MAINTAINING EXISTING ASSETS
The Center for Neighborhood Technology
www.cnt.org
August 2003
This review will be more easily understood as annotated comments on problem areas in the 2030 RTP.* The 2030 RTP was considered from the point of view of public comment
during 2001 and 2002, particularly the comment found in
Changing Direction: Transportation Choices for 2030.**
Thematic issues that impact this section include:
·
Reduction in regional commitment to existing infrastructure, from 80% to 77%, a $1.8 billion drain of resources from existing communities.
* Available at
http://www.sp2030.com/CommentSite/index.html
.
**Available at
http://www.cnt.org/tsp/trans/ctaqc/cc/theplan.htm
The chart below offers specific page references and quotes from the Regional Transportation Plan and commentary on why each quote is relevant or problematic
Page Quote
Comment
4
Of that ($61 B), an estimated $47 Billion will be needed to
maintain the existing transportation system in a state of good
repair.
This is a significant reduction in commitment to existing infrastructure,
from 80% to 77%, a $1.8 billion dollar difference to existing
communities.
21
Goal: Maintain the integrity of the existing transportation
system. . . . This includes maximizing existing and new
transportation infrastructure and service efficiency through
effective transportation management and operations practice.
. . . "maximizing existing transportation" in the first draft, became
"maximizing existing and new transportation" in the final draft, reducing
the emphasis on existing assets and older communities.
38
Most transportation facilities are constructed to last 20-50
years.
There is no discussion of differing maintenance and reconstruction
schedules. The average life of a sidewalk or a rail line is different than
the average life of a highway.
39
The RTP's goal of maintaining the integrity of the existing
transportation system also recognizes the discretion necessary
to keep the existing system in a state of good repair while
addressing the changing mobility needs of the region with new
facilities.
The maintenance "priority" is always tempered by language that
prioritizes new construction.
46
. . . significant new segments to the region's major highway and
passenger rail system were introduced with the intent of
accommodating or managing forecast growth.
There is no commitment to redirecting growth to disinvested
communities; instead taxpayers in existing communities finance the
drain of investment from their own communities.
119
In a dense urban area, nearly all major project proposals are
able to forecast some benefit to travelers and transportation
system performance.
This plan devotes a large proportion of new investment (over 50%) to
the portions of the region that are sparsely populated, therefore the
projects have little benefit to existing communities and may deplete
resources needed for existing communities.