The North Carolina Mobility Fund: A Chance to Bring North Carolina Transportation Policy into the 21st Century (SELC)
Transportation policy has a profound impact on the economy and the environment in North Carolina. Unlike many of its neighbors, North Carolina lacks any comprehensive growth management law, and so more than any other statewide policy, transportation plans dictate how North Carolina grows. Until now, state policy has focused on highways, fueling an expensive cycle of sprawl development patterns. This pattern of growth has made North Carolinians more dependent on driving in their daily lives, and it has had significant noise, water quality, wildlife habitat, air quality, and other environment impacts across the state. Today, in most North Carolina metropolitan areas the transportation sector accounts for over half of smog emissions. And statewide, it has been estimated to contribute 29% of North Carolina’s gross greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions. Such impacts are bound to grow without a significant policy change at the state level. The recent creation of the North Carolina Mobility Fund may mark the first step towards such a change.
North Carolina’s policy shift would take advantage of emerging federal transportation policies. President Obama recently announced a $50 billion transportation investment plan that will work towards the goal of providing alternatives to the automobile for travel, and other changes to reduce oil consumption, lower greenhouse gas emissions, and expand access to job opportunities and housing that’s affordable. A long-term framework includes plans for a national high-speed rail system, expansion of public transportation systems, and a national infrastructure bank to fund merit-based grants, building on reforms set in place during the implementation of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
Like the recent federal programs, North Carolina’s new transportation legislation breaks with the past practice of formula-based spending focused on new highway construction. The 2010 Appropriations Act creates the “Mobility Fund,” a revenue source for projects “of statewide and regional significance that relieve congestion and enhance mobility across all modes of transportation.” N.C. Sess. Law 2010-31 § 28.7(b). It is endowed with $173 million from fiscal year 2011 to fiscal year 2014, and $58 million each fiscal year thereafter, and much of this is designated for an “initial project” that would widen Interstate 85 outside of Charlotte. But the potential of the Mobility Fund lies not so much in the projects that its initial funding allocation may finance, as in the policy reforms that it may set in place.
The Mobility Fund provides a critical follow-up to the Congestion Relief and Intermodal Transportation 21st Century Fund Bill, popularly referred to as the “Intermodal Bill.” N.C. Sess. Law 2009-527 codified at N.C.G.S. § 136-251(2). The Intermodal Bill established a statewide grant program for public transportation and rail projects, but the program was never funded. Now, to comply with the law, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (“NCDOT”) must create a project selection process to disburse the Mobility Fund, which gives “preferential consideration” for projects targeted by the Intermodal Bill. And because the Intermodal Bill links transportation funding eligibility to various land use and environmental criteria, it could spark a broader integration of transportation and land use policy.
Currently, North Carolina’s transportation policy is dominated by the Highway Trust Fund law, which mandates the construction of ten urban beltways and dozens of major highway expansions in less developed areas. No comprehensive study has ever been completed to justify these construction plans from a traffic engineering, economic development or environmental perspective. To the contrary, the most recent studies, such as the 21st Century Transportation Committee’s report to the 2009 General Assembly, point to the need for a more focused approach. For now, however, the Highway Trust Fund mandate remains in place, and its scattershot approach is magnified by the so-called “Equity Formula,” which allocates transportation funding on the basis of arbitrary administrative districts, and results in some rural areas receiving over twice the funding of major metro areas on a per capita basis.
In creating the Mobility Fund, the North Carolina General Assembly stated its support for “all modes of transportation,” N.C. Sess. Law 2010-31, § 28.7(a), and expressly exempted the Fund from the Equity Formula and programming requirements of the Highway Trust Fund. To the contrary, the law conditions NCDOT’s project selection criteria for the Mobility Fund to the requirements of the Intermodal Bill, a law premised on the finding that “congestion continues to worsen” under the Highway Trust Fund building program, that “most of North Carolina’s growth is in its urban regions,” and that the “increased use of rail for transport of freight will reduce highway congestion as well as allow economic expansion.” N.C.G.S. 136-251. The Intermodal Bill’s land use and environmental objectives could help to set in place a statewide project selection process that takes these factors into account, initiating a transformation of the state’s transportation policy.
Shortly after coming into office, Governor Perdue directed the Secretary of Transportation to develop a “professional approval process for highway projects,” in response to widespread perception that transportation planning decisions were politically motivated. Since then, NCDOT has developed a statewide project selection process, but it has many flaws and does little to alter the status quo. For example, the project ranking process shields high-cost new construction projects from comparisons with more modest roadway upgrades or maintenance projects, or from rail, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian projects. None of the criteria consider land use or environmental impacts, relying instead on engineering metrics, such as a roadway’s “Level of Service” rating, which tend to focus on short-term, often temporary, congestion relief. Discretionary rankings from local officials and NCDOT division staff control up to half of the overall rankings for some projects, yet surprisingly, only the ranking criteria for urban loop projects consider cost. The resulting transportation plans have been heavily focused on new highway construction, and exhibit few differences from past plans.
By contrast, the Mobility Fund project selection process, with its mandate to give “preferential consideration” to Intermodal Fund projects, can be expected to differ dramatically from NCDOT’s current practice. Under the Intermodal Fund Bill, a city, county or local transportation authority must demonstrate “an adequate and sustainable source of funding established for its share of project costs,” N.C.G.S. 136-252(b)(4), and its transit plan must meet various objectives. These include congestion relief, the traditional focus of North Carolina transportation policy, but also environmental factors, such as improving air quality and reducing energy consumption. They also include land use objectives, which may have the potential for the most dramatic change in state policy. Criteria based on these objectives would prompt local governments to establish affordable housing inventories, promote “mixed-use” zoning, make urban centers safe for bicycles and pedestrians, provide transit access to poorer communities, and take other planning steps in order to qualify for state funding. See N.C.G.S. 136-252(b)(2). Such an incentive structure would be in stark contrast to the current state of affairs, which primarily encourages local governments to identify locations for new highway capacity in order to receive state transportation funding.
The Intermodal Bill objectives should provide the foundation for the Department’s selection process for Mobility Fund applicants. They are broad enough to apply as criteria to all projects, and could even favor highway projects with the appropriate design and overall land use plan. Incorporating these directives into the Mobility Fund selection criteria would be consistent with the Mobility Fund law’s “preferential consideration” requirement. It would also advance other state policies, such as the Ambient Air Quality Improvement Act’s goal “to reduce the growth of vehicle miles traveled in the State by at least twenty-five percent (25%),” N.C. Sess. Law 1999-328, and NCDOT’s own mission to operate with “environmental sensitivity,” a consideration that currently does not factor into the Department’s project selection process.
The bulk of the state’s transportation budget continues to target highway construction as a means of moving people and goods across the state, without a clear policy defining statewide transportation priorities. The Mobility Fund, however, could succeed in diversifying the state’s transportation investment portfolio and bringing some coherence to statewide transportation and land use policies. On October 1, 2010, NCDOT will report to the Joint Legislative Transportation Oversight Committee (“JLTOC”) with its preliminary plan for allocating the Fund. For further information and updates on the Mobility Fund project selection process, as well as contact information for interested parties seeking to submit public comment, please see http://www.ncdot.gov/about/finance/mobilityfund/
Thomas Gremillion is an Associate Attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center’s North Carolina and South Carolina Office in Chapel Hill.
Article Date: Friday, October 15, 2010
Written By: Thomas M. Gremillion
Last Update: Friday, October 15, 2010
