf interchange, traffic bound for the train station and other downtown points will be able to use the right-hand Longwharf interchange, substantially improving safety for all Interstate 95 motorists.
Page 501 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
And, third, community impact mitigation. The Interstate 95 Longwharf Project fits solidly with DOT and FHWA policy objectives and precedents regarding community impact mitigation, and especially the reconnection of city and waterfronts. The Interstate 95 Longwharf Project will create vital multi-use development opportunities and is strongly supported by the New Haven Chamber of Commerce.
In the end, I would tell you that this proposal makes sense because of three powerful facts: the first is that the Interstate 95 harbor crossing in New Haven and Amtrak's high speed rail improvements are going to be constructed in the near term, the next 3 to 5 years. Second, this stretch of Interstate 95, the busiest stretch of highway in the State of Connecticut, in fact, is isolated from one of the nation's busiest Amtrak stations, the third busiest in the nation. It is also one of the most dangerous, and, by air quality standards, one of the dirtiest, sections of Interstate 95. Third, I would learn from the past. We don't have to accept that the projects that are important to do need to work across purposes. My grandmother's house, that I lived in was taken by the last highway expansion project in New Haven. This makes sense; this project is an opportunity to tie these important purposes together.
Thank you for your time.
Ms. DELAURO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Do you have any questions, Mr. Rahall?
Page 502 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. RAHALL. I don't have any questions. I just want to commend the Mayor and our good friend, Rosa, for the very effective leadership she has provided over a number of years in representing your city, Mr. Mayor, and her city. We thank you for today's testimony.
Ms. DELAURO. Thank you very, very much.
Mr. DESTEFANO. Thank you.
Thank you.
[The prepared statements of Ms. DeLauro and Mr. DeStefano follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. Now we're joined by our colleague, Frank Riggs, who is accompanied by Jim Harberson, the Chairman of the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors.
Mr. PETRI. I think they have a lot of good wine up in that part of the world among other things.
Mr. RIGGS. Yes, sir. You know, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Rahall is familiar with our part of the world.
Mr. RAHALL. Very much so. I have a son who lives up in Humbolt County.
Page 503 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. RIGGS. That's right. He has a son at the College of Redwoods in Humbolt County, and, if I can be just a little parochial or even chauvinistic about my Congressional District for a moment, we're home to the magnificent Redwood Forest, as well as the premiere wine valleys of the world. So we're producing high quality timber products, as well as world class wines in this wine and grape growing region.
It's good to visit with you. I want to sit down here because Jim Harberson is a good personal friend of mine. I want to introduce him to both of you, and to Mr. Pease, who is kind enough to be here, and to let you know that we appear before you together in partnership between the Federal Government and State and local government in Northern California to appeal for your consideration of funding in the ISTEA reauthorization for our major transportation by-way and our major transportation priority, and that is the widening and improvement of Highway 101, which, as you may know, is part of the National Highway System. That's how you got up to Humbolt County. It runs from the Mexican border to the Canadian border, and, as Supervisor Harberson will attest in his testimony, it is the major north-side artery serving the North Bay and north coast of California.
One other thing I would like to add, and that is last summer Chairman Shuster had an opportunity to come out and visit us, and we actually, with Jim's help and the help of the Golden Gate Bridge District, did a fly-over of Highway 101 on a Friday afternoon at peak commute time. Chairman Shuster saw the congestion. He was briefed on the fact that the problem has grown progressively worse over the last decade, and without assistance from the Federal Government, without the use of Federal highway trust fund money, gas tax monies, we probably will not be able to relieve this congestion, and, therefore, the gridlock, the air pollution, and, therefore, by extension, the quality of life and the standard of living will only continue to deteriorate in the North Bay and on the north coast.
Page 504 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
So we appeal to you today to give every consideration to Supervisor Harberson.
This is Jim Harberson from Sonoma County, elected member of the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors.
Mr. PETRI. Sir, your full submission will be made a part of the record of this hearing, and we look forward to hearing your summary.
TESTIMONY OF FRANK RIGGS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM CALIFORNIA, ACCOMPANIED BY JAMES HARBERSON, CHAIRMAN, COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, BOARD MEMBER OF THE SONOMA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
HIGHWAY 101 FUNDING, INTERMODAL CENTER
Mr. HARBERSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, and members of the Subcommittee, it is an honor and a pleasure to appear before you today to discuss the projects of great importance to the people of Sonoma County. I am particularly pleased to be joined by Congressman Frank Riggs, who has worked tirelessly to help the entire link of 101, not just the part in his District.
In addition, these projects enjoy the strong support of Congressman Lynn Woolsey. During their tenure in Congress both have demonstrated an understanding of our needs in Sonoma County and a willingness to work hard in fashioning solutions. Some jurisdictions complain that they're split in two by two members of Congress, but we consider ourselves fortunate to have two such fine members we can call on.
Page 505 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Since you are reviewing member initiatives, we wish to support Congressman Riggs' Transportation Natural Disaster Mitigation Program as an addition to the next Surface Transportation Act. As one of the California counties hit hard by floods in the last 2 years, such a new program aimed at mitigating costly disasters before they happen would be welcome and seems to make a great deal of common sense.
As you are probably aware, Sonoma County is located on the Pacific Coast approximately 60 miles north of San Francisco. U.S. Highway 101 is a primary north-side highway and serves as a main street for the cities in urbanized areas clustered around it. Along with Napa County we are in the heart of wine country, attracting many people who wish to live, work and retire in our area, and, in addition, we have a large tourist trade.
Our popularity has created a major transportation problem along the Highway 101 corridor, which, as we said, serves as a main street, as well as part of the interstate system.
U.S. Highway 101 was built in the 1960s to rural standards. The 1960s population of approximately 150,000 people has grown to over 425,000, and most of the urbanized sections of U.S. Highway 101 are experiencing congestion and operating at traffic index level service F during peak periods.
Public polls designate transportation as the number one problem every year. Believe me, our citizens support your efforts on behalf of a strong Surface Transportation Bill.
Page 506 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We are embarking on a major transportation plan to improve this corridor. Our approach is multi-modal in scope, including development of a new HOV lane on U.S. Highway 101, Highway 101 interchange improvements, two reliever routes and an integrated rail-bus transit network.
The recent acquisition of Northwestern Pacific Railroad, which runs parallel to and largely adjacent to Highway 101, offers additional alternatives and provides land that can be used to enhance the multi-modal network that we seek. Our current land use study shows that we must pursue this multi-modal approach. Concentration on only one mode will not address the problem according to our traffic model. Land use must be coordinated with the transportation network, particularly key intermodal modes where increased land use and access to various forms of transportation can help facilitate increased public awareness and usage of alternative modes.
Mr. Chairman, please allow me to focus on the following pints:
Highway 101 is the most important and focal element of our transportation network. As our main street, it operates as California's coastal interstate connector to Oregon. It is the only north-side intercounty route to Marin, San Francisco and Oakland in the East Bay and carries a heavy intracounty traffic load as the main corridor where the majority of the population is clustered.
Traffic volumes have increased for the past 30 years. Public polls cite transportation gridlock as the top problem and issue in our area. Frustration over congested U.S. Highway 101 is prevalent. The surveys indicate our citizens favor improving mobility by improving highway and transit systems.
Page 507 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
U.S. Highway 101 is on the national highway system and proposed highway projects included in the regional transportation plan and local plans. We have concentrated on and completed most of the less costly improvement projects aimed at reducing congestion. However, we now have to focus on the big picture, adding additional high occupancy vehicle lanes to Highway 101. HOV lanes will encourage ride sharing and use of transit and complement the additional HOV lanes in Marin County.
As of February of this year, the Sonoma County Transportation Authority, which includes every city in the county, and the counties unanimously supported the proposed projects proposed by Congressman Riggs. So we have uniform support on this throughout the county, which is not particularly prevalent in Sonoma County in the last few years, so we're pretty proud of this.
On the highway side we're requesting almost $158 million of Federally assisted money matched by about $40 million of local funds over a phased 5-year period to improve U.S. Highway 101 corridor, concentrating on the high occupancy vehicle lanes on 14 miles of the most congested segments, improvement of 13 interchanges and completion of the two parallel reliever routes. Maps are included in our testimony.
On the transit side we are requesting $12 million of Federal assistance matched by $11 million in local funding to develop five intermodal transportation facilities that compliment the high occupancy vehicle lanes, existing networks and the recently acquired Northwestern Pacific Railroad corridor. We propose to develop one facility each in the next 5 years in each of our major population centers.
Page 508 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The Subcommittee's project evaluation criteria reports have been submitted for these two project. These reports outline the project benefits and related details. Our proposed plans are broadly supported and will reflect the multi-modal approach encouraged by ISTEA.
Mr. Chairman, we are very excited about the potential of these intermodal transportation projects and hope we can count on Federal participation in developing this element of our transportation plan.
This completes my remarks, and I would be happy to answer any questions.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Do you have any questions?
Mr. RAHALL. I do not.
Mr. PETRI. I just want you to know that you're represented by a very active and able member of this Committee. We'll be trying to work with you and other people in your area as we move forward with this project.
Mr. HARBERSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Chairman, let me thank you for those kind remarks, and just close on this note or this observation, and that is my District is mostly rural in character, and, therefore, we rely very much on our transportation infrastructure for the well-being, if you will, of our economy. While we have many needs in my Congressional District, this is the number one need, and, therefore, the number one priority, and that is why this is the project that I have chosen to sponsor as the primary sponsor.
Page 509 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Pease did have a question.
Mr. PEASE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Just a quick observation. We have, obviously, seen a lot of proposals, and your presentation was very well done. I want to commend you on your written presentation, as well. It is very succinct and gets right to the point, and it points out, among other things, that you are willing to take on more than the expected local share in terms of percentage costs, and that is refreshing.
One other thing you should know is that your Congressman not only works here, even when he is off duty, he is working on your behalf. We were on an Amtrak train this weekend, and he was checking the stock at the bar to make sure that it was Sonoma or Napa that was in stock there.
[Laughter.]
Mr. HARBERSON. Thank you, Congressman, and thank you, Congressman Riggs.
Mr. PETRI. The next panel is our colleague, Chairman Dan Burton, of the greater Indianapolis area. I guess they call it the Indianapolis Metro Region now. He is accompanied by Stephen Goldsmith, the Mayor of Indianapolis, and Tom Schneider, the Mayor of Lawrence, Indiana.
Page 510 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. BURTON. And the Chairman of the Town Board, Mr. Kelly.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Riggs and Mr. Haberson follow:]
[Insert here.]
TESTIMONY OF HON. DANIEL BURTON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM INDIANA, ACCOMPANIED BY HON. STEPHEN GOLDSMITH, MAYOR, CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS, WALT KELLY, PRESIDENT, FISHERS TOWN COUNCIL, HON. TOM SCHNEIDER, MAYOR, CITY OF LAWRENCE, IN
NORTHEAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, I–70/6 POINTS ROAD PROJECT
56TH STREET PROJECT
Mr. BURTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I really appreciate your altering your schedule a little bit to accommodate me. I have to meet with the Speaker about a couple of issues in just a short time so I really appreciate your help and cooperation.
If it is all right with you, Mr. Chairman, after I make my opening remarks, I would like to be excused so that I can go to that meeting.
Page 511 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. Chairman, and members of the Subcommittee, I want to thank you for allowing us to testify today before your Committee. We're here today to lend our strong support for funding in the reauthorization of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act for a few critical projects in the City of Indianapolis, Indiana, and the surrounding area.
Mr. Chairman, as you are aware, Indiana is one of the many States that annually contributes far more gasoline tax dollars into the Federal Highway Trust Fund than it receives back in Federal grants. With these funds Indiana does everything it can to fulfill its transportation needs.
However, more often than not our list of transportation infrastructure priorities more than exceeds our financial capability to pay for them. Consequently, there are a few critical transportation projects in Indiana to which a commitment of Federal funds is crucial to their completion.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to testify before the Committee on Transportation regarding our request for Federal funding for these important transportation projects, and, Mr. Chairman, you know that I've been fighting what are so-called pork barrel projects for years. So I wouldn't be here if I didn't think these were extremely important, and Mr. Rahall knows that, I think, as well.
I strongly applaud the use of the 14 point criteria standards to ensure that all projects are truly valuable investments. This prioritization of road projects will ensure that all projects chosen are based upon real need and fairness. Each of the three projects that will be discussed momentarily meet the criteria requirements of the Committee. They are all considered as high priorities by State and local transportation officials, and they are critical to the continued development and economic growth of the City of Indianapolis, its surrounding areas and the entire State of Indiana.
Page 512 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
All three projects—the Interstate 70/6 points road interchange, the 56 Street Road extension and the major investment study for the Northeast corridor of Indianapolis—are considered vital to the ongoing economic viability of their respective counties and cities.
I have with me today a number of people who have been intimately involved in the planning of these projects from the beginning stages. Seated in the audience are Dennis Reddick, the Mayor of Noblesville, Indiana; Steve Hold, Hamilton County Commissioner; Steve Cavanaugh, President of the Port Authority on Indianapolis; Larry Hopkins, the Executive Director of the Port Authority of Indianapolis; Roland Dorson, Executive Vice President of Indianapolis; and Walt Kelly, President of the Fishers Town Council.
There are some people still back in Indiana but a lot of them are already out here.
[Laughter.]
Mr. BURTON. They have all been involved in the planning of the Northeast Corridor Project. In addition to these highly involved individuals, I have with me Mayor Stephen Goldsmith of Indianapolis and Mayor Tom Schneider of the City of Lawrence and President of the Fishers Town Board, Walt Kelly, to provide you with more details regarding the need for and merit of these important projects.
However, before I ask Mayor Goldsmith and Mayor Schneider and Mr. Kelly to speak, I would like to reiterate my strong support for these projects. For those of you who don't know Indianapolis, Indiana, the city and its surrounding metropolitan area is no longer your typical, sleepy midwestern town with corn and soybean fields just out the city limits. I know that your father-in-law is from the Hamilton County area, so I'm sure he has told you how fast that area is growing.
Page 513 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
It is now a thriving and vibrant city experiencing an explosion of economic growth and development. These worthy transportation improvement projects are the key to assuring the continued strength and growth of the beautiful City of Indianapolis and the State of Indiana.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you once again for taking us out of order, and hope you will look with favor on the projects we just talked about.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mayor Goldsmith.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Thank you, Congressman Burton.
Mr. PETRI. I just should explain that we operate under a procedure where your full submission will be made a part of the record and we invite you to summarize and highlight the submission.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. I understand.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the sake of your time and because we have several speakers, let me just introduce and endorse the projects. I'll talk about one and the other representatives here will speak about the others.
Page 514 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Actually, there are four projects. The three that Congressman Burton mentioned requests dollars to replace metro transit buses in the City of Indianapolis.
Let me begin, first, with the Six Points Road Interchange. This project is a central Indiana project that involves several counties. Essentially, what has happened is that Congress allowed a little more than $1 million for design funds—$1.3 million previously—and we have begun to design what is called the Six Points Road Interchange. Interstate 70, which, obviously, runs through our country, runs past the airport and has been the site of most enormous growth, economic development growth, in central Indiana.
The airport really is an economic development engine for the region. There is a chart up there but for purposes of brevity, let me just suggest that inside the areas that we are mentioning—Interstate 70 runs from the left corner to the right corner, and the line that goes north and south is what is called Six Points Road. Those purple lines are the runways at the airport. In that area there has been $500 million of public investment and almost $1 billion of private investment in the last several years. The airport contributes almost $1.5 billion in economic impact to our community and with passenger traffic that has more than doubled.
In that area Indianapolis—central Indiana is becoming the air freight center of the United States. Over the next several years more air traffic in terms of freight traffic will move through the Indianapolis International Airport than probably anywhere else outside of the coast. Federal Express continues to expand there. The Postal air hub is located in Indianapolis, as well. It is an intermodal project because in the county adjoining Conrail has its classification yards. United Airlines has 7,000 maintenance individuals in the area, as well.
Page 515 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
In a nutshell, what we are asking the Committee to do is endorse a project that will allow us to build out this interchange. What we have done now, and I know this Committee is an expert in aviation issues, that these tens of thousands of workers actually almost enter the airport along with passenger traffic before they get to their jobs because you cannot go north and south around the runways. So, basically, the aviation workers, Federal Express workers, United Airline workers, Postal hub workers, all drive into the airport, congesting the passenger traffic and essentially back out and around to their jobs.
We have the right-of-way acquired, we have the local match identified, the design work is done, construction is ready to go. This Committee has already invested $1.3 million in this intermodal project, and we would request continued funding that will allow us to move forward with construction, a total project cost of $30 million.
So in that area there are literally—there has already been a billion dollars of investment, and we're asking this Committee to authorize a total participation of 80/20 and a total project cost of $30 million for the Interstate 70/6 points interchange. It is one of the most congested, one of the most important economic projects in Indiana because of the growth.
Let me mention briefly three other matters, Mr. Chairman. First, Indianapolis is the 12th largest city in the country. We happen to have one of the oldest bus fleets in the country. Our 157 buses virtually all need to be repaired or replaced in the next 2 years. Because they're so antique, virtually none of them comply with ADA requirements. So we are forced in our metro transit organization to have a separate contract that picks up for the disability issues, and we would ask this Committee to allow us funding that would provide for a total cost of $44 million, 70 percent local, in the replacement of our metro bus fleet—very important for our urban residents, very important for our residents who are disabled.
Page 516 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Finally, Mr. Chairman, there are two other projects that these other speakers to my left and right will address. To my left is Mayor Schneider who is the primary person responsible for a base reuse plan that has an important corridor, 56 Street. To my right is Walt Kelly, the President of the Fishers Town Council who is the chief proponent of a plan that would allow us to study with a major investment study possibilities of light rail connecting urban communities to urban communities. All four of these projects are important. They all serve different goals, and we would appreciate the attention and deliberation of the Committee.
Thank you so much.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mayor Schneider.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
My name is Tom Schneider. I am serving my third term as Mayor of Lawrence, Indiana. Lawrence is a suburb of Indianapolis. We are primarily a residential community with limited retail, commercial and industrial development. Lawrence is a city of approximately 35,000 citizens. Over the past 10 years we have experienced a population growth of nearly 40 percent, which makes us one of the fastest growing cities in Indiana. All indications are that we can expect our population growth to continue in the near term.
Lawrence was formerly the home of Fort Benjamin Harrison. Fort Harrison was identified for closure in 191, and in October of last year the formal closing was accomplished. Fort Harrison is essentially the geographic center of Lawrence and comprises 20 percent of the land area of our city. As a result of the closure, approximately 5,500 military and civilian jobs were lost or transferred elsewhere. Our first task was to position ourselves to replace the lost jobs and create the platform for sustained economic redevelopment of the installation.
Page 517 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
During the process of planning for the closure, it seemed obvious to us, and the real estate, economic development and traffic consultants now all have confirmed, that vehicular access was our greatest infrastructure need. The former installation was, again, like the hole in a donut. Streets and holes led to but not through the installation. In fact, while it was a military installation, through traffic was discouraged.
Further compounding the situation is the fact that access was eliminated and north-south traffic is impeded by the new Fort Harrison State Park. This was created by the State of Indiana from about two-thirds of the former base. Additionally, the south and east boundaries of the installation are marked by a busy rail line. Thus, when one evaluates the existing physical conditions, there is only one efficient and practical means of improving vehicular access to the former installation. That is the project I am here to talk to you about today.
The 56 Street corridor is a primary thoroughfare for the larger metropolitan area. The regional transportation planning organization has long sustained that the extension and widening of 56 Street would provide a vital east-west corridor across Marion County, which is crucial to effective traffic flows. Currently, the 56 Street corridor does not cross the railroad tracks I mentioned before, and while the base was an active military installation, it was not in the best interest of the Department of the Army to have a major thoroughfare bisecting its facility. Now that the base is closed, the project is critical to our recovery and each day of delay exacerbates the distress in our community.
Our proposed project envisions the widening of this thoroughfare to four lanes through the base, across the railroad tracks by means of an above grade crossing and connecting the thoroughfare to U.S. Highway 36, approximately one mile east of the base.
Page 518 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
To the west of the base, approximately one mile, the roadway is connected to Interstate Highway 465, the outer loop around Indianapolis and Marion County. The Fort Harrison Reuse plan, which was funded by the Department of Defense, cited the importance of the widening, extension and improvement of this thoroughfare as a prerequisite to the successful redevelopment of the base. Without this transportation improvement project, any proposed commercial, industrial redevelopment will be located on what is effectively a dead end road. I think we can all agree that is not, and would not be, the best planning result.
Mere economic recovery is but one of our goals. Linkage of the former base into the community it previously held at arms length is critical to that economic recovery. However, we want to do more than just recover. We hope to achieve a sustained economic impact on the community. The former base holds the potential of over 11,000 new jobs and private sector investment of nearly $300 million, but one of this can be achieved without this critical project.
Were it not for the closure of Fort Harrison, I would not be here before you today seeking your assistance. We are a small community. The closure of Fort Harrison and the need for this project is a crisis for us. For a larger community it would not be as significant an issue. The Forth Harrison Reuse Authority, which was formed to administer the redevelopment of the installation, had to purchase—and I reiterate—purchase about one-third of the former base from the Department of Defense so that we could control the redevelopment. Additionally, until we can transfer the land and improvements we have maintenance and operation responsibility at a cost of approximately $2 million per year. Our only mechanism for maintaining the base and paying the Department of Defense is through land sales and the only way we can achieve the best economic use and return is if we can offer access.
Page 519 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We currently estimate other sources will provide approximately one-half of the funding for the project. We are respectfully requesting funding of the $6 million balance.
Chairman Petri and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to present this information to you on behalf of the citizens of Lawrence.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Now , Walter Kelly from Fishers Town Council.
Mr. KELLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll be brief.
It's an issue that has groundswell support by my neighbors, Mayor Reddick, who is here today, and the rest of Hamilton County. We are the fastest growing community in the State of Indiana, averaging 30 percent growth for a long time. I have been on the council since the late 1970s and we have worked with Mayor Goldsmith and our other neighbors to try to find some regional approaches and regional solutions to some of our issues. Transportation is critical. We don't believe, and there is not local community support, for 14-lane interchanges—14-lane highways in that area. We think there is an alternative. We would like to study that alternative.
As a small community, we are requesting some support for that study, and we are also requesting some annual support thereafter with respect to some of the initial parts of the project that are detailed in the testimony.
Page 520 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
As I expect, a lot of people who visited the area are very familiar with the tremendous growth that has moved out between—well, a number of directions but the Carmel, Indianapolis, to Noblesville, Fishers. It's all one city now and it used to be lots of open space and agricultural lands.
