Road Pricing: Public Perceptions and Program Development (2011) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Appendix F - Interview Summaries Related to Communication and Engagement
Appendix F - Interview Summaries Related to Communication and Engagement
Pages 114-129
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 114... ...
Table 11 summarizes the interview findings. City of San Francisco: Areawide Pricing Proposal and Variable Parking Pricing In San Francisco, planners at the San Francisco County Transportation Authority are studying areawide road pricing involving a $3 fee to enter, leave, or pass through certain parts of the city during peak hours, generating revenues in support of transit, cycling, and possibly more regional transit parking.
|
From page 115... ...
Agency and Project NYCDOT Office of Planning and Sustainability: Park Smart On-Street Pricing Program Content Framing of pricing: Frame peak pricing of parking as Way to reduce cruising and associated traffic, improve safety, reduce violations, and reduce cost of violations to delivery trucks passed through to businesses and customers; not as way to drive commuters to off-street parking as there are few commuters on-street, surveys find Voluntary program where neighborhoods can opt in or stay out of parking pricing; also frame as pilot with 6-month evaluation followed by possibility of termination after that Audience targeting: Used Business and neighborhood association allies ("advanced troops") used to "drum up interest" among various affected parties in the area Several one-to-one meetings with community boards and businesses districts Environmental/funding issues: One listed goal in the Sustainable Streets plan is reduced pollution, and is fitting with many efforts to reduce "miles driven" in DOT strategic plan, Sustainable Streets An advantage to parking pricing program is it did not require the same level of environmental scrutiny as compared to congestion pricing studied for NY, so no need to communicate NEPA requirements and processes Equity: Fairness across businesses more important than income equity "Sidewalk surveys" important to demonstrate how and when shoppers arrive, to counter concern about inequitable adverse impacts on some retail businesses and those highly dependent on timely deliveries Context Respondent's view of government image: Bolstered by City council and planners pitched as facilitators of a voluntary program, not as those imposing a program decided upon outside the community; "big bad DOT" image countered by fashioning programs for each area according to preferences Fostered responsiveness and "transparency" by holding transportation "seminars" for all 59 city community boards Listed specific transportation and parking project accomplishments on agency website and in Sustainable Streets, 2009 Progress Report Reference to programs elsewhere: No reference to programs elsewhere in communications, though planners have been watching and talking to San Francisco program for latest developments Attention to stakeholder views: Special attention to delivery business stakeholders to ensure that the program does not affect their delivery, and retailers to ensure that customer traffic would not be affected Also addressed residential stakeholders' concerns by monitoring spillover from commercial corridor into residential streets Vehicles Content: Park Smart website lists range of goals from increasing parking availability to improved safety, reduced cruising congestion, and less associated pollution Also lists trial sites and prices and highlights "merchant involvement" and support via sale of parking cards and displaying Park Smart logo 311 info website also lists similar information; "user feedback" encouraged via public forums and websites Sustainable Streets offers a Q and A section on parking programs, rates, use instructions, operation hours, etc.
|
From page 116... ...
Agency and Project San Francisco County Transportation Authority: Mobility, Access and Pricing Study (MAPS) and SFPark Content Framing of pricing: Doyle Drive pricing plan framed as congestion relief and financing for major improvements MAPS framed as congestion relief, finance for transportation improvements including BRT, support of "economic vitality" and environmental benefit SFPark framed as improving parking availability, reducing cruising, pricing changing with demand Audience targeting: Doyle Drive showed importance of targeting Marin County decision makers who objected to and halted pricing plan as unfair to Marin County commuters (see "Equity")
|
From page 117... ...
Agency and Project San Francisco Bay Area MTC: Regional HOT Network Content Framing of pricing: Framed as expediting development of HOV network over and above what regular funding would allow, with HOT element as key to financing system and returning revenue to the same corridors where it is generated Audience targeting: Key actors included CMA directors, BATA (Bay Area Toll Authority -- toll authority for bridge tolls) , Caltrans, and CHP, all part of HOT Executive Committee concerned with finance, operations, and enforcement No specific targeting to environmental or auto interests [they do have input via standing Planning Committee and SPUR (SF Planning and Urban Research -- an SF group concerned with HOT air quality impacts)
|
From page 118... ...
