Transportation Blueprint:
Streamline – Embrace measures aimed at increasing efficiency, eliminating waste, and saving money.
Implement measures to streamline NCDOT. Much of the waste at NCDOT is a result of the nature of bureaucracy. Whether implementing the recommendations of the 2007 McKinsey report, or implementing other bold reforms, NCDOT must avoid bureaucratic inefficiency and mission creep. Once projects have been completed, fiscal and human resources must be recommitted to other priority projects.
Institute a prioritization plan for all projects on the Transportation Improvement Program. Funds should be allocated to projects to maximize the number of high-priority projects completely funded. This approach should take into account all of the state’s most pressing transportation needs, including new construction, system maintenance, and efficiency upgrades for congested areas. Projects should be prioritized according to such measures as vehicle-miles traveled, safety, and funding availability. Any project that does not meet prioritization criteria must be approved by the General Assembly as separate legislation (not as part of the Budget Bill or other omnibus legislation).
|
The Little Things: A Holistic Approach |
|
In 2001 and 2002 Governor Easley and the General Assembly took transportation funds from the Highway Trust Fund for a one-time upgrade in areas like traffic signal optimization and intersection channelization. These projects should instead be built into transportation budgets in a continual effort to improve the system. Improvement projects should not be carried out at the expense of high-priority new construction like urban loops and freeways. An ongoing improvement program should include: >Signal optimization, which allows stop lights to be timed for efficient traffic flows. |
Reasonably limit environmental impact assessments to prevent delays. Isolate problem areas instead of instituting blanket policies that bog down vital infrastructure projects. For example, an area that has already been sufficiently studied for environmental impacts for other projects should not generally require a new study in order to widen a road. (See box "Environmental Impact Delays" below.)
Encourage public-private partnerships (PPPs). According to a 2004 Federal Highway Report to Congress at least 31 public-private partnership projects have been implemented in 11 states. Through these partnerships, private entities pay the capital costs of HOT lanes and tollways upfront, and are reimbursed through the tolls collected once the roadways are built. While the private entity will profit in the long run, citizens gain more efficient roadways built more quickly, and many of these projects pay for themselves. To ensure that contracts are awarded in the state’s best interest, an agency outside of NCDOT should have primary responsibility for the bidding and award process.
Improve Traffic Flow. Congestion in urban areas and towns is an issue requiring greater attention. There are two major ways to help improve traffic:
• Construct High-Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes. Conversion to HOT lanes would allow drivers to pay to use lower-traffic lanes. Not only do the lanes help pay for themselves, they lighten traffic for drivers in other lanes as well. HOT lanes have been built in Texas and California to great success. Other congestion pricing measures should be studied and considered.
• Create a program for continuous improvements. Ongoing attention to small details that affect system-wide performance is crucial to the success of our transportation system. (See box: The Little Things: A Holistic Approach)
|
Environmental Impact Delays |
|
Out of concern over the pace of Trust Fund and other DOT projects, the Joint Legislative Committee on Transportation Oversight commissioned a study by the Dye Management group of DOT project delivery. The study found that the delivery of construction projects had become more difficult and complex over the years. One reason was that the Highway Trust Fund law, which required DOT to pursue the construction of specific projects, did not take into account whether these projects could be permitted and approved by environmental agencies, and whether these projects were still regional or local priorities at the time of construction. |
Back to TABLE of CONTENTS