You are under a lot of pressure and we appreciate it.
Are there questions?
Mr. Pease?
Mr. PEASE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Just a few observations. It may come as a surprise to folks here and members of the Committee that Congressman Burton has a reputation for being somewhat conservative, and it's extraordinary to me that he comes and makes this request. I don't know in all the years that I've known him that he has made a request of this nature of the Federal Government, but there's obvious reasons for that.
The case has been made—I won't reiterate the case—but I drive through Interstate 70 to get to the Indianapolis Airport every time I come here from my District, and the creative leadership that Mayor Goldsmith has provided to Indianapolis and central Indiana has resulted in explosive growth in this area for which we're very grateful but which has placed some tremendous demands on the infrastructure, particularly in the area of the Indianapolis Airport. The Six Points interchange proposal is one step of many—some of which have already been taken; some of which are still contemplated—that will fit, I think, absolutely perfectly with the intentions of ISTEA. They deal with intermodal approaches to transportation. It will assist not only the Indianapolis International Airport, but a number of the communities in my District, and the soybean and cornfield areas that Congressman Burton referred to, which are my District, and I could not speak more strongly for this purpose. I am grateful to all of you folks from central Indiana who came in support of Congressman Burton.
Page 521 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. Thank you all for being here.
Now our colleague, a hardworking member of our Committee, Jack Metcalf. He will is accompanied by Bob Drewel, the Executive of Snohomish County; Dave Earling, Councilman from Edmonds, Washington; Greg Nickels, King County, Washington, Councilman; and Bob White, Executive Director of the RTA.
Jack, please proceed.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Burton, Mr. Goldsmith, Mr. Schneider, and Mr. Kelly follow:]
[Insert here.]
TESTIMONY OF HON. JACK METCALF, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM WASHINGTON, ACCOMPANIED BY BOB DREWEL, EXECUTIVE SNOHOMISH COUNTY, DAVE EARLING, COUNCILMAN, EDMONDS, WA, GREG NICKELS, COUNCILMAN, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AND BOB WHITE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, RTA
SOUND MOVE
Mr. METCALF. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and all the members of the Committee.
Page 522 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
It is my pleasure to testify before you today in support of the new start authorization request for the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority in Washington State.
As you may know, the leaders and residents of the Central Puget Sound region have debated the issue of high capacity transit for many years. On November 6, 1996, the voters of the region approved RTA's Sound Move proposal by a 56.6 percent majority. The voters agreed to pay approximately 70 percent of the Sound Move through self-imposed local taxes. We are here today to ask the Federal Government to supplement these local contributions with Federal investment in these mobility improvements for the central Puget Sound region.
Sound Move will increase transportation capacity in the region through a combination of light rail, commuter rail, high occupancy vehicle expressways, regional express bus routes, park and ride lots and transit centers. RTA is asking for a Federal authorization just for the light rail and commuter rail portions of this program.
I understand the complexity of the new start requests under the reauthorization of ISTEA. I am hopeful that we as members of the Subcommittee can work together to solve the dilemma posed by the current full funding agreements signed by the Administration. I can assure you, Mr. Chairman, that I am prepared and committed to finding an acceptable solution.
Mr. Chairman, I support RTA's request and am pleased to introduce to you Bob Drewel, who is the Snohomish County Executive and Chairman of the RTA Board, for further testimony on Sound Move and its authorization request.
Bob?
Page 523 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. DREWEL. Mr. Chairman, and members of the Subcommittee, my name is Bob Drewel. I am the Executive of Snohomish County in Washington State and Chair of the Board of the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority, the RTA.
As earlier mentioned by Congressman Metcalf, I am accompanied by David Earling, a member of the Edmonds City and Chair of the RTA Board's Public and Government Affairs Committee; Mr. Greg Nickels, a member of the King County Council and Chair of the RTA Board's Finance Committee; and Mr. Bob White, the Executive Director of the RTA.
Being most respectful of your time and your heavy and ambitious schedule, I will be the sole speaker today, and I have about 5 minutes and 7 seconds worth of remarks and I'll get on with them, sir.
Mr. PETRI. Yes, sir.
Mr. DREWEL. We are gratified by the support given to our project requests this afternoon by Congressman Jack Metcalf, a member of this Subcommittee, and other members of the Washington State Congressional Delegation. Likewise, we are absolutely pleased to be able to testify today about Sound Move, our plan to improve mobility for the central Puget Sound region, and our request for an authorization for Federal assistance for this project.
On November 5, the voters of our region approved our Sound Move proposal by a majority of 56.5 percent. Sound Move will increase the capacity of the region's transportation system through a mix of light rail, commuter rail, high occupancy vehicle expressways, regional express bus routes and community connections—such things as park and ride and transit centers.
Page 524 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Transit customers will be able to travel by local bus, regional bus, light rail and commuter rail with the use of a single ticket. Our region's voters agreed to pay for most of this plan through a four-tenths of one percent increase in their local sales tax and a three-tenths of one percent increase in the motor vehicle excise tax. These tax revenues will provide a stable, dependable, dedicated source of local revenue for building, maintaining and operating the system.
The RTA does need financial help, however, to successfully implement the light rail and commuter rail portions of our plan. Our light rail plan includes a 25-mile line with 26 stations between the University District of Seattle and the City of SeaTac through downtown Seattle and Seattle-Tacoma Airport. If sufficient funding is available, we would wish to extend the line north from the University District to the Northgate region in the City of Seattle.
One of the most significant investments required for this line, the downtown Seattle transit tunnel and its five stations, is already in place. Our plan also calls for a 1.6 mile light rail between downtown Tacoma and the Tacoma Dome train station. Last year Congress appropriated $3 million to begin preliminary engineering and environmental work on our light rail system.
Our commuter rail plan calls for an 81-mile line between Everett in the north and Lakewood to the south, through Seattle and Tacoma, with at least 14 stations. The commuter trains will run on existing freight track, RTA funds, supplemented by funds from our public and private partners, including the railroads, will help pay for track and signal improvements on this line in order to secure the speed and reliability necessary for quality commuter passenger service on this line.
Page 525 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We have obligated $1.88 million in Federal funds for the environmental work on the Seattle-Tacoma segment of this line and an additional $1 million for the Tri-Rail Demonstration Project, successfully completed in 1995.
We expect to obligate an additional $1.3 million very shortly for the Everett-Seattle and Tacoma-Lakewood segments of this line.
We request that the Committee provide an authorization of $500 million over 5 years for the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority for a program of interrelated projects, including a light rail project, previously mentioned, and the commuter project between Everett and Lakewood. The total cost of these two projects over the next 5 years is $1.28 billion.
We also expect to seek discretionary bus capital funds under the bus and bus-related facilities program. The total cost of our bus capital program is $92 million in 1995 dollars over the 10-year period. We cannot exactly estimate at this point how much bus capital money we will request over the next 5 years.
The Sound Move plan also includes $377 million to fund 14 direct access ramps to high occupancy vehicle lanes in the region. This project is a partnership with the Washington State Department of Transportation, and I might add that we're joined by Mr. Rick Daniels from that Department. We will construct with these funds the access ramps necessary to the HOV lanes. Although we currently expect to fund this construction solely from locally-raised revenues, we may seek Federal funds for this project at some point in the future.
Page 526 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We are very pleased by the broad support we have received for our Sound Move from business, environmental and community leaders, and especially from the citizens of our region. We believe that Sound Move will help maintain the economic vitality and quality of life in the Central Puget Sound Region. Because Washington State is the most trade-oriented State in this country, this investment in regional mobility will benefit the entire nation.
We are convinced that any fair analysis of our project will conclude that it is a very cost-effective investment. We anticipate strong ridership, and we expect our local match rates to be one of the highest in the nation for new start projects.
Thank you very much.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Are there any questions?
[No response.]
Mr. PETRI. I just would like to observe that I think you are all to be commended for the leadership that you've obviously shown in bringing the community together in support of this project. It's a little bit like heaven—everyone wants to go there, but not now. Everyone wants these projects, but they don't want to pay for them. To sell it to the community, is something that you are all to be commended for. This is a very fast growing area and ecologically it's very sensitive. People love the area because of the tremendous environment that you have. This project is probably one of the keys to trying to accommodate the growth, and, at the same time, promote a vibrant economy.
Page 527 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We're interested in hearing your report, and we look forward to working with Jack and your other representatives on this.
Thank you very much.
Mr. DREWEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Metcalf and Mr. Drewel follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. We may as well take a break for 20 minutes, and we'll be back on schedule at 1:10.
[Recess.]
Mr. PETRI. The Subcommittee will resume. I apologize for being a minute or two behind schedule here, but we're delighted that our colleague is here and is going to introduce to the Subcommittee his fellow Arkansans.
Asa, please proceed.
TESTIMONY OF HON. ASA HUTCHINSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM ARKANSAS, ACCOMPANIED BY EMON A. MAHONEY, RETIRED PRESIDENT, ARKANSAS-OKLAHOMA GAS PAST PRESIDENT, FORT SMITH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, ROBERT E. LEE, PRESIDENT, TEXARKANA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, UVALDE R. LINDSEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NORTHWEST ARKANSAS COUNCIL
Page 528 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
US–71 IMPROVEMENTS
US–71, TEXARKANA, ARKANSAS TO THE MISSOURI LINE
US–412 REQUESTS, INTERMODAL CONNECTION TO THE NORTHWEST ARKANSAS REGIONAL AIRPORT
Mr. HUTCHINSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
It is my pleasure to present this panel on behalf of two high priority corridors in my District that affects the nation, as well. It is my pleasure to introduce Uvalde Lindsey of Fayetteville, Arkansas. Uvalde is the staff director of the Northwest Arkansas Council, a group of business, industry and community leaders. This group includes, who the Chairman will know, former Congressman and former minority ranking member of this Committee, John Paul Hammerschmidt, who is very involved in this project. Uvalde did a study of transportation needs in northwest Arkansas, including serving as Executive Director of Northwest Arkansas Planning and Development District in Harrison. In 1986 Uvalde worked with two other planning directors to develop the east-west corridor study of transportation needs in northern Arkansas. He is probably the most knowledgeable person I know concerning intermodal transportation needs in northwest Arkansas, and I welcome him to this panel.
The second panel member is Emon Mahoney, a resident of Fort Smith, Arkansas. Emon recently retired as President and CEO of Arkansas-Oklahoma Gas Corporation and is the past Chairman of the Fort Smith Chamber of Commerce. Emon served on the staff with Senator John McClellan in the early 1970s, and has been Federal Chairman of the Arkansas-Oklahoma Arkansas River Compact. Emon has a key understanding of the linkage between economic growth opportunities and good safe roads and has worked for many years to improve one of the most dangerous roads in America, Highway 71 North.
Page 529 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The third panel member is Robert E. ''Sweet'' Lee, who for the past 16 years has been President and CEO of the Texarkana Chamber of Commerce. Sweet Lee has hosted members of this Committee who made field investigations in the need for building U.S. 71, Interstate 49. He has worked with the Reagan, Bush and Clinton Administrations to provide them with information on the regional infrastructure needs. In 1989 he organized the mid-American Connection Compact, a group of over 1,000 citizens committed to the improvement of roadways that connect middle America with Canada and Mexico trade markets.
I welcome each of these distinguished individuals to this Committee. Others present, Mr. Chairman, who will not be testifying are Billy Dulley, President of the Fort Smith Chamber of Commerce; Mr. S. Boyant, City Administrator in Fort Smith; Ray Stewart, City Director; Carol Lindsay who is here as the Ozark International Consultants; and Terry Coberly, the Mayor of Bentonville. There are others who might be here as well. We welcome them to this and they're very supportive of these projects.
I would ask that Mr. Uvalde Lindsey proceed.
Mr. LINDSEY. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, my name is Uvalde Lindsey. I work for the Northwest Arkansas Council and Congressman John Paul Hammerschmidt is the Chairman, so technically I work for the Congressman.
It is an honor to be here and to present testimony on U.S. 412, one of the 22 high priority corridors designated in the 1991 ISTEA legislation.
Page 530 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The 22-county region of north Arkansas is currently enjoying population and economic growth which far surpasses the rest of the State. While those economic benefits are potentially tremendous, they don't come without some problems to be solved or challenges, quite frankly, to be met. One of the greatest of those problems is the east-west transportation across the region.
Recognizing this problem, the Arkansas Highway Department in 1986 commissioned a comprehensive study to look at the need for that east-west highway corridor to serve that region. That 1986 study pointed out that the region was served by a disjointed collection of narrow two-lane highways that didn't provide a through east-west movement of people and goods in interstate commerce, and these deficiencies were underscored in an interstate corridor study, which basically stated in summary one of the most notable omissions to the interstate system is a missing link through north central Arkansas to Tennessee.
As Arkansans and surrounding States concentrated on completing the interstate system during the 1960s and 1970s, the region basically became land-locked, cut off from the free flow of goods in an east-west movement. The roads basically grew out of the old road bed without any interstate definition between metropolitan areas and without any continuity within the State. The typography and the alignment problems created the free flow, the efficient flow, of traffic and the service levels of the highways just absolutely exceeded what we were designed to provide.
On top of that, as the region grew, increased in traffic volume, the end result is a traffic system that threatens over time to strangle the growth of the region.
Page 531 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Let me give you some examples, Mr. Chairman, of the region's growth:
During the 30-year period from 1960 to 1990, the region's population increased 47 percent, a rate of growth which is 89 percent greater than the rest of the State. In the 10 short years between 1985 and 1995, employment grew 52 percent and the unemployment rate in northwest Arkansas at the end of 1996 was only 2.6 percent, which is about half the national average. But that growth and vitality can be stopped without continued improvements to U.S. 412. As we look at the roads, you sort of have to define them, I think, as being the community road that we sort of grew up with, movement from city to city, town to town, county to county without any definition of interstate mode.
Routes followed the route of least resistance. They sort of wound through the hills and down into the Delta, and full of curves that impeded the free flow of traffic. And, quite frankly, all cities' main street is the highway, as we all sort of grew up with. That still exist.
While improvements have been made to many of the systems—and for those improvements we're most grateful—most of those improvements have been on existing site locations. So the rural segments remain much as they have for years.
Specifically, let's define the highways that we have—81 percent are two-lanes, 71 percent of these two-lane miles do not have safe passing opportunity, 65 percent of the pavement is rated as less than good, 53 percent have shoulder width of less than four feet, 30 percent of the route must be traveled at speeds under 55 miles per hour. Add to these deficiencies the traffic demands. We've got 61 percent more vehicles on U.S. 412 today than we had 10 years ago. That threatens the ability of that highway to serve as an adequate mover of traffic, and it could constrict expansion and result in lost opportunity.
Page 532 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. Chairman, as you well know, ISTEA notes that travel and economic development needs in many regions are inadequately served by the interstate system. Resolution of that deficiency or that problem is evident in ISTEA's naming of new corridors, which basically integrated regions provided for safe independent flow of commerce. One of those is Highway 412 east-west corridor from Tulsa, to Nashville, Tennessee, through north Arkansas.
As you deliberate the ISTEA reauthorization, we would ask for your continued support and funding for new high priority segments that would finally bring us into the 21st Century and provide that connection.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. Mahoney?
Mr. MAHONEY. Chairman Petri, with your permission, I will highlight my testimony but ask that it be received in its entirety.
Mr. PETRI. Your entire statement will be included in the record.
Mr. MAHONEY. My name is Emon Mahoney. I'm a resident of Fort Smith, Arkansas. I'm testifying in the capacity of a former Chairman of the Fort Smith Chamber of Commerce.
Page 533 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We thank the Honorable Asa Hutchinson for arranging this time for our testimony. As you know, he is the latest in a long line of distinguished Third District Arkansas Congressmen who have served with distinction on this Committee. His Third District constituents very much appreciate their efforts and your efforts, Congressman, on our behalf.
We have a unique opportunity on a portion of Interstate 49 that proceeds south from Alma, Arkansas to Texarkana in that recently the mission of Fort Chaffee, Arkansas, has been changed and Fort Chaffee is being transformed into a National Guard Training Center. This has freed up lands on the west end of Fort Chaffee for non-military uses, at the request of the Fort Smith Chamber of Commerce and our Federal representatives.
A large portion of these lands have been currently set aside by the local redevelopment authority for the Interstate 49 route with concurrence by the United States Army, National Guard and Reserve components. That significantly lessens the cost of this portion of the highway, and because this window of opportunity is open today, we have a unique ability to build a four-lane highway that will promote economic development without the accompanying problems that often occur when you build a four-lane highway.
In addition, it will mitigate the economic impact of reduced Federal expenditures caused by the change in mission of the Fort. The advantages of the route through Fort Chaffee are strong. It is the strongest route, and, therefore, less money will be required to construct this Fort through the highway. The Federal land swap means reduced cost for purchase and litigation for rights-of-way.
Page 534 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Uninhabited land results in zero disruption to the public and faster construction. There are known environmental factors to deal with, and we have had numerous environmental surveys in this area because of the gas well drilling that requires an environmental impact statement. It provides growth for the booming Fort Smith regional economy.
There is no question on the savings. As we pointed out, we've attached a draft environmental impact statement from Michael Baker & Associates to this testimony. They have a summary of beneficial and adverse impacts that has about 12 beneficial impacts and I couldn't find any adverse, so we're quite delighted with that naturally.
It has been our privilege to be host to the Chairman of the Full Committee, The Honorable Bud Shuster, who was then accompanied by Congressman John Paul Hammerschmidt and other Committee members in Fort Smith to inspect portions of this highway that have been built and that were to be built.
Chairman Shuster will no doubt recall the excellent view of the route across Fort Chaffee that was provided during the helicopter tour of the area while he was there. He told us while speaking to the Fort Smith Chamber of Commerce of his experiences when a road very similar to 71 in Pennsylvania was replaced and the many benefits, including safety, which occurred from that.
Mr. Chairman, when I was thinking about this testimony, I at one point recall my experiences as a youth at a camp in Wisconsin. We went to—we spent a week camping out and fishing in northern Wisconsin. We started in Delafield, and what was to me the largest tackle store in the universe was in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin—you're probably familiar with it—and we used to stop there and buy lures that they didn't have in Arkansas. I remember one of them is what's called a mud puppy, which is a huge lure and had a big hook attached. We would flail the water with optimism and hope that only a 13 or 14-year old youth could have, sure that at any moment this monster was going to come out of the depths and drag that lure. We're throwing it with inadequate rods compared to today's tackle, but it was quite an experience that, obviously, I have never forgotten. That sort of optimism and attitude is very helpful when you're trying to build a four-lane highway, and if we can just maintain that optimism, we'll be well off because it does take time.
Page 535 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Last night coming up on the plane I was re-reading an old William Faulkner book, ''The Town,'' and I wanted to share with you this quote from there. It just happened to be the twin sister of one of the protagonist of the book that happened to be a Harvard lawyer, like yourself, named Gavin Stevens, and she said, ''Give up hope? Young people should never give up hope.'' ''Of course not,'' mother said, ''they don't have to. All they have to do is stay young no matter how long it takes.''
So we're going to stay young no matter how long it takes, and with your help we'll get the highway bill.
Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. Lee?
Mr. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First, I want to thank the Committee for allowing citizens like myself an opportunity to participate in this ISTEA reauthorization process. I particularly want to thank our Congressman, Asa Hutchinson, for inviting me, although I'm a little bit outside of his District, to participate in the hearing.
My name is Robert E. Lee, and I'm President of the Texarkana Chamber of Commerce. I'm here representing a large portion of southwest Arkansas.
Page 536 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The ISTEA Act of 1991 identified 16 high priority corridors. Number one on that list was the north-south corridor from Kansas City to Shreveport, Louisiana. In 1987 a feasibility study for a controlled access freeway in that corridor was authorized by the Congress. It was approved in 1988. Because that freeway—there was a lot of trouble with the name of this highway. It is pretty hard to talk about a highway calling it the north-south corridor from Kansas City. So because this freeway was approved and the feasibility study connected Interstate 49 in Shreveport, since that time the section from Shreveport to Kansas City has generally been identified as Interstate 49, and is the way I'll be addressing it in my remarks today.
ISTEA of 1991 also included an appropriation of approximately $200 million for Interstate 49. The vast majority of this money has been spent and is being spent on construction. There was just enough left over to complete in the entire State of Arkansas the route studies, and the environmental studies and some of the engineering that must be done prior to construction.
I am pleased to say that all this work has been completed in the State of Arkansas, and we're not only under construction on this highway, but we're ready for construction up and down the line.
Interstate 49 is going to be one of the nation's most important trade routes. It will serve directly the States of Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas and Missouri, but Interstate 49 will connect with Interstates 29, 35 and 44, which will give an additional eight States the best possible route to Mexico and all the seaports of the Texas and Louisiana gulf coast. So 12 States are going to be served once Interstate 49 is in place.
Page 537 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
It is kind of interesting to me that the feasibility study for Interstate 49 was done years before the North American Free Trade Agreement was enacted, but that agreement has made Interstate 49 a key trade route for NAFTA goods. It is expected that $100 billion a year in trade will be generated between the northeastern United States and Mexico within this coming 10 years. Interstate 49 will be the best route for 30 to 40 percent of all those good. I have attached a map to my written testimony to illustrate that and show the States from which those goods come.
The speedy completion of Interstate 49 for economic purposes alone is, I think, compelling. However, the safety factor is equally significant. If any of you have ever drive on Highway 71 through the hills and mountains of Arkansas, you can say you've gone through a truly death-defying experience. The facts are clear—the Arkansas Highway Department in 1987 produced the following numbers: 3.2 injuries per mile, one death every 4.7 miles every year between Fort Smith and Texarkana alone. This is 39 deaths on average and 576 injuries.
We need to finish Interstate 49. If Congressman Hutchinson's request for funding is approved, we can finish the Texarkana to Fort Smith segment in about 10 years. However, I think the evidence is compelling and this is an international and interstate key trade route. I would hope this Committee would overrule the Congressman's request, and double it, and we'll finish it in 5 years and be through with it.
Thank you very much.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Page 538 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Are there questions of the panel?
[No response.]
Mr. PETRI. You mentioned Asa's predecessor our former ranking minority member, John Paul Hammerschmidt, who I guess is now Mr. Lindsey's Chairman. I had the opportunity to be in your area, and I think we may have met at that time. It is memorable because a lot of colorful people are up in northwest Arkansas, among them Sam Walton, the Tyson family and Hunt family. It turns out that they're not alone there. There are satellite companies and spin-offs up in that area. It's become a very vibrant, international and commercial area.