, but AAA involved; also attempted to reach out to petroleum companies but they resisted "controversial" concept Public targeted via 3 public hearings to begin pilot, continuously involved via website and community meetings as go for "permanent pilot;" since "public" still not "on board" (key legislators are supportive, including important Senator as champion) ; in hindsight perhaps should have used focus groups to develop most effective messages rather than just instructional materials for pilot Should have been less in "reactive" and "trial and error" mode Also should have started with more fixed variables in concept -- emphasis on "flexibility" scared some members of the public due to uncertainty about what future pricing would bring Media not targeted at first, only after their negative response; they eventually "came around" but no "media plan" to target them was a mistake Environmental/funding issues: Environmental groups wanted variations in pricing more attuned to emissions, although this viewpoint was not specified or accommodated in the program Equity: Urban versus rural important as equity issue since rural travelers generate more VMT; it is also difficult for rural public to estimate whether better off under gas tax or VMT fees; try to counter by making fee system simple Double paying another perceived fairness issue, as public perceives gas tax and mileage-fee system in combination -- voluntary switch over may counter this concern Context Respondent's view of government image: General suspicion of government always an issue -- government seen as inefficient and money grabbing DOT image is "pretty good" in terms of getting things done, maybe in top 10 nationwide, so not a big point of contention (continued on next page)
|
From page 119... ...
ODOT communications people did not want involvement during concept development stage but assisted enthusiastically once pilot began Used newsletters and press communications stressing themes of sustainable support for transportation, flexibility by location and congestion Vehicles Content: Relied quite heavily initially on individual explanations of rationales via e-mails in response to comments and criticisms Reference to programs elsewhere: No references indicated Attention to stakeholder views: Task force designed to pitch concept to key decision makers and stakeholders, and at the outset tailored program design via focus group for designing instructional materials for pilot Changed from central to fuel station billing to reduce public (driver) concern for double billing, and changed from transmitting coordinates to counting only mileage via on-vehicle devices to address privacy issue Should have heeded public concern for more specific pricing plan as public dislikes uncertainty Puget Sound Region: HOT Lanes, Variable Bridge Tolls, and Pricing in Regional Plan In the Puget Sound area, the SR-167 HOT lane project is operating and is slated for extension and possible merging with a planned I-405 HOT lane.
|
From page 120... ...
as "legislative direction" References lack of sustainable funding under current gas tax system, indicating that no tolling means "traditional" sources will need rate adjustment, indexing, more reliance on general fund, taxes on sales Indicates federal revenues in 2009 will be inadequate to meet SAFETEA-LU "spending guarantees" Big unresolved finance issue now is whether to dedicate toll revenue to toll facilities or broader uses Regional plan discussion also indicates must-have "financially constrained" component, with balanced costs and revenues, supportive of pricing Equity: RTP discussion framed and discussed around Income differences How toll revenues may link with fairness issue of "paying twice" if supporting transit via tolls and sales tax (may roll back or "rebase" if toll revenues grow) Context Respondent's view of government image: No particular negative image presently for PSRC in plan development; agency generally respected Effort to get lots of public and decision-maker input which may keep image as "responsive" Used "model peer review" group for SR-520 work to bolster credibility of planning model Reference to programs elsewhere: Tacoma Narrows referenced in toll discussions, including SR-520 FAQ documents, especially focusing on operations with "non-stop" toll collection Emphasized that "experiences in other cities in the U.S.
|
From page 121... ...
Vehicles Content: Regional plan references "reliability," time savings and emissions control; also pitches gas tax as "toll"-like road pricing in town halls, i.e., another user fee drivers may not calculate on per mile basis SR-520 public information stresses "variable tolls can help relieve congestion" giving people "incentive to change travel times, reduce optional trips, take an alternate route, or choose transit as an alternative to driving alone," also emphasizes transit expansion and electronic signs for real-time traffic information SR-520 examples of vehicles for soliciting wide range of input include meetings with cities, town halls, open houses, decision-maker and press interactions SR-520 information presented "to more than 40 elected officials, jurisdictions, and stakeholder groups during the spring and summer of 2008 … these included meetings with community and civic groups such as the Bellevue Downtown Association and Transportation Choices Coalition, along with many local city councils and elected representatives" SR-520 also has special project website that summarizes media and public reactions in a report (input from 2,770 people, many from letter-writing campaigns sponsored by Sierra Club and Mercer island residents) Attention to stakeholder views: Regular interaction with key stakeholder decision-maker groups, including WA State Commission for overall tolling in state, Transportation Policy Board, Pricing Task Force at regional level, and specific groups associated with project planning, for example SR-520 Table 16.
|
From page 122... ...
