Posts Tagged ‘ Transportation ’

Metro Prez Candidates Debate Growth, Bridges and Traffic

January 20, 2010
By

The three leading candidates for Metro Council President talked about growth, bridges, traffic and more during a forum Tuesday night.

It was billed as a chance for all of them to address issues surrounding sustainability. But they also talked about affordable housing, white flight, and issues of inequality. Since many of those in the audience were Metro employees, they discussed workplace respect and health care benefits.

I’ve edited the forum into three video segments focusing on some of the environmental related issues raised at the event.

Read more »

Greenroads: Building Sustainable Highways

January 14, 2010
By

The Greenroads system evaluates a road's environmental and social impact. Photo from University of Washington.

In a region that practically worships mass transit and bicycles, the poor old-fashioned roadway doesn’t get much respect. Roads get blamed for encouraging traffic, congestion, pollution and sprawl. But unless you live, work and play in a city, it’s hard to imagine getting around without them.

So is there a greener way to build a road? A group of Pacific Northwest researchers and engineers think they’ve found an answer. They’re calling it Greenroads.

Read more »

Green Groups Unhappy With Transportation Bill, Call For Changes

May 22, 2009
By

Not that long ago, Oregon’s top environmental groups were optimistic, almost excited, about getting more money for mass transit, biking and walkable neighborhoods. They put their hopes in House Bill 2001, the giant transportation bill that will guide spending over the next two years.

My how things have changed.

Late this week, those same groups say the bill has morphed into a money for roads bill that leaves little to spend on other forms of transportation. “What started as a balanced transportation package has become an $840 million highway funding bill that takes the state backward,” says Bob Stacey, with 1000 Friends of Oregon. “We can’t support the package in its current form.”

HB 2001 includes a list of 50 road building or road widening projects for Oregon.  But only 37 of them are funded in the bill.  The money would come from increased gas taxes and vehicle fees.

In a letter to Governor Kulongoski, the groups are calling for three major changes.

  • Require plans for cutting global warming pollution from cars and trucks in the fastest growing areas of the state.  Right now, the bill only includes the Portland metro area.
  • Increase spending on bicycle and pedestrian projects to a minimum of 1.5% of what’s spent for roads.  Or create a new funding source for these kinds projects.
  • Have the Transportation Commission review the road projects in the bill and decide if they really are the best way to spend the money.  The current list has been criticized as pork because many of the projects have been submitted by individual lawmakers.

The letter was signed by 1000 Friends of Oregon, Oregon Environmental Council, Environment Oregon, the Bicycle Transportation Alliance, and the Oregon League of Conservation Voters.

For an interesting perspective on the issue, see this posting by former senatorial candidate Steve Novick on Blue Oregon.

The Special Joint Committee On Transportation held a hearing on HB 2001 Thursday night, and continues work on the bill starting at 1pm in Hearing Room F. If you can’t be there in person you can follow along via streaming video on the Oregon Channel website.

Enviro Groups Have High Hopes For Transportation Bill

April 27, 2009
By

Environmental groups are hoping to score some big victories this week with House Bill 2001, the transportation bill.

After more than a week of behind the scenes negotiations, and public meetings, the House Transportation Committee is poised to vote on the bill.  Perhaps as soon as tomorrow.  How important is it?  Brock Howell of Environment Oregon says this could be, “The most progressive transportation bill – ever.”

Here’s what Environment Oregon and 1000 Friends of Oregon hope will be in the bill when it finally gets out of committee.

Regional Planning:

Environmental groups want the state’s three largest planning councils to officially include greenhouse gas reductions goals in the planning process.  The areas covered are Portland metro, Salem-Keizer, and Eugene-Springfield.  The benefits?  We should see more planning for bike lanes, high capacity bus lanes, mass transit, and neighborhoods that are easier to get around without using the car.  Planning is the first step in making sure these projects really get built.

More Money For Green Projects:

Read more »

Thursday’s Enviro Agenda In Salem

April 23, 2009
By

Three big environmental projects in Salem today, starting with…

Greenhouse gas reductions:

The big event of the day comes this afternoon when the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee resumes work on a bill to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In Senate Bill 80, utilities and transportation companies have to find ways to reduce emissions and help the state reach the goals agreed upon in the 2007 legislature. Those goals are reducing emissions at least 10% below 1990 levels by 2020, and at least 75% below 1990 levels by 2050. Factories, and other “stationary” sources of greenhouse gas would get a five year break to develop a voluntary program.

Business groups have lobbied hard against the bill, warning that the costs of meeting these goals will hurt the state’s economy and cost jobs. Considering the current economic situation, it’s no surprise that their arguments are getting striking home with legislators. There were more behind the scene talks this week on a possible compromise.

Updating The Bottle Bill:

Read more »

Oregon Climate Change Debate: Leadership Vs. Going It Alone

April 10, 2009
By

Depending on who you believe….

If Oregon moves ahead with greenhouse gas reductions, it will cement our role as a leader on green issues, grow our renewable energy businesses and create jobs, and helps Oregonians save money because we’ll learn to conserve energy.

Or… moving ahead before the rest of the country is risky, raising the cost of doing business and puts Oregon companies at a disadvantage, drives up the price of electricity and threatens jobs.

These are the central arguments before and against Senate Bill 80, legislation that sets in motion a plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Oregon. Members of the Senate Environmental and Natural Resources Committee listened to witnesses on both sides of the debate during Thursday’s hearing, but took no action. The hearing will continue next week.

SB 80 gives large utilities and transportation companies about 18 months to work with state agencies on plans to lower greenhouse gases. Heavy industry gets about five years to work on a voluntary plan. The goal is to reduce emissions 10% below 1990 levels by 2020, and 75% below 1990 levels by 2050.

The most dire warnings came from PGE and Pacific Power, who said the bill would cost them billions of dollars and dramatically raise power rates. Dave Robertson of PGE said to meet these goals they’d have to shut down some power plants and build new ones at cost of about $7 billion. He said customers would see their bill jump 75-100% by the year 2020.

Marcy Putnam with IBEW local 125 also argued against the bill. Her union has hundreds of members working at older power plants in economically depressed areas of the state. She’s worried that the bill will force these plants to close and jobs will be lost. She warned that if the state adopts such a plan before the rest of the country, “Oregon is on this path by itself.”

Many of the witnesses opposed to the bill said a national solution was the way to go and Oregon should wait for Congress to approve a greenhouse gas reduction law.

But environmentalists said it was time for Oregon to show leadership on global warming. Andrea Durbin of the Oregon Environmental Council praised the bill for its flexibility because it gives each major sector a chance to develop its own plan. “We’re not going to see action in Oregon until we have a process for moving forward,” she said.

Dennis Wilde of Gerding Edlen rejected the notion that helping the environment will hurt the economy. He said they are not competing goals and that the bill will focus investments in clean energy. “We believe this bill,” said Wilde, “will help push Oregon towards a strong renewable economy.”

Witnesses from renewable energy companies said the bill would help them grow their businesses and that as more clean energy sources become available, Oregon could meet those goals without economic hardship.

To leave a comment, please click on the “Continue reading” link.

Read more »

Tight Budgets Mean More Litter In Clark County

April 6, 2009
By

If you think you’re seeing more litter along highways in Clark County, you’re not crazy. According to a story in the Columbian, Washington DOT is having trouble keeping up with the mess. DOT tells the paper its road crews are still busy with repairs from the hard winter. Plus, money is tight and they’ve got less to spend on hiring prison crews to pick up litter.