I was reminded of the area because I saw a brief TV clip that concentrated on this regional airport that you're speaking of, and it was a little bit critical, trying to argue that it was a boondoggle. Is it a boondoggle or could you give the other side of the story, as they used to say on radio?
Mr. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I would be proud to respond to that.
As from the time that you were there in 1990 for the field hearing—in fact, one of the field hearings for the implementation of the 1991 ISTEA legislation—northwest Arkansas has struggled for the last 40 to 50 years in development of infrastructure, as the gentlemen and I have mentioned, and as you heard in that field hearing in 1990 from Mr. Walton, and Mr. Tyson and others that bring a tremendous amount of employment and economic growth to that particular region. We struggled to build four-lane highways. We're one of the few places, one of the largest population centers in the country without that four-lane link. We just finished, thanks to your ISTEA legislation of 1991, that segment that links Interstate 44. We've got that first one and now we're trying to build this airport, and the ABC piece was unfortunate in that it portrayed a series of half-truths, Mr. Chairman, and what it doesn't say is that this project, this building of a new regional airport, is supported by the Federal Aviation Administration, the top to the bottom from then Administrator David Henson's letters to regional support and support of the local people.
Page 539 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We had a referendum in 1992 on the airport project in which 74 percent reaffirmed their commitment to continued representation to the airport authority. That's a landslide, I think, in almost any book, and what ABC doesn't say is that this project is a public works project, is under budget, 26 percent under budget. It started at $144 million; it is at $107 million. We've saved $37 million. That is a unique project, and as you look at the way airports are built, it's the fourth Greenfield Airport that has been built since 1974. This is a—we think the way things are done. This is a project that provides air carrier service to a region. ABC shows the sign ''Population 84,'' but it serves a region that has a population today, two county regions, MSA of 264,000 people and projected to have 400,000 plus people by the year 2010. It has had 129 to 130 percent population increase in the last 20 years. It has had a 300 percent increase in employment since 1982.
What we're trying to do, Mr. Chairman, is catch up with the rest of the world and to provide service not only to the Wal-Marts and the Tysons of the world, but the other Fortune 500 companies that have service facilities and institutions in our particular part of the world and the rest of the thousands of employees and employers that are there who we think deserve that infrastructure.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Are there other questions?
[No response.]
Page 540 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. If not, as you said, your area has been represented by a long line of representatives who have honored this Subcommittee, and Asa is the plague bearer on this lap. We look forward to working with him and with you and others in your area as we move forward with this legislation.
Mr. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
The next panel is led by our colleague, Charlie Bass, from New Hampshire. I would like to welcome him and also Leon Kenison, New Hampshire Commissioner for Transportation, and Donald Davidson who is the Mayor of Nashua, New Hampshire.
I think you're familiar with our procedure. We're going to make a part of the record your full statements and we would encourage you to summarize them.
Charlie, if you would like, you may begin.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Lindsey, Mr. Mahoney and Mr. Lee follow:]
[Insert here.]
TESTIMONY OF HON. CHARLES F. BASS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE, ACCOMPANIED BY LEON KENISON, NEW HAMPSHIRE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, AND HON. DONALD DAVIDSON, MAYOR, NASHUA, NH
Page 541 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
NEW HAMPSHIRE POLICY PREFERENCES
BROAD STREET PARKWAY
Mr. BASS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and Congressman Rahall. We certainly appreciate your taking the time to listen to us today. I have briefed my co-testifiers here as to what the rules are. They are well aware of it, and we will certainly stay within the time limits.
I would like to, again, thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify here today. I'm here to introduce our Transportation Commissioner Leon Kenison, who will talk about general issues relating to the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act reauthorization and the importance of certain issues relating to the northeastern, most notably, the State of New Hampshire.
We feel that the current structure of ISTEA funding has functioned well, and we hope that it remains close to that model. We, obviously, will support improvements to the funding formula as they come along, but we certainly hope that the fundamental structure can remain as it has been in the past.
The second individual I have here today is the Mayor of Nashua, New Hampshire, Donald Davidson, an old friend of mine, a forme Eastern Airlines pilot. I'm sure he likes the look of that aircraft landing over there on the right. We in New Hampshire have a citizen form of government, and the Mayor has worked in the private industry, as I said, for many years.
Page 542 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The Mayor is going to talk today about a project of great significance to New Hampshire, and that's the Broad Street Parkway. Now, the Broad Street Parkway is a project that has been under consideration now for well over a decade, probably longer than that. It consists of an improvement to a corridor of about 1.9 miles long. We propose to build a limited access multi-lane facility with bike paths and so forth. The total cost of the project will be $23 million. We feel that this is a project of great significance at the intersection of four major regional highways in southern New Hampshire. There are significant environmental mitigation issues involved here. The project has been well-vetted. We have an environmental impact statement complete, and in order not to steal any of the thunder that Mayor Davidson will provide to this Committee, I will stop there but only to say that this particular stretch of project is indeed my top priority for infrastructure development in New Hampshire.
With that, I will turn the dias over to Commissioner Kenison who will address general issues, and then Mayor Davidson on the Broad Street Parkway.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. KENISON. Thank you Congressman Bass.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and members of the Committee. I'm Leon Kenison, Commissioner of the New Hampshire Department of Transportation. I certainly appreciate the invitation of the Committee and Congressman Bass' ability to arrange for us to appear today to express our thoughts on the very important issue of reauthorization of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act.
Page 543 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Speaking on behalf of the State of New Hampshire DOT, and I might just introduce New Hampshire very briefly to you. One might describe it as certainly a northeastern State, an irregular land mass of approximately 9,000 square miles, home to 1,200,000 people. Two-thirds of those people live in the one-third southerly portion of the State. So it has produced an urban environment in that part of the State, while we have a real rural environment in two-thirds of our State.
We believe that ISTEA has worked as an effective successor to the interstate era, and has successfully served the entire nation. New Hampshire joins with several other States in supporting reaffirmation of ISTEA without significant change. We believe that the original aims of ISTEA are still the right way to go, placing more responsibility on State and local governments, providing greater flexibility, recognizing that transportation needs vary from State to State and within a State, improving regional planning efforts and giving equal consideration to all modes of traffic and transportation.
New Hampshire supports maintaining a strong Federal role in transportation, including funding for Federal clean air mandates for the congestion, mitigation air quality program, more commonly known as CMAC. We support the need for long-term and consistent Federal capital investment in transportation. Continued investment is needed to maintain and encourage economic growth.
The need to maintain at least the current funding level is great. There is certainly more than 95,000 bridges classified as deficient across this country. New Hampshire is not a stranger to harsh weather conditions, and we're still having it. Despite our best efforts, more than 600 State and municipal bridges are designated as red list bridges, meaning to us that due to known deficiencies they have to be inspected twice a year.
Page 544 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Americans are traveling almost twice as much as they did in 1973, and the number of vehicles on the nations' roads has increased by more than 50 percent since that time. That jump, along with a working population in New Hampshire that often commutes long distances, has put increasing pressure on our highway system and emphasize a need to maintain it at higher levels of standards to ensure safe and efficient mobility.
Motorists are traveling more but paying less fees. In 1979 Federal, State motor fuel taxes accounted for 6.7 percent of the cost of owning and operating a vehicle. By 1993, the fuel tax share of motor vehicle costs was 4.4 percent, a 60 percent drop in 15 years.
Although highway investment increased substantially in the last decade, the investment must continue increasing to keep up with the needs. Any delays in preserving highway investments or in meeting the needs brought on by traffic growth could quickly reverse the repairs and gains achieved over the past few years. When adjusted for inflation, U.S. highway investments per mile of travel have dropped 40 percent since 1973.
The future of American jobs and economic development depends on increased transportation funding. Current funding levels are inadequate for the nation's transportation needs; yet, a portion of the user taxes, 4.3 cents, is still going to non-transportation purposes. New Hampshire supports the return of the 4.3 cents per gallon fuel tax currently diverted to general funds for deficit reduction to the Highway Trust Fund. Those funds should be distributed for their intended purposes, to maintain and improve the conditions and safety of the nations' highways, bridges and transit system.
Page 545 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
To enable the full investment of the highway user tax without being detrimental laudable efforts of general fund reduction, we suggest either removal of the trust fund from the general budget category or pursuit of the revenue constrained fund.
Surveys have shown that highway accessibility is the number one location fact considered by businesses when deciding to relocate. New Hampshire believes again that ISTEA has worked. We support the key notions of ISTEA partnering between State and local entities, intermodal planning and public participation in the planning, design and construction of transportation projects.
We support a continuation of at least the current funding level, and Congressman Bass has submitted a few demonstrations and suggestions to the Committee, and I might say those are all a part of New Hampshire's 10-year transportation plan.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for sharing our thoughts with you today.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor?
Mr. DAVIDSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Rahall, and members of the Committee.
It is indeed a pleasure to be here this afternoon to speak to you about our most important project in our City of Nashua, New Hampshire
Page 546 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
For a moment, though, I would just like to comment that that 727 is beautiful. I have about 9,000 hours as captain in that airplane, but as I look at it closely, that is brand X, that's Delta. It would be a lot prettier if it had those Eastern stripes on it that were once the pride of the skies. And, secondly, Congressman Petri, I am very familiar with the region of the country you represent. For the past 15 years or so I've made my annual pilgrimage out to Oshkosh for that grand-daddy of air shows, and for 10 years I flew my World War II Mustang out there as the past president of War Birds of America, which is part of the—
Mr. PETRI. We've got to get Charlie out there next time.
Mr. DAVIDSON. Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, the Truth and Budgeting Act, which is H.R.4, we fully endorse at our level. It is imperative that the Highway Trust Fund be preserved and the monies therein spent on desperately needed local and regional road projects throughout this country. The project for which we are seeking your support here today, the Broad Street Parkway, is but one example. I fully endorse and support the efforts of this Subcommittee, and you, Mr. Chairman, in the pursuit of this legislation.
The City of Nashua is situated on the New Hampshire-Massachusetts border, 35 miles northwest of Boston, and has become a strategically important employment center over the last several decades.
The primary purpose of this project is to provide a long overdue second crossing of the Nashua River in downtown Nashua. The second river crossing will resolve many long-standing problems and provide a myriad of benefits to the region, including regional congestion relief. Existing intersections along the highways feeding the northern, western and eastern access to and through downtown Nashua are highly congested, not only during commuting hours but throughout the week.
Page 547 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
As Nashua only has one main north-south artery within its core city, originally laid out during the 1700s, all traffic is forced to funnel through a specific geographic location known as ''Library Hill'' in order to proceed to any designation beyond that location. Construction of the parkway will divert an expected 30,000 vehicles per day, thereby reducing this severe traffic congestion in downtown Nashua by at least 30 percent.
Air quality mitigation—another example of what it will do for us—due to the existing traffic congestion the Nashua central business district has been designated as a non-attainment area for carbon monoxide and ozone by the U.S. EPA, and, in addition, has the dubious distinction of being the worst air quality location in the entire State. The construction of this parkway will resolve this environmental problem.
The final environmental impact statement has been completed and approved by all State and Federal agencies. Also, the Federal Highway Administration's Record of Decision was signed last Friday, March 7. This project will provide an overall net gain to the quality of the environment. Project enhancements include the additions of 175,000 square feet of land to the 325-acre Mines Fall Park, located in the center of the city, acquired by the city in 1969 with the assistance of land and water conservation Federal funds. This enlargement of the park includes enhanced access to the Nashua River with a boat ramp and provides 18 times the mitigation for the 10,000 square feet lost to the parkway.
In addition, there will be dual use fully separated pedestrian bikeway provided along the entire length of the parkway with trail linkages to downtown and the Mines Fall Park.
Page 548 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The project will provide both regionally and local economic benefits. Within the city the parkway will enhance the economic vitality of downtown and the mill yard. Regionally, the project will enhance mobility into and through the area reducing the transportation barriers of the Nashua and Mamaroneck Rivers, thereby enhancing the vitality of one of New England's premiere business and employment centers.
In addition, the parkway will actually serve as a limited access spur extension to a major national highway system roadway, the Everett Turnpike. Due to the fact that the north terminus of this parkway will connect directly to Exit 6 of the Everett Turnpike.
In summary, Mr. Chairman, and members of the Committee, our project is ready to start tomorrow morning. We have passed environmental and permitting processes. We have about $10 million of the estimated $32 million for the project to start the process, and once we are advised that we will have the funding, this highway will become a fact.
I thank you very much for your attention to our comments.
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Rahall?
Mr. RAHALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me commend our Committee colleague, Mr. Bass, for the work that he does on this Committee, and to you, Mr. Commissioner, and Mr. Mayor. We appreciate your testimony. I know speaking for our Highway Commissioner, Fred Vankirk, in West Virginia, you could not have said it better, the way you put it today. I think we share a common ground in the fact that ISTEA works, and we want to see the basic core of that program continue and be authorized this year. So we appreciate very much your testimony.
Page 549 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. DAVIDSON. Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Let me ask just one quick question.
What will the level of funding be for the project you were discussing, Mr. Commissioner?
Mr. DAVIDSON. The Broad Street Parkway, sir, would be $23 million. It will allow us to complete the project totally.
Mr. PETRI. And the local State match would be?
Mr. DAVIDSON. It's a combination—we already have a little over $9 million put aside for the project, and it gives us enough to do the design phases and the right-of-way acquisition, but, obviously, the $23 million is needed for the bridge construction and the parkway itself.
Mr. PETRI. I appreciate your testimony, Mr. Bass. It's always good to see you before the Committee. You play a very important role on this Committee and do a good job for New Hampshire and for your District.
Thank you very much.
Mr. BASS. Thank you.
Page 550 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
[The prepared statements of Mr. Bass, Mr. Kenison and Mr. Davidson follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. Our next panel will be the Chairman of the Boot Caucus, I believe, Congressman McKeon. The Boot Caucus—like cowboy boot.
Mr. Congressman, it's good to have you before the Committee and your panel.
TESTIMONY OF HON. HOWARD MCKEON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM CALIFORNIA, ACCOMPANIED BY CARL BOYER, COUNCILMAN, SANTA CLARITA, CA, AND HON. FRANK ROBERTS, MAYOR, LANCASTER, CA
NORTH LOS ANGELES COUNTY PROJECTS
Mr. MCKEON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Before I begin I would like to introduce two constituents who are with me today. On my right is the member of the City Council with whom I served on the Council City of Clarita, Carl Boyer. On my left from the City of Lancaster, Mayor Frank Roberts, and I would like to ask unanimous consent to submit their statements for the record.
Page 551 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I also have a statement from the City of Palmdale that I would like to submit for the record.
Mr. Chairman, and ranking member Rahall, it is an honor to speak today in support of highway and transit funding requests in north Los Angeles County. It is also a pleasure to appear before the Subcommittee on which I served during the 103rd Congress.
The County of Los Angeles has a population approaching 10 million people. To give you an idea of our size the county is represented in the House by 17 members of Congress. Other than California, there are only six States with more representatives than this one county. I represent the northern most part of Los Angeles County, which geographically comprises about one-third of the county's land area.
Since 1980 much of the population growth in metropolitan Los Angeles has been in the north county area outside the Los Angeles basin. My District was created following the 1990 census, as a result of this growth.
I want to quickly give members some figures that will illustrate the growth that has occurred and will continue to occur:
In 1980 the population of north Los Angeles County was 186,000. In 1990 it was 393,000, and by the year 2000 it will be 592,000. It is projected that this growth will continue to 872,000 residents in 2010, and over a million by the year 2015.
While this growth has been dramatic, our basic network of Federal and State highways has remained the same. North Los Angeles County has two north-side freeway routes, Interstate 5 and State Road 14. We also have two regional east-west routes, State Route 126 and State Route 138. All of these highways are on the National Highway System.
Page 552 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Besides the three-fold increase in population during the last 15 years, the north county area has been devastated by natural disasters, such as the 1994 North Ridge Earthquake and wild fires which occurred in 1993 and 1996. These unfortunate events served as a reminder of the shortcomings in the network of roads that serve our region. We've been cut off from the Los Angeles basin twice in the time that I've lived there by earthquakes and also by floods.
I'm asking your Subcommittee to authorizing funding for highway projects that involve each of the routes that I mentioned. Along Interstate 5 three interchanges require significant improvements, two of which involve Route 126.
The first interchange is the Interstate 5 Magic Mountain Parkway interchange. This is a regionally significant interchange in the City of Santa Clarita that is adjacent to a major employment center and a Six Flags Amusement Park that is visited annually by four million people. Improvements are also required at the uncompleted Interstate 5, State Route 126 interchange in Castaic junction and the Interstate 5 Valencia Boulevard interchange. I've also asked that construction be completed on a four-mile arterial route east of the Castaic junction interchange.
Along the State Route 14 freeway three projects require attention. A major regional project is the construction of a bypass for State Route 138. This bypass is essential because a substantial amount of north-south traffic uses 138 and Interstate 15 as a bypass around the Los Angeles basin. The bypass is strongly supported by the California Department of Transportation but has not been funded because of prior commitments to other projects.
Page 553 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
In the City of Lancaster there are two projects. The first is widening the Avenue L overpass over the 14 freeway from two to six lanes. The other is improvements to Avenue H, including reconstruction of the overpass above the 14 freeway, which will also support a major regionally economic development project.
I have also asked for transit funds, Mr. Chairman, the most significant of which is a $12 million request for a badly needed bus maintenance facility in the City of Santa Clarita.
In closing, I want to state that the need for these projects is recognized by Caltrans, as well as regional and local transportation entities. The City of Lancaster, Palmdale and Santa Clarita have also committed and/or budgeted funds to support and supplement State and Federal funds for these projects. The four highways that I have mentioned have existed as is for over 25 years through all of that growth, and the improvements in my request are the result of numerous studies and feedback from the communities involved.
I realize that transportation dollars are scarce, but I can assure the Committee that by funding these requests we will realize a significant bang for our transportation buck.
Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Yes.
Page 554 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. Boyer or Mr. Roberts?
Mr. BOYER. Mr. Chairman, and ranking member, Mr. Rahall, the bus funds that we're asking we're prepared to put in $2.6 million of the $12 million total, and on the roads we're looking at a contribution, State and local, of $20 million out of $57.1 million total.
I just want to add that on two occasions within the last couple of years one traffic accident has totally tied up all the traffic in our city for several hours.
Mr. PICKERING [assuming Chair]. Mr. Roberts?
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Pickering, and ranking member, Mr. Rahall, thank you for allowing me to say a few words about the two projects in Lancaster.
We also have constriction problems. In the case of the Avenue L overpass, which constricts Route 14 and gives us some problems in egress and ingress of that particular interchange, there have already been things such as a recent fatality. What happened primarily is that basically we had a fairly good size Avenue L approaching a crossover, cross over the railroad tracks, and there are only two lanes on that, so we need to widen that. This particular overpass serves a major development area, an economic development area. It serves the Lancaster Automall, it serves the Lancaster Business Park, and one of the larger commuter park-and-rides.
In terms of the money, and I'm sure you're curious about that, the improvement project is valued out at about $3,453,000. The $2,762,000 is asked for, 80 percent from you folks, and we will be contributing 20 percent of that through matching and general funds of about $600,000 and maybe $700,000.
Page 555 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The second project is also one that will help us with industrial development. Both of these help in terms of clean air and other things because of the constriction that they pose in crossing over the various impediments in that area, as mentioned by my esteemed colleague, Buck McKeon. So we're interested in having some help with these.
The project in the North Valley—what we call the North Valley Regional Access Project—also serves another purpose. We are developing Foxfield Industrial Corridor and Lancaster Heavy Industrial Park and a new regional fairgrounds that we plan to move to. This second project, which is slightly more costly than the first, allows access to those regions and widens some roadways that lead to the overpass, the new Avenue H overpass, so it is essential in terms of the money. And you've been asking so we'll just beat you to the question, if you don't mind, Mr. Pickering.
The total cost of the North Valley Regional Access Project is about $15,400,000. We're asking $12,320,000, about 80 percent from the Federal Government under ISTEA if it is authorized, and we hope it is. The City of Lancaster will match the Federal grant with approximately $3,080,000, or 20 percent, and these will be out of TDA and general funds.
That is our request from the City of Lancaster. By the way, we are the space capital of the world, but I'm sure you know that. Edwards Air Force Base where the shuttles are built are in the City of Lancaster.
Thank you.
Page 556 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PICKERING. Well, I'm also on the Science Committee.
Mr. ROBERTS. You know all about that.
Mr. PICKERING. Do we have any questions?
Mr. Rahall?
Mr. RAHALL. Let me ask this just in quick summary. You went through the list of projects. The Federal share total of the projects that you all have proposed today, would you have that total figure of the combined different projects?
Mr. MCKEON. I don't have in front of me the total figures, but we will provide those for the Committee.
Mr. PICKERING. Congressman McKeon, it is always good to have you before the panel. We appreciate your testimony and look forward to working with you.
Mr. MCKEON. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statements of Mr. McKeon, Mr. Roberts, and Mr. Boyer follow:]
[Insert here.]
Page 557 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PICKERING. Is our next panel ready?
I believe that's Congressmen Woolsey. Would you like to go ahead and start and then we can have—Congressman Pelosi is speak who is next door?
Ms. WOOLSEY. Yes, she'll be here. She'll be here by the time I'm through, I'm sure.
Mr. PICKERING. Well, we'll let you get started, thank you.
TESTIMONY OF HON. LYNN C. WOOLSEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM CALIFORNIA, ACCOMPANIED BY HARRY MOORE, CHAIR, MARIN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS; AND HON. NANCY PELOSI, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM CALIFORNIA, ACCOMPANIED BY CARNEY J. CAMPION, GENERAL MANAGER, GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE, HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT
HOV WIDENINGON US–1, INTERMODAL FACILITIES
SEISMIC RETROFIT OF THE GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE
MULTI-USE BIKE PATH, REVERSABLE HOV LANE GAP CLOSURE PROJECTS
Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Rahall and Mr. Pease for allowing me to speak before your Subcommittee here today.
Page 558 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
It is always an opportunity I appreciate appearing before you in support of projects in my District. Today I have several ISTEA project requests that I would like to talk to you about, and Congressman Nancy Pelosi will be with me in a little bit to talk about a Golden Gate Bridge Project that both of our districts share in common.
I would like to point out that my neighbor to the north, Congressman Frank Riggs, who I just saw come in, fully supports these requests, and it is my understanding that he and Supervisor Jim Harberson came before you a little bit earlier today and know that I fully support what they were requesting also.