. Agency and Project Los Angeles Metro: I-10, I-110, I-210 HOT Lanes and Downtown Parking Pricing Plan federal approval, with support and encouragement of federal VP actors Worked with regional planning agency to amend 2001 plan to include I-10 and I110 projects, and I-210 if funding became available, though there was little challenge or concern by regional planning agency actors Outreach by LACMTA staff to several Council of Government (COG)
|
From page 123... ...
Paul HOT lanes -- communication and engagement. Agency and Project Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota: I-394 and I-35W HOT Lanes Content Framing of pricing: HOT lanes framed overall as getting better use from underutilized HOV lanes while preserving and enhancing transit use on the HOT facilities Emphasized as "congestion free choice" with no one worse off, and a fixable or reversible project if conditions worsened in unexpected ways De-emphasized revenue generation and emphasized congestion management and improved travel options Did not explore pricing of existing lanes for future, but now exploring the use of shoulders (e.g., I-94)
|
From page 124... ...
. Agency and Project Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota: I-394 and I-35W HOT Lanes Vehicles Content: "No question unanswered" approach in content of meetings and workshops important element Vehicles include University of Minnesota and MnDOT use of public roundtables on "Rethinking Transportation Finance" for key leaders Legislative seminars on transportation issues Hired consultant to help develop vehicles and content of presentation materials, feed media; also used publicity video For newest HOT plan I-35W, local mayors were targeted and are now engaged; planner responsiveness to Task Force shown by initial proposal for $8 max and $0.50 min charge, but Task Force thought minimum value was too high and proposed $0.25, which was accepted as "politically palatable" even though it results in reduced revenues; media targeted to make sure they had "all information" Dallas Region: Various Tolling and Managed Lane Projects In the Dallas metropolitan region, there are several toll roads that will include variable pricing, following adopted regional policy.
|
From page 125... ...
, I-30, I-35E, Southwest Parkway Content Framing of pricing: Supporting MPO policy from 15 years ago provides key framework: region does not have sufficient gas tax to meet "capacity needs"; any freeway reconstruction will test for "express lane" feasibility; but existing free lanes will not be tolled Also pitched that there is plenty of capacity but not at all times of day, so pricing can shift and reduce peak demand and speeds can be "guaranteed" because of dynamic pricing, where applied to tolled managed facilities Framed in terms of how much we really "pay" for transportation and how old and inadequate infrastructure will be burden on "children and grandchildren," so if we won't tax selves via legislature or congress, we need to pay the right amount now to get at sustainability, especially if external costs of safety, congestion, air quality, climate change, and energy are accounted for Audience targeting: Forty elected officials at NCTCOG gave unanimous support for tolls; support is continually nurtured by "monthly communications" from staff on rationale and purposes of tolls to "keep in the fold" Generally used same messages across groups Tried to maintain support with locals in part by alluding to congress and state legislature as either not up to the job or diverting funds, compared to user fees where "we" more local powers can ensure that funds are spent on local roads and transit Environmental/funding issues: As non-attainment area, very important to tie road pricing to emissions inventories for mobile sources, whole concept of managed lanes would not have "its wings" if not tied to the ozone problem Relied on reality of diminished federal funding for roads in urban areas as central to tolling rationale; toll revenues also enable transit support not otherwise possible (see next) ; for PPP projects, revenues pay back operating costs and upfront construction costs Equity: Environmental justice analysis shows equity is not a problem in terms of accessibility to jobs, i.e., geographic/spatial equity for road pricing projects is acceptable Stressed toll revenues as enabling transit support, e.g., (121 project)
|
From page 126... ...
