| OCR Text |
Show Visions planning principles, which have enjoyed strong and growing support among Capital District communities. 4. Commitment to a major initiative is as much related to a subjective rationale as to objective analysis. This does not mean that a decision to reconstruct the Central Artery in Boston or a regional rail system in Raleigh-Durban is unfounded. Rather, it means that regions pursue major initiatives as much because they want to as because they believe the initiative is economically efficient in achieving results. The "look and feel" of the completed project; the desire to make a public statement of the region's priorities; the hope of lasting positive benefits are at least equal to calculations of user savings, transit Ridership, emissions reductions or cost effectiveness in the decision process. The subjective rationale for the big ticket items in the Capital District is compelling. 5. Funding is achieved through a combination of local sources and state or federal funds - reflecting a willingness to pay. The funding paradox ("We can't plan something big because we don't have money and we can't get money because we haven't planned anything big") is resolved in successful initiatives by (1) securing local financial support for a popular initiative with public support by promising external funds to vastly subsidize the local cost; and (2) leveraging the local enthusiasm and local funding commitment to obtain external (state or federal) funds from discretionary pots. The question of the willingness to pay for big ticket items has an uncertain answer in the Capital District under existing conditions. Growth pressures brought about by the high growth scenarios may influence the public on this, especially if investments are viewed as tools to manage the growth and protect and enhance community quality. Further, higher growth scenarios may lead to increases in regional transportation revenues, for example, an increase in mortgages related to higher population growth will create more revenue for funding public transit; and higher population growth will result in increasing shares of federal funds. This type of funding increase would present opportunities that would influence the public's thinking. More concentrated development patterns with urban reinvestment would support premium transit service and reduce costs per vehicle mile traveled, creating opportunities for public support of increasing revenue. Finally, forecasts of future levels of State and federal funding are uncertain; but if those funding levels were to increase, the region would be well positioned to take advantage of those funds if a consensus has been developed about the types of big initiatives that should be pursued. The recent state investments and incentives for Nanotech and chip fab industries in the Upstate communities raises the possibility that the external funding needed to help support big transportation initiatives in the Capital District may be from the state budget as much or more than from the federal budget. 6. In the absence of the conditions to support big initiatives, it is difficult to attain comparable impact through incremental changes. Incremental actions, such as those contained in CDTC's existing New Visions plan and funded in the 2005-10 Transportation Improvement Program, are different in kind as well as in scale from big initiatives that derive from a sense of urgency. For example, in the absence of expectations of rapid growth in the region, in 2000 CDTC chose a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) option for the NY 5 corridor and full implementation will not be completed until 2015. Over that same timeframe, other metropolitan areas will have built substantial regional rail systems, undertaking the difficult and expensive actions because of urgency caused by growth. The substantial commitment to rail transit in those metropolitan areas will produce a land use impact (with development more oriented to station locations) that 1/7/2010 Effects of Alternative Development Sc… cdtcmpo.org/policy/june07/wa-doc.htm 49/60 |