We are accompanied today by Harry Moore, who is a Supervisor and Chairman of the Marin County Board of Supervisors, and Carney Campion, the Manager of the Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District Board of Directors.
In addition, Mr. Chairman, Al Boro, the Mayor of the City of San Rafael in Marin, is here to lend his support to the project—Mr. Boro, right back here—and, as I said earlier today, you heard from Jim Harberson, the Chairman of the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, regarding the projects that Representative Riggs brought before the Committee. Jim also is still here, and I say all of that because I want you to know that this is an example of how important these projects are to the 6th District of California and a whole group of members of the Santa Rosa City Council are sitting in the back row behind me. So we do not take this lightly. This is very important.
But, in the interest of time, Mr. Chairman, I'm going to be brief, and would like to ask that you allow me to submit written testimony for the record regarding the full scope and the detail of these requests.
Page 559 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I represents Marin and Sonoma Counties. These are the two counties north of San Francisco across the Golden Gate Bridge. Most of our traffic problem, Mr. Chairman, is associated with the commute along U.S. Highway 101 and it's a commute within Marin and Sonoma Counties, a commute between the two counties, and across the Golden Gate Bridge into San Francisco. There is no single solution to the traffic problems which plague Highway 101.
That is why I support, and you'll hear me say this all along and my requests will support this, a comprehensive solution that includes widening the highway in the most congested areas, retaining the option for future rail service, planning to prevent unwanted urban sprawl and improving public transportation.
Today I am here to express my strong support for projects that will help us reach this end, a reversible HOV lane gap closure and a multi-purpose path project in Marin County, five intermodal centers and an HOV lane construction project, and, at the same time, improvements to interchanges and reliever routes in Sonoma County, and, Mr. Chairman, a Seismic Retrofit Project for the Golden Gate Bridge that spans San Francisco to Marin County.
These projects are very important because they are absolutely essential steps for the long-term solution to our transportation problems.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for your time and for your consideration. I look forward to working with you and the Committee to meet the transportation needs of my District, the needs of the Bay Area and the needs of this country in total. After we've heard from Congresswoman Pelosi and Carney Campion, there will be more detail from Supervisor Harry Moore.
Page 560 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you.
Congresswoman Pelosi, it's good to have you with us.
Ms. PELOSI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to you and Mr. Rahall and Mr. Petri, for your leadership in reauthorizing our nation's surface transportation program.
In the interest of time because I know the Committee has had a long day, I will associate myself with the remarks of my colleague, Congresswoman Woolsey, and, again, thank you for the consideration of our requests.
I am pleased to join her and Congressman Frank Riggs. Each of the Districts that we represent are very much affected by what happens on the Golden Gate Bridge. It is indeed the link of commerce for our regions, and, as you know, it's one of the most recognized national landmarks in the United States. Again, it is vital link between the District I represent, San Francisco, and Northern California.
There is no question that the Seismic Retrofit Project is essential. The only question is to what extent the Federal Government will be involved in the financing package. We simply must retrofit the bridge. We were lucky in the last earthquake it went almost up to the bridge but not to the bridge. The people on the Bay Bridge were not quite as fortunate, and, as you know, we had a loss of life there.
Page 561 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
But I am also pleased to join my colleague, Congresswoman Woolsey, in welcoming Carney Campion, General Manager of the Golden Gate Bridge District. He will explain the details of the project, and, Mr. Chairman, and members of the Committee, I urge your full support for the $140 million request.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Rahall.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you.
Mr. Campion?
Mr. CAMPION. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Rahall, Mr. Riggs and Pease, I appreciate your affording me the opportunity to appear before you today on a matter of the utmost urgency relating to a cherished and critical part of the nation's infrastructure. It would be wholly inappropriate, though, for me to go further without recognizing and expressing our greatest appreciation to the efforts of the three House members of the House whose Districts include the Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, certainly, Lynn Woolsey and Congressman Riggs.
As you know, a proposal has been submitted by them seeking $140 million for the Seismic Retrofit Project of the Golden Gate Bridge.
Mr. Chairman, according to the engineers, the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, registering 7.1 on the Richter Scale and centered 50 miles from the Golden Gate Bridge, represented the maximum stress that the bridge can tolerate. A similar earthquake on the San Andreas or Hayward Faults, located just seven and 10 miles from the bridge respectively, could be devastating to this international landmark, an integral part of our region's infrastructure, a conduit for over 130,000 vehicles a day. This destruction would devastate the region's economic and physical environment, take countless lives and result in a reconstruction costs nearly 1,000 percent out of its retrofit.
Page 562 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Of course, the loss of personal property could be staggering and the impact on shipping and maritime to the Golden Gate with a concomitant impact on the Nation's defense, which depends in part on passage through the Golden Gate under the bridge, is incalculable.
Shortly after Loma Prieta in 1989 the Bridge Board initiated a process of analysis, design and engineering, which will now allow us to begin construction on the bridge seismic retrofit in the near future. There have been more than 200 firms which have purchased the construction plans and specifications on the first phase of this project, and bids will be open on March 25th. This first phase of the retrofit will be paid for entirely with bridge tolls.
Thanks to the work of this Committee and the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995, those funds will be allowed to count as the non-Federal match against any Federal funds that might be forthcoming. Future work, though, will be entirely dependent upon Federal assistance. While the Bridge Board has raised tolls on the Golden Gate Bridge by 50 percent, with the express purpose of assisting with the retrofit, and they are now three times as high as any on any other bridge in the State, that increase will generate funding sufficient to pay 20 percent of the total retrofit costs of $175 million. Other bridge tolls pay for 100 percent of the operation and maintenance of the bridge.
Mr. Chairman, back in the 1930s and even today, our community has been proud of the fact that the Golden Gate Bridge was built without Federal or State assistance. We continue to take pride that no Federal or State funds are utilized for its operation and maintenance. In point of fact, because the bridge is not owned by the State and because the State has such enormous needs on structures for which it is responsible, it is very unlikely that any State funds or regular Federal aid apportionments will ever be used on the Golden Gate Bridge even for our critical seismic retrofit.
Page 563 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
So while the community takes pride in our general financial independence, we recognize and appreciate the precedence for Federal assistance on projects of a magnitude which exceeds the bridge's revenue capacity.
The Federal Government provided about 80 percent of the $68 million required for our major redecking project in the 1980s. Indeed, $5.9 million, about 38 percent of the amount expended to date, was provided by Congress for preconstruction activities for design and engineering on the project.
Mr. Chairman, once the seismic retrofit of the Golden Gate Bridge commences with our own funds in late Spring or early summer, it is critical from a point of view of cost effectiveness that it continue without lapse. The provision of $140 million, as part of the Surface Transportation Reauthorization Bill, would permit that and would be fully obligated and expended within 5 years, helping to create 3,100 jobs and preserving a critical part of the nation's infrastructure, the placement of which would require about 1,000 percent the cost of retrofit.
For these reasons, Mr. Chairman, and members, we urge that the Subcommittee and the Committee support the efforts of Representatives Pelosi, Riggs and Woolsey and make available $140 million over the next 5 years for the seismic retrofit of the Golden Gate Bridge.
Again, I appreciate and thank you very much for the opportunity you've provided to me today to bring this subject to your attention.
Page 564 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Thank you, sir.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you.
Mr. Moore?
Mr. MOORE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Rahall, members of the Subcommittee.
It is a pleasure to be here today to testify on two projects of very great importance to the people of Marin County and to the commuters who travel each day into Marin, San Francisco and the East Bay from the North Bay counties.
I am particularly pleased to be here with our own Congresswoman, the Honorable Lynn Woolsey. Her presence here today and strong support for these projects is just one more indication of how responsive and effective she is in supporting her constituency and leadership on issues that will improve our infrastructure and our local economy.
As Congresswoman Woolsey knows, and as is known by all who are familiar with the Greater San Francisco Bay Area, Highway 101 is the only commute route for those traveling daily from the North Bay counties into Marin, San Francisco and across the East Bay. In addition, it is our main street. That seems to be a lament I've heard earlier today—and I think it is creeping across the nation—the only avenue connecting the counties principal population centers also.
Page 565 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The first project we are requesting assistance with today would address an anomaly which currently exist on Highway 101, adding significantly to the highway's capacity and reducing congestion in an extraordinary cost effective manner. In the morning a southbound commuter comes onto 6.4 miles of HOV lanes, extending from Nevada, a major city near the Sonoma County line, to central San Rafael, our largest community and county seat.
The motorists then encounters a 4.4 mile gap in the HOV lane from central San Rafael through Corte Madera. After merging with the slow-moving mixed flow lanes to travel 4.4 miles at a level of service F, HOV lane users then enjoy an additional 4.1 miles of HOV lanes, carrying them down almost to the Golden Gate Bridge on Highway 101 and to San Francisco.
Similarly, morning commuters to Oakland or the East Bay enjoy the existing 6.4 miles of HOV lanes north of the gap but aren't merged into the slow-moving mixed flow lanes for 4.4 miles before exiting Highway 101 into and to cross the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge over to the East Bay.
Fortunately, $43 million has been identified to fill the southbound gap to assist morning commuters, and funding has been programmed for construction in the years 2000 and 20001. Unfortunately, it would require well over an additional $80 million to construct southbound HOV lanes to assist with the afternoon commute, and such work could not be completed until some time in the year 2010.
There is good news, however, we believe. Our engineers have determined that the southbound work already programmed can be modified to become a reversible HOV lane for an incremental $20 million instead of the $80 million.
Page 566 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
There is an additional $6 million remaining from the southbound work that could be applied to such a project, leaving a $14 million shortfall, the amount we are seeking from the Subcommittee today. Implicit in our desire to find the incremental funding we need for this HOV gap closure project, Mr. Chairman, and members, is the fact that we know reversible HOV lanes will save motorists a full 15 minutes of time, commuting in each direction. That time saving and the aggravation savings that will accrue with avoiding the level of service F alternative will certainly attract more commuters out of their single-passenger automobiles and into the public transit and ride-sharing alternatives that are present.
The sum of this project, Mr. Chairman, we are seeking $14 million to supplant $49 million, either programmed or identified, to convert a planned project to add only southbound HOV lanes to fill a gap in our existing system and instead make that southbound project a reversible lane. The alternative to this project is obvious.
The second project—and I'll take just a moment longer—for which we are seeking additional assistance of the Subcommittee is the Highway 1 Tennessee Valley Bridge. I Marin County we are fortunate to have 511 miles of combined use trails available to bicyclers and hikers. There is currently a 1.6 mile gap in this system between the Golden Gate and nation recreation area and the population centers of Mill Valley and Sausalito to the east.
Those attempting to diverse here and bridge the gap must attempt to pass under the existing Tennessee Valley Bridge, crossing over Highway 1, offering a precious little head room and then race across busy Highway 1, which is very unsafe.
Page 567 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
With regard to this problem, we are here requesting $2.8 million, which along with a non-Federal contribution of over half a million dollars, will close the gap between the existing system and our population centers.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. We hope that this year's reauthorization of the National Surface Transportation programs can accommodate our request for $14 million, especially since it will save money, and to close the gap in our trails.
Thank you very much for the time that you've allowed us.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you, Mr. Moore.
Mr. Rahall, do you have any questions?
Mr. RAHALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to commend our colleagues, Lynn Woolsey and Nancy Pelosi, for the leadership that they have provided on these projects for a number of years. I know we've worked very closely with both of you in providing the flexibility under the NHS bill to meet your local match.
Mr. Campion, as you know very well, I've went to the top of the Golden Gate Bridge about a year ago. It was a beautiful and calm day on the surface, but up there it was pretty windy, I tell you, but it was a beautiful view. Highway 101 I'm very familiar with, as well, as my colleague, Frank Riggs knows, traveling on that road up north a number of times to visit my son.
Page 568 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
So I appreciate very much your testimony here today, and we certainly look forward to working with you on these projects.
Mr. Riggs?
Mr. RIGGS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and colleagues.
Mr. Chairman, since you weren't here earlier today, let me just note for the record earlier today I accompanied Supervisor Jim Harberson, Supervisor of the Chairman of the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, who testified on a project which Congresswoman Woolsey and I jointly support, and that is the addition of HOV or High Occupancy Vehicle lanes to Highway 101, interchange improvements and reliever route construction over the next 5 years, as well as the construction of five intermodal transportation facilities in five different cities in Sonoma County, which is divided in our two Congressional Districts.
I just want to also note for the record that there are several other elected officials, locally elected officials, from Sonoma County who support these projects present. I see out in the audience Mayor Patty Hillagas of Petaluma, Congresswoman Woolsey's hometown. I also see Mayor Sharon Wright of the City of Santa Rosa and her council colleagues, Councilman Mark Martini and Councilman Dave Burto, who are here today. I want to say how strongly I support the request that Congresswoman Woolsey has made on behalf of Marin County, which is, in a way, my home, having graduated from San Rafael High School and having relatives who still live in Marin County today, and how strongly I support the request to conduct the seismic retrofitting of the Golden Gate Bridge, which is not only an engineering marvel but one of the manmade wonders of the world.
Page 569 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you, Mr. Riggs.
Well, I want to thank the panel for your testimony. We look forward to working with you. It's impressive to have Congresswomen Pelosi, Woolsey and Congressman Frank Riggs' support and the demonstration of local support for these projects.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Campion, Ms. Woolsey, and Mr. Moore follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PICKERING. Our next panel is Congressmen Dreier and Kim, joined by Congressman Martinez.
It is good to have you before the Committee today.
Congressman Dreier, if you would like to start your testimony.
TESTIMONY OF HON. DAVID DREIER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM CALIFORNIA; HON. JAY KIM, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM CALIFORNIA; HON. MATTHEW G. MARTINEZ, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM CALIFORNIA; AND BEATRICE LA PISTO-KIRTLEY, PRESIDENT, SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
Page 570 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST, GATEWAY TO AMERICA
Mr. DREIER. Thank you very much, Chairman Pickering. Let me at the outset congratulate you and say it is nice to be here with my friends, Mr. Rahall, and Mr. Pease and Mr. Riggs and other members of the Subcommittee. We are here on a very important issue, and I'm not going to take a lot of time on this because you're going to hear from my colleagues. The most important testimony, with all due respect to Messrs. Kim and Martinez, is going to be coming from the woman sitting directly to my left. It has to do with something that Jay Kim has very appropriately named Alameda Corridor East, and that is we need to look at the impact of the Alameda Corridor, which is so important for getting goods to and from the people of the United States of America through the ports in Los Angeles and Long Beach to realize the tremendous impact that this is going to have on the adjoining areas around Los Angeles, and that is why we're here to strongly support a request that I hope the Committee will grant to deal with the impact of the Alameda Corridor.
So I thank you very much, again, Mr. Chairman, for having us, and I don't want to take any more of the Committee's time but hope very much that you'll be supportive of our request here.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you, Mr. Dreier.
Mr. Kim?
Mr. KIM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Page 571 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I would like to echo my colleague, Mr. Dreier. I want to add just a little more information of what this is all about. As you know, my colleague is calling me Mr. Transportation of California because I do have a strong background, but this project is a perfect match to the spirit of the ISTEA law. It will connect the largest container ports in the country to the new intermodal transit stations east of Los Angeles County. You may have seen today the paper where USA Today reported that we have the worst traffic congestion in the country, which even surprised me.
Part of this traffic comes from trucks heading east out of Los Angeles to other parts of the country. According to SCAG, 43 percent of all the traffic on Route 60, which is an important route, are trucks. This will grow to 70 percent by the year 2005. This is frightening statistical information. That will create truck gridlock, tremendous air pollution and safety problems in our east-west freeways, and that is why it is so important to fund the Alameda Corridor East project and move freight by train from the ports to the intermodal yards east of Los Angeles County.
Again, I would like to point out that 60 percent of the national freight coming into the Los Angeles ports heads east out of California. This is a true intermodal project that benefits the entire country and deserves the Committee's support.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you, Mr. Kim.
Page 572 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. Martinez?
Mr. MARTINEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, thank you for holding this hearing, and I thank my good friend, Mr. Rahall, for his consideration here.
In light of the Subcommittee's ambitious schedule, I am just going to take a few minutes. I'm going to submit my written statement for the record, and I might deviate from it in order to point out a couple of things.
As most of you know, I and David Dreier and Congressman Torres represent most of the San Gabriel Valley, in fact all of the San Gabriel Valley. And although Mr. Kim does not represent the San Gabriel Valley, he knows the importance of—correction.
Oh, you do?
Mr. KIM. Correction.
[Laughter.]
Mr. MARTINEZ. At any rate, I was going to say that he truly, having been a businessman, understands how important transportation is to the economy of the country.
I want to make an analogy here because once before we committed a travesty on the community of Alhambra and basically in the San Gabriel Valley in that we built a freeway that abruptly stopped at Alhambra and dumped all the traffic out on the service street from that freeway causing havoc and creating all kinds of accidents and everything else.
Page 573 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I would not like to see that happen again with the Alameda Corridor. Remember, the Alameda Corridor is going right now from Long Beach Port to the City of Los Angeles where most of the freight that goes in that is not used in Los Angeles will go on rail to the next designation to the east through the San Gabriel Valley. I think that we have to think in terms of, for the money that we expend on the Alameda Corridor, it would be a shame not to understand the impact that that is going to have on the San Gabriel Valley.
You've got volumes of information that have been provided by the proponents of this, but there is one particular piece of information there. It is a little graphic that is in the information you have that lays out the routes of the rail lines there and the crossings, and if you do not look at anything else, please look at that because it illustrates very vividly how important it is for these monies, the $220 million that they are requesting, be provided to correct some of the grade levels that are existing now because in that whole area there is only one below grade level crossing under the railroad, and I am afraid that if there is no more made or done, that there is going to be a tremendous impact on that one particular city more than they can possibly handle.
That corridor, as Mr. Kim has termed it, the Alameda Corridor East, is appropriate because that is an extension of the Alameda Corridor that is as vital to the corridor itself as the corridor is. We really expect it to increase the international trade and create 192,000 jobs for southern California, and I think the whole nation benefits by that, and, certainly, our communities and the eastern Los Angeles and San Gabriel Valley will benefit by it.
We have estimates of the increased traffic from the completion of the Alameda Corridor, 67 percent. As Mr. Dreier has laid out for you, our good friend sitting between us will outline more of the actual statistics regarding that, but I just want to urge you to think about what we did when we built the 710 and abruptly stopped it in Alhambra, and think about the importance of the Alameda Corridor. Without this extension, the Alameda Corridor east, the only corridor, I'm afraid, will not do us that much good.
Page 574 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Thank you.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you, Mr. Martinez.
Ms. La Pisto-Kirtley? Is that correct?
Ms. LA PISTO-KIRTLEY. That is correct.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee. On behalf of the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments we appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to present testimony in support of the reauthorization of the Intermodal Surface Transportation and Efficiency Act of 1991, ISTEA. This legislation is essential to the mobility and economic needs of the $1.8 million residents of the San Gabriel Valley. We want to express support and gratitude to Congress and your Committee for the leadership that you have shown in providing for a continued Federal partnership through legislation and funding of a comprehensive transportation system, a continued Federal funding partnership ensuring that surface transportation infrastructure needs are met, the mobility of the nation is continued, a competitive advantage in our global economy is maintained and the movement of goods essential to the nation's economic viability is provided.
That is why we applaud your efforts for reauthorization of ISTEA.
We are honored to have the leadership and bipartisan support of the Congressional members representing the San Gabriel Valley, including Congressman Jay Kim, Congressman Esteban Torres, Congressman Matthew Martinez and Congressman David Dreier.
Page 575 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I am delighted to be joined by three of our esteemed representatives today. Thank you for coming.
We are before today seeking your support of a Federal partnership in the Alameda Corridor East, Gateway to America Project. The $220 million in Federal funding request before your Committee today is an extension of the Alameda Corridor Project and is crucial to the region and important to the nation. The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach represent a tremendous source of jobs and economic growth for southern California and the nation. If we fail to protect the competitive edge that this area now enjoys, businesses will increasingly look to ship their goods elsewhere.
The Alameda Corridor will create 700,000 new jobs and will significantly increase the volume of freight moving through the ports of Long Beach in Los Angeles from $116 billion to $253 billion annually. The project will protect the global trade that is the life blood of this region and the nation.
For the same reasons that we need to construct the Alameda Corridor and support it, we need to streamline the flow of goods east from the City of Los Angeles through the San Gabriel Valley and east to the rest of the nation. The joint investment that the local, State and Federal Governments have made in the Alameda Corridor will be wasted if the goods are delayed, as they are shipped from the ports to the San Gabriel Valley to the Inland Empire and on to the rest of the nation.
Without proper mitigation of the 67 percent increase in trains, longer trains carrying an estimated one million tons of freight daily, 40 percent increase in vehicular traffic, delay at intersections increasing by 300 percent, and average wait times of 10 to 24 minutes could occur at intersections.
Page 576 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Unless these impacts are mitigated and mobility in the San Gabriel Valley is maintained, the economic vitality will be threatened and the 192,000 jobs projected for the San Gabriel Valley could be lost.
Mr. Chairman, honorable Committee members, we are aware of the difficult decisions the Committee faces in allocating scarce transportation funding resources. We urge your consideration of our Alameda Corridor $220,000 Federal funding request. This project funding request is based upon ready to go, discrete actions that will have an immediate economic and mobility impact for southern California residents. We believe it is a model project and of national significance. We appreciate your continued leadership on these important transportation matters that affect the nation's mobility.
Thank you.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you.
Mr. Rahall, any questions?
Mr. RAHALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
No questions, just to commend our witness on her excellent testimony, also to say to my colleagues that certainly the fact that this is termed Alameda Corridor East Gateway to America is a very accurate description because as we look—as I told the mayor of Los Angeles last week, as we look at the international economy in which we compete today, a truly global economy, we must have adequate infrastructure and gateways to get the goods out of our country if we're going to increase American jobs and American competitiveness in our world economy. This it helps all of America. It helps the eastern part of the country, as well.
Page 577 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
So I think that is a very accurate description, and I commend David, Jay and Marty for their leadership on this project.
Mr. DAVIDSON. If I could just comment on that briefly, I think it is key to recognize that as we seek to ensure that those goods get to and from the American people, anything that could possible jeopardize that we have to address now, and that is why this project is so extraordinarily important because we would all hate to see some kind of bottleneck created just at the eastern side of the Alameda Corridor, which has gotten so much attention.
So I appreciate your understanding of that.
Mr. RAHALL. Thank you, and thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you.