, use of newsletter Entirely open process so all can "give their 2 cents worth"; sent out 8,000 notices every time they did public meetings, so no complaints about lack of information about meetings Did public surveys including a panel over time on toll road attitudes Key actor (former chair of TxDOT) coined vital supporting phrase, "slow roads, no roads or toll roads" in support of PPP legislation Cleared misconceptions and clarified communications content on managed lanes about all lanes versus just express lanes being tolled Stressed new capacity with pricing (e.g., LBJ freeway adds capacity via frontage roads)
|
From page 127... ...
Agency and Project New York City Department of Transportation and NYC Mayor's Office: Proposed Areawide Pricing Plan Content Framing of pricing: Framed in terms of transportation needs in light of growing population, need for managing congestion and shifting more to transit, not air quality or climate change Emphasized that transit service would be increased before the start of charging or at the same time as revenue stream starts flowing Frame impact has been weakened by current economic recession where major capital funding for MTA looms larger, and congestion has diminished in case of traffic and transit ridership; therefore impetus for PlaNYC diminished Audience targeting: NYCDOT and Mayor's Office tailored communication for specific stakeholders Separate meetings were organized with transit and traffic communities, with general public, constant community meetings with community boards, small and large businesses, and outreach to environmental organizations and environmental justice constituencies There were different messages to different groups: o Drivers -- Reduced travel time o Transit riders -- Transit funding o Big business -- Street efficiency o Small business -- Ease of compliance, since most small businesses rely heavily on driving o Labor -- Jobs created because of construction of new subway lines Environmental/funding issues: Environmental issues were not a big driver, although always referenced as one of three prime goals (congestion reduction, transit support, air quality improvement) Climate change is not an obvious plus for RP, e.g., if the problem was idling, the competing solution is encouraging hybrids ownership and transit fleet conversion, not clearly linked to RP RP revenues were proposed to fund a special Transit Capital Improvements account for transit enhancements Equity: The "thorniest groups" were the organizations advocating for outerborough commuters, who felt pricing was inequitable for drivers without a viable transit alternative to driving.
|
From page 128... ...
and also pointed out significant number of commuters are from "out of state" so some appeal for outsiders paying their fair share HOT lanes were framed as allowing choice to pay (no forcing) and avoid congestion, producing some congestion relief on mixed traffic lanes, and making more congestion free lanes available to transit Priced new ICC lanes were presented as providing a fast by-pass shortcut between two heavily congested freeways; managed lanes promise of "largely self-financing" new highway capacity was part of the frame Audience targeting: Although three consultations with MD secretary of transportation garnered support for HOV conversion along US-50, the previous governor was swayed by opposition to "Lexus lanes" Still interacting with opponents of I-395/95 HOT lanes to be operated as a PPP For northern VA HOT lanes, VDOT and private sector partner "have done careful nurturing through well crafted outreach activities to generate and sustain the supporting constituency," and thus far the two projects received "close scrutiny" by the entire Transportation Planning Board and were adopted in the region's long-range plan (continued on next page)
|
From page 129... ...
Maryland DOT as one key actor involves other state agencies like the MD Toll Authority and relevant MPOs in planning and outreach In 2000s, FHWA VPPP grant funded workshop to inform key stakeholders and "opened the door" for further exploratory studies and discussions by VDOT, eventually leading to the PPP agreement for Beltway/I-495 HOT lane project Maryland ICC project has been supported by businesses (chambers of commerce, etc.) , trucking interests, and a majority of the region's planners; it has been opposed by many, but not all, of the environmental community and corridor residents Vehicles Content: Three involved states conducted multiple public information meetings and public hearings Established a website and means of responding to individual queries, held stakeholder meetings TPB held public hearings and workshops, consulted with TPB Transit Advisory Committee, conducted citizens meetings during environmental review process, held marketing campaigns, disseminated information at retail kiosks, and engaged the press Each state and jurisdiction relied upon established community outreach and consultation strategies: community meetings, websites, newspaper ads, public hearings, focus groups and surveys Key stakeholder group to target and attend to views is the Transportation Planning Board (TPB)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.