It is good to see three members of Congress and the local leadership coming together on a project of this magnitude in the spirit of ISTEA promoting the objectives of intermodal and international trade. We look forward to working with you in this Congress on these important projects, and we appreciate your testimony.
Ms. LA PISTO-KIRTLEY. I just wanted to mention that seated behind me is our local support from the San Gabriel Valley.
Thank you.
Page 578 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PICKERING. It is good to have you all here.
Ms. LA PISTO-KIRTLEY. Thank you.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Kim, Mr. Martinez and Ms. La Pisto-Kirtley follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PICKERING. Congresswoman Molinari, it is good to have you here today.
TESTIMONY OF HON. SUSAN MOLINARI, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM NEW YORK, ACCOMPANIED BY CHARLES MILLARD, PRESIDENT, NEW YORK CITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
NEW YORK CITY WIDE PROJECTS
Ms. MOLINARI. Thank you. It's very nice to be here. I just commented to our colleagues from California that we see where California picked up all of New York's Congressional Districts, and they brought half the population here to testify.
I will be very brief, Mr. Chairman—Mr. Chairman, boy, a little background in the legislative process and you move right in there.
Page 579 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. Rahall, I want to thank you very much for what has been a very long and deliberative process that you have afforded all the members of this body to bring forth our representatives so that they can communicate best with you as to what our priorities are. I know our time is limited and your patience has been extended. So I will have my opportunity to lobby you in another venue.
Let me at this point in time just thank you, again, for all the work that you've done on behalf of all of our States and our overall national infrastructure and ask you to please welcome Commissioner Charles Millard, who is the current Commissioner of the Economic Development Corporation for the City of New York. Charles is a former member of the New York City Council and is a dear friend and an active advocate.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you.
Mr. Millard?
Mr. MILLARD. Thank you, and thank you Congresswoman Molinari, and thank you, Mr. Chairman, for giving me the opportunity to testify on behalf of Mayor Guiliani and the City of New York to highlight our priorities for ISTEA, and I will try to run through the highlights quickly because I know that you have many other witnesses to testify.
First, I want to emphasize on behalf of the mayor the importance of reauthorizing ISTEA in its current form. We would like to thank Congressman Rahall for his efforts in that regard. The present structure of ISTEA allows us to develop a national intermodal system that is economically and environmentally sound and the current structure also recognizes something, which I think is very important, and that is that urban centers in the United States really are the essential catalyst for economic development. Traffic congestion can really hurt a city's ability to thrive economically, and in New York's case it can really hurt our ability to compete on a global level because people will choose to take their business elsewhere or ship their goods and materials elsewhere.
Page 580 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
In a city as big as New York, transportation really is the life blood because the movement of people and goods in a safe, efficient, economic and environmentally sound manner is fundamental to our ability to compete.
Interestingly, as you may know, New York City has three islands and one peninsula so bridges and infrastructure are really paramount in our needs, and we've asked for substantial funds to keep up our bridges, to repair our bridges. We have—we also have substantial fund requests for mass transit because we have 45 percent of the nation's mass transit riders, we have 40 percent of the nation's commuter rail and 10 percent of the transit buses. So those are very, very important priorities for New York City.
Another important priority which may—is probably known to you because it is the world's most famous water borne transit route, and that is the Staten Island Ferry and the terminals on both ends of the Staten Island Ferry. That is very important because there's 60,000 trips a day on the Staten Island Ferry and it is a perfect example of intermodal transit because the people who get to the Staten Island Ferry get there either by car or by rail, by commuter rail, and they leave the Staten Island Ferry usually taking, again, a subway. So if we didn't have the Staten Island Ferry functioning, all those people who were getting into Manhattan or out of Manhattan would have to go by car, and not only would they go by car and then create a lot of congestion on the highways and the roads, but they would have to go along the route, which is now one of the most congested in the country, the Gowanas Expressway, and they would have to go across the crowded Staten Island Expressway.
So the Staten Island Ferry is a classic example of intermodal transit, and we're going to need three new ferries and terminals on both ends of the ferry have substantial needs that Congresswoman Molinari has pushed very hard for.
Page 581 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Another priority is privately operated ferries. New York has the largest privately operated ferry service probably in the United States, maybe the world. Twenty-five thousand passengers a day ride private ferries in the City of New York, and the mayor supports a midtown Manhattan, west midtown Manhattan ferry terminal because that will benefit people from all the boroughs, Staten Island, but also every other borough where people might want to commute by ferry and allows people to commute from New Jersey also taking cars off the roads, out of the Lincoln Tunnel, off the George Washington Bridge.
As we look to the 21st Century, one of Mayor Guiliani's priorities is going forward with a rail freight tunnel under New York Harbor, and we're requesting money for the major investment study, and, assuming that the major investment study has a positive result, we also seek money down the road for the preliminary design funds.
As an interim matter, we are seeking funds for an improved car float barge operation. Over the years much of the transit, the rail freight across the harbor, actually across on float barges, and we need to build that up again because it has really gotten neglected. It would land probably on Staten Island right near the Arlington Intermodal Transloading Facility, which would also reduce congestion. We are seeking funding for that as well.
And, finally, the mayor supports a rail link, a long-needed rail link, from LaGuardia and Kennedy into midtown Manhattan. A one-seat ride would do a tremendous amount to make New York a more attractive place for people to come to do business and to visit, and we are also supporting intelligent traffic light systems, the newly electronic traffic systems that can actually anticipate where there will be congestion so the traffic lights can be properly programmed, and expanding clean fuel buses and taxis.
Page 582 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The only other thing I would like to add, if you will allow me one more moment, is to thank Congresswoman Molinari because her support for all of these kinds of items is tremendously important not just to the people of Staten Island and Brooklyn, which she represents, but to the people of New York City and the region because every time we take a car off the road in Staten Island, that is congestion and traffic that—excuse me, congestion and pollution that we don't have elsewhere but it is also cars and buses and trucks that are off the road throughout New York City and really throughout the whole region. I know the mayor personally wanted me to say thank you to Congresswoman Molinari for all of her help.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you.
Mr. Rahall, any questions?
Mr. RAHALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me just say, Mr. Millard, that I certainly look forward to working with your representative, Susan Molinari, who has been quite up front and vocal in our joint efforts to continue the highway funding formulas as we have them today—with the exception of the State of Mississippi, Mr. Chairman.
[Laughter.]
Mr. RAHALL. Those greedy southern States who get all of our defense dollars and now they want all of our highway dollars, as well. So we look forward to working with your representative on these projects' mutual interest.
Page 583 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. MILLARD. Thank you.
Mr. PICKERING. I want to compliment and commend Congresswoman Molinari for her leadership on this Committee and in this Congress. You couldn't have a better voice for New York, and I believe in the nation.
Ms. MOLINARI. Thank you very much.
Mr. PICKERING. We look forward to working with you.
If we could make a compromise between Mississippi and New York, maybe we can work the formula without any trouble.
Ms. MOLINARI. And West Virginia.
[Laughter.]
Mr. PICKERING. And West Virginia I would never leave out.
Ms. MOLINARI. Thank you very much.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you again.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Millard follows:]
Page 584 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
[Insert here.]
Mr. PICKERING. Our next panel is Congresswoman Kennelly.
TESTIMONY OF HON. BARBARA KENNELLY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM CONNECTICUT
THE RIVERFRONT PARKS SYSTEM, TRINITY COLLEGE AREA ROAD IMPROVEMENT, WELFARE TO WORK TRANSPORTATION ACCESS PROJECT, I–84 WEST RECONSTRUCTION, CHARTER OAK GREENWAY, GRIFFIN LINE
Mrs. KENNELLY. Thank you, Mr. Pickering.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you, it's good to have you before the Committee.
Mrs. KENNELLY. Did you notice an adjacent State to New York is here to give somewhat the same message?
Mr. Rahall, thank you very much, and other members and Council, thank you very much. I'm very happy to see a new member, Mr. McGovern, I am so glad to see you sitting up there another New Englander working to protect the formula. Thank you very much.
I am very glad to have this opportunity to speak to the Committee and thank you for allowing me to be here. I know what you're going through with this huge endeavor—with so many projects to review. In a time of shrinking budgets I know how challenging your job is, and I really have come here to talk about some projects in my area that have broad-based community support and have the support of the people of the City of Hartford, as well as people of the State of Connecticut. I've worked with a number of regional and local groups to make sure that I have before you projects that are important to my community and can make a transportation difference to New England and to Connecticut.
Page 585 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
What I am here to talk to you about has been in front of this Committee before. It is called the Hartford River Front Recapture, and it has been a project that has been very active in Hartford, Connecticut, which, by the way, is a poverty stricken city at this time in history. The only way we could figure we could make a come back is to recapture the river, and it hasn't been easy. A dock had been built up, a highway had been built up and we had all sorts of studies taken in the best way. As you know, there are so many other cities, we can all them, that have become successful because of their ability to get to the river, and it means people in commerce who get to the river.
Over the past 10 years this group has successfully created a network of transportation that makes it possible for this project to be successful. I've said it's been before this Committee before—in fact, twice. This Committee has been helpful, and, as of today, it is almost over; the project is almost finished. The project that I am requesting funding for will finalize the design and complete construction of four segments of the Hartford Recapture Project. Two of the segments are paved transportation access roads, and the riverfront project will also allow us to circumvent the Hartford steam pump house, but I'm not going to go into all the details.
Just to tell you what is happening here is an effort to increase the ability to get from one place, downtown Hartford, to the river. I know that your council is familiar with Hartford, Connecticut, and probably has seen this project. It is huge—it goes over the highway, it goes under the highway, it gets to the river and it provides access for people to get to the river. We're looking at it as one means to save our city and bring it back to greatness. It became an insurance capital by being on the river, and it was commerce that brought insurance to Hartford.
Page 586 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Another project of importance to me is the Trinity Area Roadway Improvement Project. Once again, this is about making Hartford healthy economically again. We have a large hospital, we have a large college, community college, and we have another hospital for those that have mental illnesses. We have our local and public TV station all in the area, which has an ambitious but good plan to revitalize entire section of our city by improving transportation, facilitating access to transportation and this is why I am here.
I know this kind of improvement, and pedestrian walkway and vehicle driveways are necessary if places are going to be healthy to commerce.
I have some other projects that I am going to hand into your staff. I know what a huge job that they have in front of them. I know that they have criteria that these projects will have to pass. I am fully aware of this, and I am fully understanding of the hard work that you have.
With this I will submit my whole statement. You have the projects outlined—one called the Griffin Line, which is a light rail project which we are very interested in and we know that you'll give a fair look at it along with the rest of my project requests.
I thank all of you, knowing how difficult your job will be on this committee, how your choices are going to be very, very hard to make, but I do just want to say, I know this committee has been always fair to all parts of the country and I know it will continue in that vein.
Page 587 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I appreciate your giving me the opportunity to speak before you.
Mr. PETRI [resumming Chair]. We're delighted to give you that opportunity and I apologize for missing part of your statement. As you know, we are pulled and tugged in a lot of different directions.
Ms. KENNELLY. Mr. Chairman, I want to tell you, when we came in, your staff had the projects lined up, had everything organized and that's why I feel so comfortable, knowing of the professionalism of this committee and the bipartisan fashion it's always worked, that we will get a fair review.
Mr. PETRI. We have very much appreciated working with your committee because we share jurisdiction over different parts.
Ms. KENNELLY. I was on this committee once, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETRI. Once a member, always a member.
Ms. KENNELLY. Always a member. Thank you very much.
Mr. PETRI. That's great. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Kennelly follows:]
Page 588 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI.Let's see, The Honorable Jim McGovern. Welcome back, on the other side of the desk this time. I invite you to introduce your guests.
TESTIMONY OF HON. JIM MCGOVERN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM MASSACHUSETTS, ACCOMPANIED BY STEPHEN O'NEIL, DIRECTOR, CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, WORCESTER, MA, MICHAEL LATKA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, WORCESTER, MA, AND CRAIG BLAIS, ASSISTANT TO THE CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, WORCESTER, MA
DOWNTOWN GATEWAY IMPLEMENTATION LINCOLN SQUARE/NORTH MAIN STREET PROJECT, DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE PROGRAM PROJECT
UNION STATION REDEVELOPMENT
BLACKSTONE RIVER BIKEWAY
Mr. MCGOVERN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Let me begin by reiterating my support for the reauthorization of a strong ISTEA. In particular, I'd like to begin by highlighting two projects of great importance to my district. First, Congressman Barney Frank testified last week in support of one of them.
It's the Brightman Street Bridge in Fall River, a project which I too strongly support and a project which is very much needed.
Page 589 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Second, I want to express my support for a proposed improvement project by the Town of Foxboro, Massachusetts where plans have been developed to enhance the downtown of Foxboro.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to introduce three witnesses who have come from Massachusetts to testify on behalf of the other key projects in my area. Mr. Stephen O'Neil is the Director of the City Manager's Office of Planning and Community Development for the City of Worcester, who has come to talk, among other projects, about the Blackstone River Bikeway.
This project is a vital linkage for our community as it will wind from Providence, Rhode Island to Worcester, ending at Worcester's Union Station.
Mr. O'Neil is accompanied by Mr. Craig Blais, the Assistant to the Chief Development Officer for the City of Worcester and Mr. Michael Latka of the Worcester Redevelopment Authority who has come to talk about the redevelopment of Union Station which is absolutely key to Worcester's economic development.
Worcester's Union Station plays a vital role in drawing together various modes of transportation and represents one of this country's shining examples of the merits of ISTEA. Mr. Chairman, it is an absolute priority of mine and to the entire Massachusetts congressional delegation.
I'd like to first begin by introducing Mr. Michael Latka.
Page 590 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. LATKA. Thank you, Congressman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I wish to speak to the committee today to update you, first, on the progress that the Worcester Redevelopment Authority and the City of Worcester has made on the Union Station Intermodal Transportation Project since we last testified before your committee last spring.
Secondly, I'd like to describe for you how, with your help, we can reach the goals that we have for air quality improvements, congestion mitigation, traffic and transportation improvements, historic preservation in this particular project, and also economic development and urban design improvements that our previous public investments have set the stage to accomplish.
As of today, we have fully secured and stabilized the main structure of Union Station itself. We have fully designed the improvements for the Union Station and area development, which included installing a temporary roof to dry out the building, as well as removing tons of wreckage and debris and removing all asbestos from the building.
Complete renovation bids have presently been sought and at this point in time, we have a prebid conference on Monday and a bid opening on April 11th. The successful award of the renovations will be the next formal step towards a mid-1999 completion date.
Funding has been secured with Congress' direct assistance through CMAC and Section 3 funding, plus State of Massachusetts off-street parking garage grants to finance the $33 million improvements as originally envisioned for the Bay Station bus ports and parking garage.
Page 591 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
However, as exciting and rewarding as these improvements are, these funds would not complete the station's towers, extend the rail platform the additional 400 feet that's necessary to meet the requirements of the commuter rail service, to add entry canopies as originally existed, or even include an interior escalator.
The station will work as presently designed, but will not maximize our public investments. In fact, these improvements have also been noted in our comprehensive economic development and urban design studies as needed to maximize the private investment anticipated in this project area.
Additionally, the area around the station needs the final EIR-required traffic mitigation improvements that would completely replace and widen the railroad bridge, a recently restudied and found inadequate railroad bridge, to address the new station's needs, and replace aging and dysfunctional roadway patterns, infrastructure and utilities.
These additional improvements are estimated to cost approximately $15 million which would be funded 80 percent Federal and 20 percent State and local, which is the request before you today.
It is important to us that we live within our budget parameters established before your committee previously. These amounts are still within the $20 million authorization for the Union Station Project which was received 3 years ago, of which we have approved appropriations for $8 million at this point.
Page 592 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
These improvements will improve pedestrian access to the area, currently unsafe or inadequate, create new development parcels from a disorganized and inefficient roadway and rotary pattern, and provide safe, efficient transportation options to the area.
This is in the neighborhood of a $215 million medical city project that just recently broke ground, a $50 million Worcester common fashion outlet expansion, a $37 million convention center expansion project, and over $15 million of roadway improvements.
Mr. Chairman, over $265 million of those investments are private investments. The private development estimated to be generated from Union Station alone will exceed $25 million and create over 500 jobs.
Additionally, Union Station is the catalyst for an areawide development in a nearby approved urban revitalization neighborhood that covers over 100 acres. This $70 million public investment area includes a refurbished Union Station just described, but also adds $20 million of requested State of Massachusetts funding.
With your assistance, the Union Station Project recently written up in the FHWA and FTA Innovations in Transportation and Air Quality Booklet of 12 exemplary nationwide projects and the Surface Transportation Policy Projects Book that demonstrated 5 years of projects highlighting 120 to 130 community projects where ISTEA has been making a difference can become a reality and the success that we all envision. Working together, we can make it all happen.
Thank you for your attention for our Union Station presentation and we look forward to working with the committee to complete this important regional and now nationally-recognized project.
Page 593 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to introduce Mr. O'Neil who will now address other ISTEA regional projects.
Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. O'Neil?
Mr. O'NEIL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, fellow committee members, and thank you to Congressman McGovern for having us down here today.
I'd just like to give you a little background. The Union Station project is really symbolic of Worcester's revitalization efforts. It's an older, industrialized city that we're trying to make a shift from that industry into more of a medical, biomedical and entertainment industry.
As such, as Mr. Latka has indicated, we have over $500 million in public and private investment in the city's central business district, utilizing previously authorized ISTEA project funds, as well as other Federal and State funding and appropriations. These major investments will significantly impact the city's growth potential as we move into the new millennium.
The first project I'd like to discuss, Mr. Chairman, is the $3 million Lincoln Square Gateway Project. Worcester has prioritized the construction of three new gateway projects. Two are underway as we speak from the downtown area to the north and south into the east and west interstate highway systems. Lincoln Square will be the third and final gateway development project to be constructed.
Page 594 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
In addition to that, we are trying to make it easier to enter our city as well as once you are in it, to leave our city. We have very comprehensive, over $1 million signage program. We are asking this committee for consideration of an additional $750,000.
The city has initiated and designed and constructed a comprehensive complementary signage program to direct motorists to various destinations, including the recently constructed regional airport facility.
Finally, as the Congressman has indicated, we are also embarking with our counterparts in the suburbs on a $6.5 million request to you for a $10 million, 28-mile bike path. The proposed Blackstone River Bike Path, part of the national corridor is part an $11 million undertaking which will result in the development of 28 miles of bike paths from Worcester, Massachusetts to the Rhode Island Blackstone Bike Riverway, which runs to South Providence.
The bikeway will be a major attraction and congestion mitigator in the Blackstone Valley National Heritage Park Project which was established by Congress in 1986.
Mr. Chairman, finally, I'd just like to take a moment to address the various elements we feel these projects address as far as the constraints and requirements under the ISTEA Program.
First of all, we are dealing with regionalism. Certainly Worcester is part of a larger, metropolitan area. Worcester has a population of about 170,000. The metro area is approximately 450,000.
Page 595 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We are also trying, with these projects, to improve our traffic flows and increase the air quality and we are also trying to make it easier to get into our community as well as to leave our community.
We feel, Mr. Chairman, with these projects, we will move our city and the city's region into the new millennium in a more effective and efficient manner.
Thank you very much.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. BLAIS. Mr. Chairman, as Congressman McGovern has said in the past, everything has been said but not everyone has said it.
I just want to add from an economic development point of view, the City Policy Office on Economic Development, your transportation dollars that we are grateful receiving in the past through Section 3 allotments for Union Station and the various projects are really driving private investment in the downtown.
We have a billion dollar economic development agenda that's going on in little Worcester and that billion dollar agenda is being driven by $600 million in private investment in our city. So the transportation dollars are extremely important to us. We accept them with gratitude.
Page 596 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We look forward to moving the Union Station Project forward. We have already begun the project. It is real; it's up and running. We're out to bid on the project and we really need this committee's support and we look to Congressman McGovern and yourself to provide the leadership on that.
Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Are there questions?
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I don't have any questions. I just want to commend our new member of this committee, Mr. McGovern from Massachusetts, for the way he has really jumped in and taken the leadership on this project. He has brought this to our attention a number of times, I guarantee you, and I'm sure today won't be the last time.
Your reinforcement from back home helps a great deal and we look forward to working with you, not only on this particular project, but the overall funding formulas as well in which we both are together and our secretaries of transportation have testified together, putting us in the same ballpark.
We look forward to working with you.
Mr. PETRI. We thank you all. It's exciting to learn about a community on the move again.
Page 597 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. MCGOVERN. Worcester absolutely is a community on the move, Mr. Chairman. We'd love you to come up and visit us.
Mr. PETRI. I've been there, but it wasn't on the move then. It was a long time ago.
Mr. MCGOVERN. I was telling my colleague from Mississippi, we even let people from Mississippi come up to Worcester too, so he's more than welcome to come up.
Mr. PETRI. It took me about 5 years to learn how to say the name because it doesn't read the way you say it.
Mr. MCGOVERN. Thank you very much.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
[The prepared statements of Mr. O'Neil and Mr. Latka follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. Bereuter, I'd like to welcome you to the subcommittee and we look forward to your remarks.
TESTIMONY OF HON. DOUG BEREUTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM NEBRASKA
Page 598 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
PROJECT REQUESTS
Mr. BEREUTER. Chairman Petri, Mr. Rahall, members of the committee, thank you very much for this opportunity to testify. I will be brief because I'm supposed to be handling about three bills on the floor shortly.
I believe that we have made appropriate submissions to you by the deadline with the help of the Nebraska Department of Roads and the City of Lincoln.
I carry before you a number of projects, but I carry most of the load for the State of Nebraska, as a matter of fact. One of these projects is predominantly in Congressman Christensen's district; I carry part of the load for the State of South Dakota in addition to my own State because two of the bridges are South Dakota-Nebraska bridges and Congressman Thune has no doubt also submitted complementary material on those two.
I wanted to make sure that they were submitted and so I submitted them as a primary sponsor as you suggested.
I'm not going to go over the details unless you would like me to do so on any of the particular projects. They are very important. The circumferential highway for Lincoln is exceedingly important. It's an effort that I started long ago, and made arrangements so that its component parts were on the National Highway Plan in your previous legislation.
I do have two policy issues that I'd like to bring to your attention that are not project specific. First would be a clarification of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act regarding bridge projects. So this would relate not only to the South Dakota-Nebraska bridges, but perhaps something more generally.
Page 599 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I'm interested in working with the committee to resolve a potential problem related to those two bridges. It's hard for me to imagine but a concern has been raised by the departments of transportation in our respective States.
We believe it's important that the ISTEA reauthorization bill reaffirm congressional intent by clarifying that these bridges and others across the country do not constitute water resource projects under Section 7(a) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and as such, are not subject to any separate environmental review and approval by the Department of Interior and the National Park Service outside of the review necessary for the Federal Government to issue a record of decision regarding adequacy of environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act and Section 4(f) of the Federal Transportation Act.
If this common sense change is not made, we are concerned and I am concerned that Section 7(a) may be misinterpreted and lead to unnecessary delays.
Next, I would like, as a policy matter, to bring to your attention the major problem that some parts of this Nation have with coal trains. My home State probably has more coal passing through it than any other State. We have no coal. We don't have your resources, Congressman Rahall, but we do have the Utah and Wyoming coal passing through our State in great quantities.
My hometown, for example, a village of only 700 people, has more than 30 coal trains or freight trains passing through it every day. It is creating very major rail crossing problems in these cities and villages across the State and solving those, even though we are reducing the number of crossings dramatically, is very expensive.
Page 600 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I also remember just a few months ago I visited a Burlington Northern shop in West Lincoln where more diesel fuel is put on locomotives than at any spot in the United States. It seems to me, and it seems to our Department of Roads and others, that the 4.3 cents per gallon tax on fuel, the one that is, unfortunately in my judgment, diverted to deficit reduction instead of transportation needs, at least a part of that fuel, maybe we're only talking about 1 cent, of the diesel fuel used by those railroads should be dedicated to deal with the very major rail crossing problem we have generated by coal trains across the country. I bring that to your consideration as a recommendation.
Mr. Chairman, I'd be happy to try to address any questions that you might have, you or any of the other members.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Are there any questions?
[No response.]
Mr. PETRI. Let me just say that we are appreciative to have you working with a number of other representatives in your own delegation and neighboring States on some of these projects. We appreciate your sharing in their behalf and carrying some water for them.
Also, the scenic river bridge problem is one that is affecting a number of projects around the country. I know that our senior, who we call the dean of our committee, Jim Oberstar, has been staff and a member here for his full career, reconizes that there is a bridge between Wisconsin and Minnesota that could be affected in a similar way.
Page 601 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
So, hopefully, he'll be interested and it might be worth copying him or checking with his office on that because we don't want to get involved, if we can avoid it, in some sort of a cat fight. We want to solve the problem.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I think you could generically solve the problem for bridges across the country. When I had a chance to help write a Wild and Scenic River Act that I knew was going to affect a bridge site, I made a specific exemption for that particular bridge, but we're not always so lucky to get in there in advance.
Mr. PETRI. Very good.
Thank you very much.
Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you.
[Mr. Bereuter's prepared statement follows:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. The next panel is led by our colleague from the eastern part of the quad city, Iowa-Illinois complex, Lane Evans, and he's accompanied by Mr. Jeff Nelson, General Manager, MetroLink and CityBus.
Welcome and as you know, full statements will be made a part of the record. We invite you to summarize and ask that you proceed.
Page 602 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
TESTIMONY OF HON. LANE EVANS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM ILLINOIS, ACCOMPANIED BY JEFF NELSON, GENERAL MANAGER, METROLINK AND CITYBUS
US–127 RECONSTRUCTION, US–231 UPGRADE, I–69 CONSTRUCTION,, I–65 UPGRADE, US–68/KY–80 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, SHORT LINE TRACK REHABILITATION
Mr. EVANS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate this opportunity to testify before your subcommittee and to recommend highway projects to be funded in the reauthorization of ISTEA.
The projects I'm recommending for funding have been designated as part of the National Highway System and are listed in Illinois' Proposed Highway Improvement Plan. I will briefly summarize the projects for which I'm requesting the subcommittee's consideration for funding.
U.S. Route 67, I'm requesting $11.7 million in Federal funding for the construction of a four-lane westerly bypass around the City of Roseville on Route 67. Route 67 is an important north and south corridor that the State considers a priority for improvements. The complete four-lane development of this highway will enhance the opportunity for future economic growth in the area.
U.S. Route 34, I'm requesting $58.4 million of Federal funding to continue the four-lane improvement of Route 34 in Henderson County. Along with its designation as part of the National Highway System, Route 34 is also part of a strategic highway corridor and network as identified by the Department of Defense.
Page 603 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The highway improvement will provide a safe, more efficient facility for heavy trucks that currently utilize the highway and support economic growth in Illinois and in Iowa.
Third, Illinois 336 from Illinois 61 to south of Lorraine, Quincy and McComb Corridor, I'm requesting $5.6 million in funding to continue the four-land development of U.S. 336 with construction of an additional 4.4 miles. The project is part of the State's long-range plan to complete four lane construction from Quincy to McComb.
Fourth, Illinois 336 from south of Lorraine to north of Illinois 94, Quincy to McComb corridor, I'm also requesting $22.7 million in Federal funding for the construction of an additional 10.5 miles of four-lane improvement on Illinois 336 from south of Lorraine to one mile north of Illinois 94.
In addition, I'm requesting $1.2 million for construction of an elevated pedestrian walkway over River Drive in Moline, Illinois. The project is part of a community transportation center that will connect Central Station to the Mark, a recently constructed 12,000 seat arena. The walkway will prove essential to the safety of pedestrians crossing the four-lane highway.
I have asked Mr. Jeff Nelson, General Manager of the Rock Island Metrotransit District to testify on behalf of this project.
I'd also appreciate the committee's consideration of a project submitted by my colleague and Banking Committee Chairman, Jim Leach. It is my understanding that this project, the Safety and Security Pilot Project, was positively considered and included as part of the original House-passed version of the National Highway Systems bill.
Page 604 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I would also urge this subcommittee's consideration of funding for a Bridge Discretionary Fund Program. Prior to ISTEA, the Bridge Discretionary Program had been well funded, but in recent years, without adequate funding, States such as my own have had a difficult time financing major bridge replacement projects.
During reauthorization of ISTEA, we have an opportunity to provide adequate funding for a Bridge Discretionary Fund Program and I would urge the committee to do so.
Lastly, I want to express to the committee my support for positive changes in ISTEA concerning rural transportation policy. It's important that State officials work with rural communities to ensure the selection of projects in rural areas through planning functions and through proper public input. I would support any language that would encourage this cooperation.
Again, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for this opportunity to testify before your subcommittee.
Mr. PETRI. We thank you.
Mr. Nelson, did you have a comment or two that you wanted to make?
Mr. NELSON. Yes. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Rahall, again, thank you for the opportunity to testify. I would like to summarize my statement and I'll provide a full statement in writing.
Page 605 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. NELSON. My purpose in addressing you today is to solicit your support in providing Federal funds for construction of a skywalk over River Drive, a major five-lane truck route thoroughfare in Moline, Illinois.
The elevated skywalk will connect the Community Transportation Center, Center Station, with a 12,000 seat civic center arena, the Mark of the Quad City.
Center Station, which is jointly owned by the Transit District and the City of Moline, is a 305 space, two-level parking structure built over a passenger transit terminal for both local and intercity bus. This adjoins a project area that includes the civic center, a 163-room Radisson Hotel, a TGIF Friday Restaurant, the Mississippi Riverfront Walkway and Recreation Area, and the new five-story corporate headquarters of John Deer Health Care and the new John Deer Company Visitors Pavilion. The combined total cost of the six building development that includes infrastructure improvements is nearly $50 million.
The Transit District and the City of Moline and State of Illinois contributed approximately $19.7 million of the total with private sources, including Deer Company providing $29.8 million.
The need for the skywalk improvement is based on the current projected pedestrian traffic required across River Drive to access the Mark and the Quad Cities. The Mark is a performance-winning civic center that has averaged over 1 million patrons in each of its first 3 years of the operation. The visitors pavilion is expected to attract between 300,000 and 400,000 people per year. The employment opportunities are approximately 700 jobs in this area currently. River Drive currently averages approximately 13,000 vehicles a day.
Page 606 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
On behalf of the Transit District and the city, I request the $1.2 million in Federal funds applied towards an estimated $1.5 million skywalk. This investment is necessary to improve traffic safety.
That concludes my remarks and I thank you for the opportunity.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Are there questions of either of the witnesses?
[No response.]
Mr. PETRI. If not, thank you very much. Lane, we look forward to working with you on these requests. I know your requests have been growing quite a bit in the last few years with the comeback of some of the manufacturing. John Deer is very important in your area, as are some of the others.
Mr. EVANS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Nelson follows:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. The next panel is led by our colleague, Tim Roemer from Indiana who is accompanied by George Nicholos, Chairman of the Board of TRANSPO.
Page 607 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Gentlemen, welcome and I think you've testified before on this project. You're welcome back.
TESTIMONY OF HON. TIM ROEMER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM INDIANA, ACCOMPANIED BY GEORGE NICHOLOS, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, TRANSPO
PROJECT REQUEST
Mr. ROEMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's nice to see the Ranking Member here as well too, and my colleague from Indiana, Mr. Pease, the new member from the southern part of our State.
Mr. Chairman, I would just ask unanimous consent that the entirety of my statement be entered into the record and I will just talk briefly to conserve your time. Let me reiterate that I'm joined by a very distinguished member of our community, George Nicholos who is the Chairman of the TRANSPO Board.
I am here to testify in strong support on the behalf of two particular projects, not just for the northern Indiana area and not just for the State of Indiana, but for the entire Nation.
These two projects, one known as TRANSPO in northern Indiana that George is here to answer any questions about and show his strong support as a community member, is a project that epitomizes the whole concept of ISTEA. It is a project which brings together and integrates a host of different intermodal transportation methods—railway, bus, commuter, and passenger automobiles.
Page 608 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We are combining all these modes into one. It is working very effectively. We are asking for one authorization, a final authorization of $4 million for fiscal year 1998. You will be delighted to know that final authorization is going to be exceeded by our local and State, not a match, but a $6,238,500 commitment to complete this project that both you, Mr. Petri and Mr. Rahall have supported in the past and that I have brought members of my community by to brief you on and inform you about our progress.
That is a very important project for the State of Indiana and we hope you would authorize that project.
Secondly, I am here to get your strong support for a project in Elkhart, Indiana that is necessary to address significant commerce and safety issues created by 85 daily trains passing through some of the heaviest tonnage track in the United States.
We are trying to do a host of things here for major improvement in the transportation of goods between east and west, and not just improve the City of Elkhart and the safety of Elkhart.
This project would begin on the west side of Elkhart and continues for approximately 17 miles to the southeast. It involves separating a rail bed, raising rails about 10 feet from current locations, closing some grade crossings, and running others under the new railbed.
Without getting into all the testimony, I will be very brief and say that this has the very strong support of the Mayor of Elkhart and the Mayor of Goshen, Mr. Perrin and Mr. Puro, respectively. They would have been here except for previous engagements and commitments they had. We will supply you more information on that project.
Page 609 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Finally, let me conclude by saying that the criteria established by this committee for consideration under ISTEA authority has already been answered and furnished to you. Each has provided answers to the 14 evaluation points developed by the committee.
I'd like to again thank you for your time here today, for your time over the past few years, especially for the TRANSPO Project which is in its last year, and hope that we can follow on the Elkhart Project with the same success that we and the Congress has afforded the project in South Bend.
Again, I appreciate Mr. Pease's attendance here for an Indiana Project and look forward to working with the entire committee.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. Nicholos, did you have any comments?
Mr. NICHOLOS. I'd just like to see the whole project come to an end because it has been a good project for 3 years. It's going to help a section of town which was in pretty bad disrepair. It's going to create a lot of new businesses; it's going to do a lot with the intermodal, with the battery-driven buses which will circle the downtown area and there's IV Tech that's going to build a place on the other side of the railroad tracks.
We need to put the finishing touches to it. We've got the house built; we need to put the roof on it and we're done and out of here, and you won't see us back.
Page 610 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. We enjoy seeing you though.
Are there any questions?
[No response.]
Mr. PETRI. If not, thank you. We look forward to working with you on this.
Mr. ROEMER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Rahall, and Mr. Pease.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Roemer and Mr. Nicholos follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. Back again is our colleague who was here, last week talking about the Wilson Bridge. Sir, welcome and I see you're accompanied by a person who is a leader in your State, Mayor Schmoke and George Baylog.
TESTIMONY OF HON. ELIJAH CUMMINGS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM MARYLAND, ACCOMPANIED BY HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM MARYLAND, HON. KURT SCHMOKE, MAYOR, BALTIMORE, MD, AND GEORGE BAYLOG, DIRECTOR, BALTIMORE PUBLIC WORKS
Page 611 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
BALTIMORE AREA HIGH PRIORITY PROJECTS
Mr. CUMMINGS. First of all, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
Congressman Cardin will be hopefully joining us shortly.
I'm pleased that the committee has given us an opportunity to testify today.
It has been almost 40 years since the citizens of Maryland's Seventh Congressional District have had representation on this committee.
I would like to welcome Mayor Kurt Schmoke, the distinguished Mayor of Baltimore City who I might say I went to high school with and we've been friends for many, many years.
I certainly appreciate being here today to emphasize the importance of our committee authorizing full funding for projects for the City of Baltimore.
Our Mayor is joined by our distinguished head of Public Works for Baltimore City, Mr. George Baylog.
As you may know, I have submitted several requests for the State of Maryland and for Baltimore City. However, Baltimore's existence and its success as a city is owed in great measure to its importance as a major transportation center.
Page 612 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Baltimore's harbor, which brings in commerce, industry and a diversity of cultures and races spreads outward along the eastern seaboard along a network of roads, rails, businesses and neighborhoods. Baltimore, like most aging cities, faces extreme social and fiscal pressures driven by dependence on our transportation needs.
Unless immediate action is taken to address the upgrading of Baltimore's infrastructure, Baltimore City and indeed the State of Maryland, will be adversely affected causing a loss of thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in revenue.
I urge you and the committee to listen very closely to the testimony of our Mayor and Mr. Baylog and my distinguished colleague who along with Mr. Gilchrest, represent Baltimore City, Mr. Cardin. We hope you will listen carefully to the testimony and do all that you can and I will be joining you in those efforts to assist our city.
Thank you very much.
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Cardin, have you some words.
Mr. CARDIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me first thank you for the courtesy of allowing us to be here today to accompany our Mayor Schmoke. I fully support his presentation before the committee on important projects of national significance under the ISTEA Program.
Page 613 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Each one of these programs are well thought out and are needed, and I strongly support them. I hope the committee will give them favorable consideration.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor?
Mayor SCHMOKE. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the committee, I am very pleased to be here and I thank my colleagues in government, our distinguished congressmen, Congressman Cummings and Congressman Cardin, very much for being with me.
I thank the committee for allowing me to appear today.
I've submitted a statement, so I will only summarize that full statement.
As Congressman Cummings indicated, our city really has grown from its harbor. The harbor brought commerce and industry and jobs and diverse peoples and cultures to our city. The harbor is linked with commerce and the Nation by its highway and transportation systems.
That system has been stressed due to inadequate funding for our ongoing maintenance needs. As Mr. Baylog has indicated to me, we could potentially invest a billion dollars in our transportation program; we are able to address only $60 million annually in our capital program.
Page 614 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We're unique in Maryland because we have full responsibility for our highway system. The State Highway Administration does not provide us with funds for these highways. This unique circumstance was recognized by the Federal Government prior to ISTEA legislation because Baltimore received $50 million annually based on its documented transportation needs.
Now the Federal ISTEA funds go directly to the States. As a result of that, rather than the $50 million, we receive $13 million, not because of any diminished needs, but because our State does not allocate its jurisdiction funds along the Federal formula. We hope that is a situation that could be corrected.
Providing direct funding to Baltimore or having the State allocate along the Federal formula will go a long ways towards addressing our transportation needs.
We're excited about the possibilities of funding the demonstration projects that Congressman Cardin and Congressman Cummings alluded to. I'd summarize that we seek funds for the transportation enhancements to our empowerment zone.
As you know, we're one of six cities in the United States to be designated an empowerment zone. We are trying to enhance our streets and roads in the empowerment zone in order to improve economic development and job development.
The second is our Penn Station multimodal transportation center which we are trying to improve along with very good help from AMTRAK that we've received, and also our commuter lines.
Page 615 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The third would be technology improvements. We'd like to improve our computer control technology to help us move our commuters. We have about 200,000 commuters a day in and out of our city and that helps our economic development to move these people quickly in and out of the city.
The fourth is the Lincoln Parkway and Greenway. Here, we are trying to accommodate not only the cars and trucks, but bicyclers and pedestrians. We have a large greenway which we are moving from a major park in our city all the way down into downtown and we're doing bicycles and pedestrianways. We're hoping this demonstration project would allow us to complete that and enhance it.
Finally, we are looking to improve Interstate 83 which comes through our city.
In conclusion, I support the course set by ISTEA. I hope we can build upon and improve where necessary the 1991 legislation.
I'd note also that we are told there is a panel to be appointed on the magnet levitation train and we are very interested in that. I was one of the first mayors in the country to appoint a committee to deal with mag-lev and to look at that.
Clearly the transportation corridor of Baltimore-Washington is one we think would be very good for a mag-lev train and we would like to participate in any way we could in moving consideration of that along.
Page 616 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Thank you very much for your consideration today.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Baylog, did you want to add anything?
Mr. BAYLOG. If I could simply add that the six projects that the Major described, we're ready to proceed on those projects now and expeditiously.
Mr. PETRI. Great.
Are there any questions?
Mr. RAHALL. No questions, Mr. Chairman. Just to thank both of you and you, in particular, Mr. Mayor, for your excellent testimony and to let you know you're very well represented here by your two colleagues to your right. Elijah and Ben are very forceful members of this Congress. Elijah serves on this committee and Ben is on the all powerful Ways and Means Committee, and a former member of this committee.
We appreciate very much their leadership here as well, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Schmoke follows:]
[Insert here.]
Page 617 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. We have two of our colleagues from the great northeast Maine. I wonder if both of you gentlemen would like to come forward and talk about the respective parts of your State.
Mr. Baldacci, you're on the program here first, so you might as well proceed.
TESTIMONY OF HON. JOHN BALDACCI, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM MAINE; AND HON. THOMAS ALLEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM MAINE
SINGING BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, RIDLONVILLE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, MACK POINT CARGO POINT, HIGH-SPEED FERRY
CARLETON BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, NEW (THIRD) BRIDGE, PISCATAQUA RIVER BRIDGE REPAIR, I–295 CONNECTOR, IMPROVED RAIL LINE TO SUPPORT PASSENGER SERVICE, RAIL SERVICE EXTENSION, AUGUSTA TRAVEL PLAZA
Mr. BALDACCI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Rahall. It's certainly a pleasure to be here.
I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak on behalf of our high priority projects I've submitted on behalf of the State of Maine. I appreciate the challenges that you face with the reauthorization of this legislation.
Page 618 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Maine is a rural State. I represent the largest physical district east of the Mississippi. It's heavily forested and sparsely populated in the northeast region. Many of the population centers in my district are isolated not only by distance but by an aging transportation infrastructure.
I'm requesting the committee provide the necessary funding for four critically important projects for my district and State. All of the projects I've submitted have been analyzed by the Maine Department of Transportation and other agencies are among the highest priorities of the State.
Maine's transportation funding cannot keep pace with the mounting needs for an extensive highway and bridge repair. Two of the four projects deal with bridge repair and replacement.
Only six meters wide and because of the narrow width and its slippery steel gird, this bridge has a long history of accidents. Trucks have caused a great deal of damage to the overhead portals and railing as these vehicles regularly go through one of the busiest portions of the State where Acadia National Park is located.
This bridge needs to be expanded to ensure the safety of the traveling public and the viability of the regional economy.
The second bridge is called the Ridlonville Bridge which is located in Western Maine and by Rumford, Maine, from the home of former Secretary and Senator Ed Muskie. Its only major employer is the Boise Cascade Paper Mill.
Page 619 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
It is essential for the continuous flow of commercial traffic and it's critical for the region's economy that we have in our State.
Probably one of the more innovative requests by the Maine DOT is to require the high speed passenger ferry from Portland, Maine's largest city, to Mt. Azerd Island which is home of Acadia National Park, one of the most visited national parks in the country. The 160-plus miles of winding U.S. Route 1 between two locations is congested and dangerous throughout the entire tourist season.
This new ferry would ease traffic on the coastal roads, reduce pollution and attract more out-of-State visitors. It would also serve the Federal Government's ongoing need to reduce congestion in the national parks.
The Marine Highway Program is part of Maine DOT's strategic passenger transportation plan to create seamless, intermodal passenger connections and it would also complement Maine's pending AMTRAK connection to Boston.
The last project I am asking for is for the modernization of existing facilities at Mack Point Cargo Port near Searsport, Maine to create a modern, deep water, multimodal, intermodal port facility as part of the State's three port strategy.
This new port would reduce the need for commercial trucking along Maine's roads by utilizing existing intermodal rail facilities and be able, through full truck and rail access to all parts of the port, including new and innovative loop traffic to allow for greater efficiency.
Page 620 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
In a State like Maine, we have to be able to have a balanced transportation network of air, water and roads and rails to make sure that we can get not only our goods to market, but also provide for the tourism infrastructure that needs to be there for economic development, and this port would complement the three port strategy.
I want to thank the committee for the opportunity and we have a much more detailed analysis which we will submit to the committee and the staff.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETRI. We thank you and it will be a part of the record. If there are specific questions about it, we will get back to you and your staff and the Maine Transportation Department.
Representative Allen?
Mr. ALLEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Rahall, and members of the committee.
I appreciate the chance to speak to you about priorities and specific transportation needs for our districts and I would like to discuss our priorities for Maine District 1.
The first is the Carleton Bridge replacement in Bathe, Maine. Additional funding for the Carleton Bridge replacement located on U.S. Route 1 is the highest priority project for the Maine delegation. The reason is simple. One, it's a major bottleneck on Route 1, particularly in the summer months and second, the project is so large that it dominates the construction budget for the State of Maine for the next several years.
Page 621 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
It started with a $200 million price tag and a year of collaborative work among all involved parties drove that down to $110 million which is still enormous by Maine's standards. Even with generous Federal support, the project is so large that it is a pivotal point in discussion in Maine's current budget negotiations.
Without additional Federal support, this project will take so much of our State budget that the Department of Transportation may be unable to reconstruct a single mile of roadway in the next 2 years.
The project request is for $35 million in Federal funds distributed in two phases, $20 million for this next fiscal year and an additional $25 million in 2001. There have been $43 million Federal funds already committed to this project and we need the additional to finish the job.
The second priority is a new Augusta Bridge in Augusta. That's Maine's capital and a major crossroad. In addition to tens of thousands of commuting State employees, the city's two-lane bridges carry a large portion of traffic flowing from I–95 to the coastal regions of the State.
Two of our major accident sites are on opposite sides of the Kennebec River in Augusta. We simply need to have a new bridge there.
The request is for new Federal funds of $28 million obligated over the next 5 years. The entire cost of the project is $35 million, the balance of which is picked up by the State.
Page 622 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The Piscataqua River Bridge repair in Kittery and Portsmouth is a case where I've not only joining with my colleague, John Baldacci but also with the New Hampshire delegation. The bulk of the money in this project would go to repaint the Piscataqua River Bridges.
The six-lane, interstate bridge is a primary gateway to the State of Maine. When it was built 24 years ago, its coated included lead paint and now the result is that in order to remove that paint and paint it over, the cost would be almost as much or about as much as it was to build the bridge in the first place.
Maine is requesting a Federal contribution of $12.8 million to cover its share of the Federal match and we are responsible for 50 percent of the total project cost.
There is a new Interstate 295 connector in Portland which would involve the creation of a new link to I–295 near the Port of Portland. It was planned but never constructed during the initial phase. The goals are to relieve traffic congestion, improve access to and from I–295 and improve access to the Port of Portland.
The request is for new Federal funds of $5.6 million over the next 4 years. The entire cost is $6.5 million.
There are two rail passenger projects. One is to improve the line from Placetown, New Hampshire to Brunswick, Maine to upgrade the track from 60 miles per hour capacity to 80 miles per hour capacity and extend service to Brunswick.
Page 623 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
This is a case where we are looking forward to AMTRAK service being restored from Boston to Portland and this would both improve it and carry it on.
Another project is to continue service from Brunswick to Rockland. That's a request for $16.8 million in Federal funds.
The last project I want to mention is the Augusta Travel Plaza. This would create a travel plaza and a See-Maine Intelligent Transportation System Information Center, an ITS, to be located off the Maine Turnpike-Interstate 95 exit in Augusta.
This is a very exciting, different and ambitious project. When completed, it would include a Maine Turnpike Service Center, the ITS Project, a commercial center featuring Maine retailers, parking for 500 cars, and a truck-RV parking lot. It would have a variety of other facilities around the site.
The project has extensive national significance. While ITS systems are proliferating throughout the country, this is the first to offer multigenerational data across several platforms. It is anticipated that after completion of the project, this software could be used in all regions of the country. It's a $9 million project request.
I thank you very much for your consideration of these requests and thank you for hearing us out.
[The prepared statement Mr. Allen follows:]
Page 624 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. We thank you both for coming and making these presentations. We will look forward to working with you to see what progress we can make as this bill goes forward.
Thank you.
Now the leader and dean of the Vermont delegation, our colleague, Bernard Sanders. Your full submission will be made a part of the record. We appreciate your being here to highlight it for us.
TESTIMONY OF HON. BERNARD SANDERS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM VERMONT
MISSISSIQUOI BAY BRIDGE
Mr. SANDERS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It's a pleasure to appear before you.
I'm here to testify to request $24 million for construction of a new Mississiquoi Bay Bridge which is located between the towns of Swanton and Alburg, Vermont. That's the northern part of the State.
Page 625 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We have many transportation needs in my State, but I only requested funding for this one special project because of its paramount importance.
As shown by the letters submitted to the subcommittee from local town leaders, State representatives, transit associations and business organizations, replacing the bridge is essential to the region.
The bridge's welfare is not only of concern to locals, however. The Mississiquoi Bay Bridge impacts the flow of traffic notably international commercial truck traffic between New York State, New England and the Province of Quebec.
The bridge is part of the National Highway System and is located on a key international, intermodal corridor that includes one of the main rail lines in the State and which connects the Port of Montreal with the Port of New London, Connecticut.
The bridge now carries heavy commercial traffic since it connects Interstate 89 in Vermont with Interstate 87 in New York. This additional traffic is taking a heavy toll on an already poor bridge.
These large trucks not only damage the structure, but they raise many serious safety concerns considering the narrow, two-lane roadway on the bridge.
The first problem with the bridge is that the drawbridge mechanism does not work. That's a slight problem. The drawbridge mechanism simply does not work, is not operational right now. This inhibits international water traffic between the United States and Canada harming commerce in the Lake Champlain Region.
Page 626 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Because the drawbridge is broken and it affects international boating, the United States Coast Guard ordered Vermont to take measures to reopen marine traffic. However, Vermont has been unable to fulfill the Coast Guard's order. The resulting limitation on marine traffic has, unfortunately, caused some tension between the Province of Quebec and the United States.
Concern over replacement of the bridge runs parallel to concerns over the quality of water in the Mississiquoi Bay which has angered Quebec and Vermont residents alike. Some attribute the poor water quality and aquatic plant infestation in the Bay to the current bridge's causeway.
A new bridge would open the current bridge's causeway and allow greater water circulation. However, environmental studies are still being conducted to determine whether greater circulation will improve water quality.
I must note that replacing the Mississiquoi Bay Bridge is a top priority of the Vermont Agency of Transportation and it is the number one priority in the Regional Transportation Improvement Program of the Northwestern Vermont Regional Planning Commission.
The State of Vermont has designated a senior engineer for the project full time and initial design work has begun. An environmental assessment has already been completed for the project.
Because it is such a high priority, the State hopes to move the project along on an accelerated schedule. While the State is finding ways to pay the $6 million for the cost of initial design and environmental documentation, it is not within the means of the State of Vermont to pay for a new bridge. The cost to simply keep the bridge in service is nearly $150,000 per year.
Page 627 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I will add that out of the 50 States, Vermont ranks 15th in its ''level of effort'' in dedicating its own resources to highway spending. Replacement of the bridge would place an extraordinary burden on a small State, even though the project has regional, national and international significance.
Let me underscore how bad the bridge's condition is, not that I want to frighten you from coming to Vermont and going over the bridge, but let me just mention how bad the condition is.
The latest sufficiency rating done by the Vermont Agency of Transportation gives the Mississiquoi Bay Bridge a score of 7.2 out of a possible 100 points. That is being rated by the State itself.
The bridge structure is in such bad shape that last summer a three-foot hole appeared in the bridge decking which necessitated emergency repairs and temporary closure of one lane.
The Agency of Transportation will make repairs to the bridge deck this summer to extend the useful life of the bridge. Closing of the bridge could be catastrophic to the local economy and would do great damage to the regional economy and to international trade with Canada.
The point that I do want to reiterate is that this is really not just a State issue, not even a question of interstate commerce, but is an international issue. There is a good deal of tension being developed between Canada and the United States on the issue.
Page 628 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Let me conclude by saying that Vermont needs funding to replace the Mississiquoi Bay Bridge because the bridge is not only essential to Vermont, but it serves as an essential link in our National Highway System and is part of an important intermodal corridor.
The Mississiquoi Bay Bridge and the Route 78 corridor plays a significant role in supporting international trade affecting the East Coast States including New York and New England. The Coast Guard rightfully ordered the drawbridge opened and its closure is a source of tension between Canada and the United States. We have a drawbridge which simply doesn't draw.
The Mississiquoi Bay Bridge's useful life is up and patchwork will not hold the bridge together for long. The bridge is a serious safety hazard. The quality of water in the Bay may benefit from improved water flow. The current state of the bridge is inhibiting international trade.
Finally, it is a major capital investment and it is beyond the State's ability to replace the bridge.
Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for the opportunity to appear before the subcommittee.
I just want to reiterate that this is our only request. We're not going to burden you with many other requests. The State feels this is the most important priority that we have in transportation. We'd appreciate your giving it very serious consideration.
Page 629 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Are there customs at the bridge?
Mr. SANDERS. I don't think so.
Mr. PETRI. It's not right at the border then, but the route goes across the border?
Mr. SANDERS. Right.
Mr. PETRI. I was just curious because there are a number of bridges on the southern border. We went down there and had hearings on NAFTA, because we wanted to become a little more familiar with some of the infrastructure changes.
There's obviously more volume trade that goes through our northern border, but there seems to be a little less tumult associated with it.
Mr. SANDERS. Yes, for a million different reasons but as you know, it's very important for the economy of the United States to maintain a strong trade relationship with Canada.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Sanders follows:]
Page 630 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. Now, our colleague, Governor Carlos Romero-Barcelo. He's accompanied by Dr. Carlos I. Pesquera, Secretary of the Department of Transportation and Public Works in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
Gentlemen, welcome.
TESTIMONY OF HON. CARLOS A. ROMERO-BARCELO, A DELEGATE IN CONGRESS FROM PUERTO RICO, ACCOMPANIED BY DR. CARLOS I. PESQUERA, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS, PUERTO RICO
TREN URBANO PROJECT
Mr. ROMERO-BARCELO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity.
My purpose today is to basically present the Secretary of Public Works and Transportation in Puerto Rico, Carlos Pesquera, and to emphasize the fact that the project which he's going to talk about, the urban train in Puerto Rico, is a project that dear to the hearts of the people of Puerto Rico, the people in the metropolitan area. It crosses political party lines, all parties are supportive of this project.
It's been considered one of the most economically viable projects in the Federal Government right now. To give you all the details and reasons for it, I think Mr. Pesquera can do that a lot better than I. He's much better acquainted with all of the details of the project.
Page 631 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I just wanted to make sure the Chair knows and everyone on the committee knows that the whole Government of Puerto Rico is behind this project and we feel it is very, very necessary because of the transportation situation in Puerto Rico and the traffic jams that are constant in the metropolitan area.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. Secretary?
Mr. PESQUERA. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee.
I am Carlos Pesquera, Secretary of Transportation and Public Works for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. I am honored to appear before you today to report on the progress of the transit system that we call Tren Urbano.
Since my last formal report to this subcommittee, we have entered a critically important and exciting phase of this project. Tren Urbano is under construction. While the groundbreaking ceremony on August 2, 1996 symbolized the launch of the construction phase, the awarding of major construction contracts has made the project a reality.
Today, $720.8 million in contracts have been awarded for the first four packages. The remaining $529.5 million in contracts will be awarded by June of this year for the final three segments.
Page 632 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
We have established an aggressive schedule for final design and construction. Systems testing is scheduled for the year 2000 with system opening scheduled for the summer of 2001.
Tren Urbano is the first FTA demonstration project to have begun construction. Tren Urbano completed project planning and preliminary engineering and secured necessary environmental approval within 18 months. In addition, project construction began only 5 months after obtaining these environmental approvals.
Tren Urbano's innovative procurement procedure has reduced project costs by an estimated 30 percent and cut nearly 2 years off the project time line. We are proud that Tren Urbano has become the national model demonstrating how designed-based procurement can deliver quality and savings at the same time.
Through the Tren Urbano Project, new technology and expertise being transferred to Puerto Rico and we in turn are positioning ourselves to transfer what we learn to other countries, especially those in Latin America.
This is another way that the benefits of building Tren Urbano will extend to the United States as a whole. As a Spanish-speaking part of the United States strategically located in the Caribbean Sea near South America, Puerto Rico has the potential to make an important contribution to the export of U.S. technology to the vast Latin American market.
Congress has recognized the importance of Tren Urbano to maintaining economic growth in Puerto Rico. The FTA and Puerto Rico Highway and Transportation Authority have entered into a full funding, grant agreement providing for FTA capital program funds totalling $307.34 million.
Page 633 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Congress approved an initial earmark of $5 million for Federal fiscal year 1995 and an additional earmark of $7.4 million for fiscal year 1996. In addition, Congress has approved a $4.35 million earmark for fiscal year 1997. This earmark has been supplemented by additional $1.3 million Federal discretionary monies awarded by FTA.
The financial analysis for Tren Urbano assumes that the Federal funds will be provided in accordance with the provisions of the full funding grant agreement which allocates Federal funds over a 6-year period, commencing in Federal fiscal year 1996.
In addition, during Tren Urbano design and construction, our Highway and Transportation Authority anticipates receiving $90 million in FTA urbanized area formula apportionments. These apportionments in addition to the full funding grant agreement funds will be devoted entirely to transit.
Over the past 3 years, our financial plan for Tren Urbano has consistently envisioned that the discretionary share of the project cost will be one-third, with the other two-thirds being financed with the Puerto Rico Highway and Transportation Authority revenue sources.
Now that we are entering the construction phase of the project, our estimates of the project costs are more exact. In addition, we have made small but significant enhancements to the cost of the project that will help assure its success.
As a result, in the current financial plan for Phase 1 of Tren Urbano, the funds provided by the FTA full funding grant agreement amount to about one-fourth of the total cost of the project.
Page 634 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I am pleased to announce that the Governor of Puerto Rico revealed last month that the budget of the Puerto Rico Highway and Transportation Authority will be increased by $120 million starting the next fiscal year.
This recurring assignment will allow the Authority to implement a much needed $3.08 billion capital improvement program during the next 5 years. We trust that Congress will appreciate the significance of this extraordinary commitment of resources from the Government of Puerto Rico when it considers our request to include funds for Tren Urbano in the ISTEA reauthorization bill.
We are here today to request that the members of the subcommittee as well as the full committee continue the support for providing a one-third Federal share for the Tren Urbano Project. We respectfully request that this subcommittee grant an authorization of $417 million. These funds will carry us through the completion of the project in the year 2001.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee for your time and consideration. Now, I welcome your questions.
Thank you.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you and thank you for coming today to testify.
Do you have any questions, Mr. Rahall?
Page 635 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I just want to commend both gentlemen for their excellent testimony today, and especially Carlos Romero-Barcelo whom I've worked closely with not only on this project but on our Resources Committee as well. I'm happy to join him in his Puerto Rican self-determination legislation.
As you well know, Mr. Secretary, as both of you know, I've seen the alignment of Tren Urbano, I've seen the plans, every detail of them, and I certainly can see why the Federal Transit Administration has termed it a turnkey project. It does have ramifications beyond just Puerto Rico. It's certainly a worthy project and your dedication, Mr. Secretary, is certainly above and beyond the call of duty. You and the Governor are to be commended for your work on this project.
Mr. PETRI. We both thank you for allowing us to participate in the ceremony marking the important milestone of bonding for the project, the signing of the contracts.
We'll continue to work with you and you're ably represented, so it should be easy.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Pesquera follows:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. We thank you very much for being here.
Page 636 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Our colleague Harold Ford is unable to be here but he did schedule William Hudson, President and General Manager, Memphis Area Transit Authority and Mr. Hudson is going to be introduced by Mr. Ford's colleague in the Tennessee delegation and another Representative from that area, John Tanner.
John, welcome. As you know, the full statements will be made a part of the record. We invite you to introduce Mr. Hudson and ask that Mr. Hudson summarize his remarks.
TESTIMONY OF HON. JOHN TANNER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM TENNESSEE, ACCOMPANIED BY WILLIAM HUDSON, JR., PRESIDENT AND GENERAL MANAGER, MEMPHIS AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY
MEMPHIS AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Mr. TANNER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Rahall. I appreciate your allowing us to testify today.
Mr. Ford was detained in Memphis due to the untimely death of a member of the city council in Memphis and actually part of this project is in my district as well. We share Shelby County, Tennessee and so I would ask permission for myself to submit a statement for the record later and I have a statement here from Mr. Ford that I'd like to submit for the record at this time.
Mr. PETRI. Without objection, they will both be made a part of the record.
Page 637 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. TANNER. With those few brief remarks, let me introduce Mr. Hudson who is the Director of the Memphis Transit Association and who has done an outstanding job in the City of Memphis and its environs with respect to mass transit there.
We'll look forward to his presentation today.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. Hudson.
Mr. HUDSON. Thank you, Chairman Petri and Congressman Rahall and members of the committee.
I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today in support of the Memphis Area Transit Authority request for authorization of the Regional Rail Plan Program of Projects.
The program includes three rail corridors recommended in the recent long-range transit plan for the Memphis area. It is a logistic extension of the successful rail construction project for the downtown area which includes the Main Street trolley, which opened in 1993, the River Front Loop Rail Extension to open in 1997, and the Medical Center Rail Extension expected to open about the year 2000.
Congressional support has been very important to the success of these endeavors and I thank each one of you that played a role in the authorization of these projects. Your continued support is even more critical now as the Memphis community stands on the verge of a turning point with the proposed authorizations.
Page 638 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
MATA is working to create a comprehensive public transportation system by prudently pursuing transit capital projects that address the transportation needs of the population. Our approaches are thus in a strong base of community support for transit projects that improve mobility and reinforce the growing realization that transit investment enhances economic development and improves overall quality of life.
This support by the letters of support from city, county and State officials submitted with our response to committed 14 questions. This momentous moment has positioned MATA to move the public with a regional integrated rail system serving two States and six municipalities.
Congress appropriated new start funds for the regional rail plan activities in three of the last 4 years. In fiscal year 1994, $500,000 was appropriated for preparation of the Regional Rail Plan, as well as $1.2 million in fiscal year 1996 and $3.09 million in fiscal year 1997 for the Medical Center portion of the Regional Rail Plan.
Based on recommendations in the plan, a program of three corridors is proposed for authorization and construction of a fixed guideway system using light rail technology. MATA intends to fund construction of the system with 50 percent local funds and 50 percent Federal funds.
Local consensus on phasing of the overall program of projects was established based on the results of a major investment study. The final segment of the downtown rail system, the Medical Center rail extension, will be moving toward construction as the regional MIS is conducted.
Page 639 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The Memphis City Council and the Shelby County Commission recently adopted identical resolutions supporting State legislation to change the formula for distributing revenues from our automobile registration fees and six cents of the State gas tax.
The change would give local government the authority to dedicate these revenues as a permanent funding source for the public transportation such as the Memphis Regional Rail System.
MATA requests authorization of the three corridors, the Memphis Regional Rail Plan Program of projects, and a 5-year Federal 50 percent share of phases, Phase 1 of $167 million. A full funding grant agreement will be sought for implementation of Phase 1 upon successful completion of the project development process prescribed by the Federal Transit Administration not later than October 1, 1998.
In addition, MATA requests the authorization of the Medical Center Rail Extension Project with a Federal 80 percent share of $20 million for the remaining funds. A separate authorization is sought for the Medical Center Rail Extension Project since it is exempt from the new start criteria which is less than $25 million in Federal funds and partial funding has been approved.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your attention and I would be happy to entertain any questions you or the committee might have.
Mr. PETRI. We thank you for your statement and are there any questions?
Page 640 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
[No response.]
Mr. PETRI. If not, sir, thank you. You're in good hands with John and Harold. We look forward to working with your area representatives.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Tanner and Mr. Ford follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. Mike McIntyre has been patiently waiting and, sir, please come forward and feel free to summarize your request.
TESTIMONY OF HON. MIKE MCINTYRE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM NORTH CAROLINA
PROJECT REQUESTS
Mr. MCINTYRE. Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I have remarks I would like to submit in full to the committee and I'll just briefly highlight those for time sake and for the respect of your committee's schedule.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. MCINTYRE. There are three projects in southeastern North Carolina that our office has been working directly on with the citizens there and with the State Board of Transportation in North Carolina that I would ask for full consideration.
Page 641 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
These projects are unique in that they not only benefit the cities and counties involved, but they also benefit two of our major military installations and transportation involving Ft. Bragg and Camp Lejeune which we know are called upon when this Nation has an international crisis to be the premiere strike forces of this country.
Two of those projects include the counties where those military installations are located and would directly affect business and the military. One of those is Project X2DNE, NC24 in Cumberland County. NC24 is on the strategic highway network and is a key corridor connecting Ft. Bragg military installation to Interstate 95, which we all are familiar with that runs up and down the east coast. It also connects to the Ports of Wilmington and Morehead City, North Carolina.
This project will facilitate better access to Ft. Bragg which is home to the largest troop population of any base in the Nation. It will allow for improved transporting of equipment and manpower in and out of the base both nationally and abroad via quicker and improved routes to the two major ports in North Carolina at Wilmington and Morehead City, and to I–95 as well.
Currently, military vehicles must travel through the City of Fayetteville to get to Interstate 95. Fayetteville is the fourth largest metropolitan area in North Carolina, making the current route from Ft. Bragg to I–95 quite a time-consuming and traffic-congesting endeavor.
In fact, during the Persian Gulf War, we saw much congestion with troop movement out to I–95 and then down to the corridor of U.S. 74 in the Lumberton area.
Page 642 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
This project in Cumberland County will also provide a new crossing of the Cape Fear River and direct access from Ft. Bragg to Interstate 95 which connects New York to Miami and represents one of the Nation's most heavily traveled and important transportation corridors.
The second project involving Camp Lejeune also involves the same highway, NC24, and is on the strategic highway network. This provides access to Camp Lejeune U.S. Marine Base in Jacksonville, North Carolina and will provide a bypass to the U.S. 17 corridor which will serve as a multilane facility from South Carolina to Virginia.
Currently, this corridor is the primary north-south roadway from eastern North Carolina and is vital to the economic development and regional growth of that area.
The third project I wanted to mention is in Robinson County on U.S. 74. As you know, the Interstate 73-74 Project was deemed a high priority corridor under the 1991 ISTEA authorization. When fully completed, this interstate system will be a boon not only to North Carolina but the entire mid-Atlantic Region of the United States and will be a part of the corridor that goes from Detroit, Michigan to Charleston, South Carolina.
This particular project that I'm mentioning, Project R513A on U.s. 74 in Robinson County, will represent an important link in the Interstate 74 corridor that will help the flow of commercial goods and traffic from the high volume port near Wilmington in southeastern North Carolina through the cities in our district of Whiteville and Lumberton and on to Charlotte which we know is a major southern city regionally and connect that as well into I–73 at Rockingham, North Carolina that goes from Detroit to Charleston.
Page 643 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Project R513A will alleviate congestion and ease the traffic and the flow of commercial goods east to west.
We'd ask your respectful consideration of these three very important projects, not only regionally but also for the Nation.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McIntyre follows:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. Thank you. Are there any questions of the witness?
Mr. RAHALL. No questions, Mr. Chairman. Just to express appreciation for our new colleague from North Carolina's testimony. As the godfather, so to speak, of I–73–74, I share your interest in that particular corridor.
You're right, it was made a high priority corridor of ISTEA, at least West Virginia's segment was, but we'll continue to work with you on this particular corridor.
Mr. MCINTYRE. Thank you for that assurance. We appreciate it very much.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you for coming.
Page 644 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The next two scheduled witnesses are both Kentuckians. Unless there is some strong objection, we'll invite you both to come forward. Mr. Lewis, I guess your the dean among the two of you. You might as well proceed and then Mr. Whitfield.
As you know, they will be made a part of the record of this hearing and we'd invite you to summarize your comments regarding the Natural Bridge; which is still not officially the Natural Bridge, but that's because of a problem over on the other side of the Capitol.
TESTIMONY OF HON. RON LEWIS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM KENTUCKY; AND HON. ED WHITFIELD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM KENTUCKY
NATCHER BRIDGE
US–127, US–231, I–69, I–65, US68/KY80 BRIDGE REPLACEMENTS, PADUCAH CITY LEAD SHORT LINE TRACK REHABILITATION
Mr. LEWIS. Right. We've been trying, yes. I preceded Ed by 6 months.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak briefly today about two projects very important to the people of Kentucky's Second District, first and foremost, the William Natcher Bridge near Owensborough.
Page 645 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
As we move towards reauthorization of ISTEA, I urge members of this subcommittee to use ISTEA funds to finish the bridge which has been in the works for almost a decade. The Natural Bridge is one of those projects that has been left in limbo since the decision to stop earmarking demonstration projects.
The total cost of the Natural Bridge and its approaches is about $122 million. The Commonwealth of Kentucky has arranged to finance all but $12.6 million of the remaining cost of the Natural Bridge.
I wish I could take all of you down to the banks of the High River, probably not at this time, but to show you what the Natural Bridge looks like. It's a bunch of steel poles sticking out of the water, just rusting.
I understand the reasoning behind the decision not to fund demonstration projects, though folks back home are wondering how long those poles will rust in the Ohio River before they are put to good use.
ISTEA presents an excellent opportunity to remedy this problem. I urge my colleagues to include the Natural Bridge in the ISTEA reauthorization. The people of Owensborough and the thousands of commuters and truckers who pass through the existing U.S. 231 bridge in Owensborough really need this bridge.
The Natural Bridge will offer a direct connection from Kentucky's parkway system to U.S. 231 north of Rockport, Indiana. It will replace the existing bridge which likely only has a few years of useful service left.
Page 646 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
It will boost commerce and speed up trips from the Owensborough area to Indiana and beyond.
In short, Mr. Chairman, this subcommittee has the chance to fulfill a commitment begun almost a decade ago by my predecessor, Congressman William H. Natcher. We need that $12.6 million to begin work on the main bridge and its structure. I urge my colleagues, many of whom served with Mr. Natcher, to give it their full consideration.
Let me conclude my remarks by commenting on one more special need in Kentucky's Second Congressional District. Many of you have heard of Mammoth Gate, one of the great tourist attractions and natural wonders of our country.
I ask the subcommittee to add $13.6 million to improve Kentucky 70 which provides the main access to the park and it is the only transportation corridor to the interstate or the surrounding communities.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the time to discuss these projects and I hope members will give their full consideration in helping us to complete the bridge and to update the Route 70.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Representative Whitfield?
Page 647 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. WHITFIELD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Rahall and members of the subcommittee.
I don't envy you in your task as you hear all of these worthwhile projects from around the country.
In my testimony, I've listed six projects, but considering the time availability, I'm going to discuss three of them as it relates to the reauthorization of ISTEA.
The three projects are the reconstruction of U.S. 127 from the Cumberland Parkway to the Tennessee line; the second is the construction of the Kentucky portion of Interstate 69; and the third is the replacement of the two U.S. 68-Kentucky 80 bridges across Kentucky Lake and Lake Barkley.
The first project I would like to address is the reconstruction of U.S. 127 to provide a modern transportation link from the east-west Cumberland Parkway to Lake Cumberland and Dale Hall Lake.
The existing 127 is one of those circuitous routes through the mountains that has created a number of accidents and is a road that was best utilized 30 or 40 years ago. An improved U.S. 127 is needed to attract new industry to the region and to enhance safe and efficient access to the region's popular recreation areas.
Funding would provide for the design, acquiring rights-of-way, relocating utilities and construction from the Tennessee State line and through Tennessee, it's a four-lane highway south, and this would go north to Albany, Kentucky. This project would require $19 million over the next 5 years.
Page 648 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The second project is the construction of Interstate 69 through Kentucky as part of Corridor 18, a project designated by Congress as a highway corridor of national significance. This interstate will eventually run from Indianapolis, Indiana to the Mexican border. It will pass through Memphis, Tennessee and Houston, Texas along the way.
Omitting construction of the Kentucky portion would greatly reduce the value of the entire roadway to the Nation. It will attract new industries along its entire length as well expand the economic base of the area.
Approximately $192 million would be obligated over the next 5 years for the Kentucky portion of the project.
The third project is the replacement of the U.S. 68-Kentucky 80 bridges with new structures that comply with modern engineering standards. This will provide improved capacity, safety and regional mobility on this segment of the National Highway System through southern Kentucky.
These bridges are the only available means of crossing these lakes without time-consuming detours to cross in Tennessee or to cross along the northern dam. Approximately $51 million would be obligated over the next 5 years.
Mr. Chairman, as I said, I have covered six projects in my area, but because of time, I wanted to specifically talk about these three and I thank you for giving me the opportunity to be here.
Page 649 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
[The prepared statements of Mr. Lewis and Mr. Whitfield follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Are there any questions?
[No response.]
Mr. PETRI. Have you guys been affected by the flooding?
Mr. WHITFIELD. Yes, we have, a great deal. Most areas of Kentucky and my district certainly have been dramatically impacted by the flooding.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you very much. If history is any guide, it maybe the opportunity for some rebuilding.
Thank you.
The next panelist is our colleague, the Honorable Donald Payne. We don't want to detain you, sir, so you're here and you're on.
We're taking full statements, making them a part of the record and inviting you to summarize and highlight things you'd like to call to the committee's attention.
Page 650 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
TESTIMONY OF HON. DONALD M. PAYNE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM NEW JERSEY
NEWARK-ELIZABETH RAIL LINK, NEWARK HIGHWAY SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much.
Thank you for this opportunity and members of the committee, as you know, we're all interested in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act and would like to appear before the committee to talk about a few of the projects in the City of Newark, which is in my district, and the entire State of New Jersey.
We certainly would like to thank the Ranking Member and Mr. Oberstar and the Chairman, Mr. Shuster, and Mr. Petri who is presiding at this time, and the staff for your previous assistance to the City of Newark in ISTEA I.
Because of your assistance and commitment to revitalizing our Nation's urban centers—let me say Newark is the third oldest city in the United States of America, founded in 1666, so we're very proud of this town.
The City of Newark has begun an enormous resurgence of public and more importantly, private development within the renaissance city. For example, in the fall of 1997, the City of Newark will open the doors of the New Jersey Performing Arts Center, a $150 million public-private partnership development. This will be one of the greatest developments of its kind in the United States of America. It will exceed Lincoln Center.
Page 651 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The projects and programs in ISTEA I will serve as direct intermodal transportation access to these unique redevelopments in the City of Newark.
In addition, the projects which I will later highlight in somewhat more detail with regard to reauthorization of ISTEA, will bolster Newark's further development plans. In effect, with this committee's further assistance and advocacy, the City of Newark, as well as other mature cities in our Nation, particularly in the northeast, will continue to experience an incredible revival of economic, social and cultural programs unique to these cities.
The City of Newark is a unique transportation hub located in the State of New Jersey. Because of the unique attributes of the City of Newark, the international seaport, the Newark International Airport, the AMTRAK northeast corridor, the National Highway System, the potential brownfields redevelopment, and the like, the City of Newark deserves further attention and advocacy in ISTEA II.
Like the City of Newark, the State of New Jersey exists as a unique example of the need for an efficient transportation infrastructure in order for the State and region to compete in the global economy.
The first and most important project in Newark and the northeast of New Jersey is the Newark-Elizabeth Light Rail Project. The first operable section of this project originally authorized under ISTEA I, will provide for the first time a direct link between the New Jersey Transit of Mars, Essex and Bootenlines with the New Jersey Transit Main Line.
Page 652 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
In addition, this rail project will improve direct convenient access to major destinations in the Broad Street area where many major corporations, First Union Corp., Prudential Insurance Company has a home office, the New Jersey Performing Arts, New Jersey Institute of Technology, are all located between the two downtown rail stations which are serviced by Amtrak in the northeast corridor, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and New Jersey Transit to and from New York City. The project will be a major intermodal connector between these two existing rail systems.
Second, and still a part of the rail project, is the design and development of an integrated auxiliary New Jersey Transit Station on the project site which will take this rail project which has access to the Amtrak northeast corridor station. There will be the construction of a new line that will later connect Newark International Airport Monorail system.
This New Jersey Transit would be a cost effective and efficient means of providing intermodal access to the airport expanding for our region.
In addition, to these important transit projects, I am also requesting the reauthorization of several highway and bridge projects around Newark and the reauthorization of one of our major national ISTEA centers, the New Jersey Institute of Technology Center for Transportation and Industrial Productivity.
Due to the complex and age of New Jersey's highway system, for which the City of Newark exists as a prime example, these projects will relieve commuter congestion and assist in the movement of people, goods and services around the city which in turn will relieve congestion on the surrounding highways in the New York-New Jersey area.
Page 653 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The University Heights road connector will provide the university community in the City of Newark direct access and linkage to the interstate highway system via Route 280. The widening and reconstruction of Route 21 strongly supported by both the city and the State, will provide the only downtown north-south artery which will assist in the renewal and redevelopment of Newark's downtown and waterfront areas.
Finally, the replacement of Route 21 via duct or New Jersey Transit Bridge fits perfectly into the Nation's and the region's commitment to repair dilapidated and unsafe transportation structures in our Nation's inner cities.
In addition to averting a serious safety threat, the replacement of this structure will provide improved, intermodal access to Newark International Airport, a major interstate connection of Route 78.
The redesign of the existing ramp access from Interstate Route 78 will correct a severe and unsafe hinderance to traffic flow on and off the interstate while improving necessary urban access to the City of Newark.
Therefore, the design and construction using innovative technologies of esplanade pedestrian overpass and a bikeway access over Route 21 will also provide safe pedestrian access from the New Jersey Performing Arts Center which is being named after the late Joe Menich, a former Congressman.
I would just like to conclude that there is an awful lot. I'll submit my total testimony for the record, but we certainly appreciate the assistance that we received in ISTEA I. Hopefully in ISTEA II, we will be able to continue these projects in my district and in the State of New Jersey.
Page 654 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Are there any questions?
[No response.]
Mr. PETRI. I obviously have traveled through your district a number of times as most Americans and it's a gateway, portal city that seems to be on the way back.
We'll try to work with you as you fight to help that along.
Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Payne follows:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PETRI. The Representative next on our schedule, Representative Velasquez, has arrived and we'd like to welcome you. Are you accompanied by Albert Appleton and Rubin Quiroz?
Page 655 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Ms. VELASQUEZ. Yes.
Mr. PETRI. The procedure we've been following is to be sure that your statements will be included in their entirety in the record. We would ask if you could summarize the high points of your submissions for the panel.
TESTIMONY OF HON. NYDIA M. VELASQUEZ, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM NEW YORK, ACCOMPANIED BY ALBERT F. APPLETON, SENIOR FELLOW, REGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION, AND RUBIN QUIROZ, CHAIRMAN, CORONA BUSINESS CORPORATION
GOWANUS HIGHWAY, CORONA PLAZA, WILLIAMSBURG BRIDGE, MANHATTEN BRIDGE
Ms. VELASQUEZ. Thank you, Chairman Petri, for giving me the opportunity to testify regarding the four transportation projects that I submitted to the subcommittee. These proposals are essential in addressing the pressing transportation and economic development needs of the 12 congressional districts in New York City.
I urge you to include each of these projects in the reauthorized Intermodal Surface Transportation and Efficiency Act of 1991.
I represent a triborough congressional district covering parts of Brooklyn, Manhattan and Queens. As such, my four proposals cover all three. These four are critical initiatives and were brought to my attention by local elected officials, community leaders, and the city and State governments.
Page 656 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
My first proposal involves alternatives to the planned reconstruction of the Gowanus Expressway, a critical link on Interstate 278 in Brooklyn, New York. This proposal has three components, a major investment study of the Gowanus corridor, a preliminary engineering design of a tunnel alternative, and continuation of the environmental impact statement process initiated by the New York State Department of Transportation.
Mr. Al Appleton, Senior Fellow of the Regional Plan Association, will expand on a preliminary design of a tunnel alternative.
The Gowanus Expressway Project is an elevated highway which cuts through eight urban communities in Brooklyn. More than a quarter of a million people and 500 businesses which employ more than 75,000 workers reside in these areas. The Automobile Association of America named the Gowanus Expressway one of the ten most congested roadways in the United States.
Because of the project's significant economic, social and environmental effects, it is important that all alternatives to reconstruction and their impacts be studied.
Specifically, ISTEA funding would include $16.25 million to complete the EIS process and $30.70 million to pay for the final design of the selected alternative. An additional $35 million will be needed for an MIS and preliminary design of the tunnel alternative.
Since the Gowanus project is so important to the region, full review of reconstruction alternatives and impact enjoys widespread support. My proposal is cosponsored by fellow New York Representatives Molinari, Nadler and Townes. It is also strongly backed by numerous community-based organizations.
Page 657 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Lastly, the New York City Department of Transportation has identified the Gowanus Expressway as a priority city transportation project.
The next project is the Corona Plaza Rehabilitation Project in Queens. It consists of streetscape improvement to the business district and the repair of the area sidewalks and improved lighting for safety reasons.
The requested $2.5 million investment of ISTEA funds will target a 22 block radius in Queens County for its economic recovery. Mr. Rubin Quiroz, Chairman of the Corona Business Corporation will elaborate on the Corona Plaza Project.
My final two proposals involve ISTEA funding for the rehabilitation of the Manhattan and Williamsburg Bridges, two of the three bridges that connect Manhattan to Brooklyn. These funds will be used for safety improvement and increased capacity for mass transit.
The Williamsburg Bridge connects the lower east side of Manhattan with the Brooklyn neighborhood of Williamsburg and 250,000 New Yorkers use the bridge daily, including 105,000 vehicles and 90,000 transit riders.
The bridge is absolutely vital to the economic vitality of the communities that I represent on both sides of the bridge. The Williamsburg Bridge has the lowest rating of all New York City bridges. It's in very poor condition and requires immediate work to ensure the safety of commuters and residents.
Page 658 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The estimated cost of the Williamsburg Bridge Project is $250 million with 80 percent proposed from Federal funds and 20 percent proposed from city and State funds.
The fourth proposal involves the Manhattan Bridge which carries 75,000 vehicles per day as well as four main subway lines. The requested $192 million will enable the northeast main span and approach span crosses to be rehabilitated and for the lower roadway to be reconstructed.
Mr. Chairman, I represent many poor, disadvantaged neighborhoods in the 12th District. These communities suffer from great infrastructure problems that need Federal transportation funding to give the area a fair chance at economic development and job creation.
However, these people are often overlooked and feel left out. My proposals will bring attention to these neighborhoods and promote economic stability and growth in the district and the area.
On behalf of the constituents of New York's 12th Congressional District, and the thousands of commuters and businesses who rely on the district's transportation infrastructure, I strongly urge you to include my proposals in the reauthorized ISTEA.
Thank you for your consideration.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. Appleton?
Page 659 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Mr. APPLETON. Mr. Chairman, committee members and staff, I'm Albert Appleton. I'm a Senior Fellow with the Regional Plan Association which is the country's oldest private corporate sector-based planning organization. Our board is composed of New York's leading business and civic leaders.
The Gowanus Expressway problem has interested us for some time because the Gowanus moves 50 million cars, 4 million trucks, and 100,000 buses each year and is New York City's principal link southward to the interstate highway system.
To be listed as one of the ten worst congested interstates in the country by the AAA is an enormously deleterious thing for the long-term outlook of the region.
The reason the Gowanus is in this shape is it's an obsolete 1940s Robert Moses elevated road; it's crumbling; it's reaching the end of its useful life and needs to be rebuilt. Unfortunately, the rebuilding choice faces the city with the fact it would divert as many as 4,000 cars a hour into the local neighborhoods with disastrous economic and social effects.
Moreover, the Gowanus turned the Brooklyn waterfront into local communities and neighborhoods, greatly deteriorated them and lost their value.
What RPA has been doing is looking at a potential alternative to the Gowanus based on transportation innovation in Europe and Asia. That alternative is an urban tunnel which would not only avoid the years of congestion the Gowanus now faces before it is rebuilt, but it would restore the south Brooklyn waterfront as a center of economic prosperity and vitality.
Page 660 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
For this reason, we have conducted a feasibility study and the question is now what is the next step to be taken so that the State of New York can make an intelligent decision with respect to the future of this critical roadway. That is why we are supporting Congresswoman Velasquez's proposal for the MIS study and for preliminary engineering design.
If we spend this money now, we can not only accelerate the replacement of this road by several years, but we can have an interstate project that for once is not hated and opposed by the community, but actually creates urban value added. That is the attraction that is the benefit if this alternative works and is made to work for us.
We urge you to consider this kind of transportation innovation. We've detailed this more in our written testimony and submission and we hope you will join with the RPA in supporting the Congresswoman's proposal.
Mr. PETRI. Thank you.
Mr. QUIROZ. Chairman Petri, members of the subcommittee, I am Rubin Quiroz, President of Acion Latina, a community-based organization in Queens whose top priority is economic development.
I appreciate the opportunity to testify before this subcommittee in support of Congresswoman Velasquez's initiative for the Corona Plaza Revitalization Project.
I urge you to include this important project in your reauthorization of ISTEA. Corona Plaza is a central community located along the Number 7 train line that links New York City. Corona is a very important business district in North Queens. There are hundreds of businesses that include retail stores, government contractors, line manufacturing, restaurants and general service stores that provide a solid base of tax revenue and jobs for the area.
Page 661 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
Unfortunately, over the last two decades Corona has gone through dramatic demographic changes as reflected in its rapid population growth. These population changes have depleted the local infrastructure and have led to a crisis in space.
The deterioration of infrastructure such as decaying sidewalks and streets, poor lighting and lack of security for pedestrians has negatively impacted the economic development of Corona Plaza.
Corona, unlike other communities, is a very important juncture. By funding the Corona Plaza Revitalization Project, more than 150 small businesses and 250,000 residents will benefit. The improvement of sidewalks and streets, the train station and bus stops and designation of parking areas will help to accommodate tens of thousands of visitors coming to enjoy the sport events at Shea Stadium and the US Open.
This will help support the economic development of the area, solidify Corona's job base and increase tax revenues for the City of New York.
I urge you to include Congresswoman Velasquez's proposal of $2.5 million for the Corona Plaza Revitalization Project in your ISTEA reauthorization. The timing is right and our community is in desperate need of this project.
Thank you.
Mr. PICKERING [assuming Chair]. Thank you.
Page 662 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I appreciate your coming before the committee and your testimony. We look forward to working with you as we go forward in the process on ISTEA.
[The prepared statements of Ms. Velazquez and Mr. Appleton follow:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PICKERING. Congressman Brown, last up today.
TESTIMONY OF HON. SHERROD BROWN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM OHIO
BLACK RIVER INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAZA, SR–18 RESURFACING AND WIDENING
Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess this is the lats of a long day for this committee.
I'm pleased to appear before you today to discuss two critical transportation projects in my district in northeast Ohio.
The first project, the Black River Intermodal Transportation Center is a key part of the plan to revitalize downtown along the western shore of the Black River at Lake Erie.
Page 663 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The Lorraine Port Authority and Lorraine County Transit have developed an exciting proposal to transform the abandoned grove site area into an intermodal transportation center.
The Black River Intermodal Transportation Center is made up of several program components, excursion rail services, commuter rail services, historic train and industrial exhibits, water taxi and excursion boat services, bicycle paths and a harbor shuttle.
The Lorraine Port Authority and Lorraine County Transit have succeeded in developing a project that not only creates rail, water, pedestrian, bicycle and other transportation facilities, but also provides improved access to the lakefront along Lake Erie which will encourage economic development.
The City of Lorraine will make significant investments around the site for pavement, right of way, pedestrian circulation, signage and way-finding improvements.
The Black River Intermodal Transit Center will also include investment from the private sector and will serve as an effective responsible model for future urban redevelopment efforts in Lorraine.
The Black River Intermodal Transportation Center has overwhelming support from the Lorraine community. Letters of support for the project have been submitted by the Metropolitan Planning Organization for Northeast Ohio, the Ohio Department of Transportation, the Lorraine Port Authority, Lorraine County Transit, the County Board of Commissioners and the Mayor of Lorraine.
Page 664 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
I look forward to working with members of the committee, with local officials and with the people of Lorraine County to make this project a reality.
The second project in my district is the widening and resurfacing of State Route 18 in Medina County. Medina County is the fastest growing county north of Columbus and has experienced a 24 percent increase in jobs in the past 5 years. While this growth has been welcomed, significant highway improvements are necessary to alleviate the heavy traffic congestion which has resulted from the expanding commercial and residential development in the county.
The State Route 18 corridor, which connects I–71 to I–77, is heavily traveled by both local and regional traffic. In January of this year, county officials learned the long-planned widening and safety upgrade of State Route 18 had been delayed indefinitely due to the lack of availability of highway funds from the Ohio Department of Transportation.
In his letter of support for this project, the Director of the Department of Transportation, Jerry Ray, stated if it were not for the Ohio DOT's scarce resources, and financial constraints, this project would be expedited.
The unsafe and congested condition of State Route 18 needs immediate attention. In order to address this situation, the Ohio DOT and county officials have proposed construction of the road to include five lanes with a center turn lane and improved roadway profiles.
Page 665 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
The improvement of State Route 18 is important for the county's continued economic development as well. An improved roadway with greater access will generate opportunities for further commercial and industrial development along that corridor.
The project also enjoys widespread support, including the Ohio Department of Transportation, the Metropolitan Planning Organization for Northeast Ohio, the County Commissioners of Medina and the Medina County Economic Development Corporation.
I appreciate this opportunity to speak before you today and look forward to addressing any questions is you have them.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you.
Mr. Rahall?
Mr. RAHALL. I have no questions.
Mr. PICKERING. On the two projects you mentioned, the Federal funding share, do you know what that would be?
Mr. BROWN. Yes. The Lorraine Intermodal Center is $7 million and the Medina County project is $12 million.
Mr. PICKERING. Thank you very much.
Page 666 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 4 Of 5
As the last witness for the day, we appreciate your coming before the committee and look forward to working with you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Brown follows:]
[Insert here.]
Mr. PICKERING. That concludes the testimony today and the subcommittee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:35 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned, to reconvene at the call of the Chair.]
[Insert here.]
Next Hearing Segment(5)