March 18, 2007
RALEIGH – Future road congestion could threaten North Carolina’s economy, but Triad regions earn grades of B+ or B in preparing for congestion growth. That’s according to a new Policy Report from the John Locke Foundation and Reason Foundation.
Greensboro and High Point get B+ grades, while Winston-Salem and Burlington earn B grades. Just three of the state’s 17 metropolitan regions earned higher grades. Asheville, Goldsboro, and Jacksonville topped the list with A- grades. In contrast, Charlotte earned a D, the state’s worst grade.
“The Greensboro area has generally positioned itself well to deal with rising traffic,” said study author David Hartgen, Professor of Transportation Studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. “But its plan is based on several critical assumptions. Those assumptions include the availability of funds to complete necessary projects, and the likelihood that projects will be completed on time and budget.”
The Winston-Salem region also has the right elements to deal with traffic congestion, Hartgen said. “The region needs to significantly increase its attention to congestion as a rising – but solvable – issue and deal with it soberly and practically.”
Hartgen calls High Point’s long-range plan a “sound first step.” The Burlington region is in a “reasonably positive position” to deal with congestion reduction, he said.
Congestion in North Carolina will more than double over the next 25 years, Hartgen said. Congestion in Triad cities will grow about the same. “Charlotte drivers will face the same type of traffic delays Chicago drivers face now. Raleigh’s delay will nearly double, to present-day Minneapolis levels. Even smaller cities like Rocky Mount will see a significant increase in traffic delays.”
State and local planners are not targeting enough transportation dollars toward reducing those delays, said Hartgen, a JLF adjunct policy analyst. “That increased congestion threatens the state’s economic future,” he said. “Yet many regions have ignored the problem and propose spending limited transportation funds on ineffective projects that will not likely affect congestion.”
The new study builds on a 2006 report Hartgen prepared for the Los Angeles-based Reason Foundation, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization founded in 1968 that advances a free society by developing, applying, and promoting libertarian principles, including individual liberty, free markets, and the rule of law.
The Reason report showed traffic delays would increase by 65 percent across the United States by 2030. North Carolina needs to spend $12.4 billion to clear congested urban roads and prepare for traffic growth in the next 25 years, according to that report.
For his new report, Hartgen reviewed more than 1,300 specific transportation projects planned for each North Carolina region’s transportation plan. Hartgen evaluated each project based on its likely impact on congestion relief, then compared that impact to the congestion growth forecast for the region.
North Carolina does not need new funding to address the congestion problem, Hartgen said. “The report recommends using existing planned funds for congestion relief,” he said. “In some cities, ‘balance’ in transportation funding needs to be redefined. Instead of saying that transit programs should get 20-50 percent of funds, modes of transportation should get funds in proportion to their demand.”
Hartgen’s report offers nearly 20 recommendations for the state and more targeted recommendations for the Greensboro, Winston-Salem, High Point, and Burlington regions. Greensboro recommendations include: reassessing the existing plan’s financial balance; increasing the focus on arterial improvements; identifying and removing bottlenecks; and moving forward with the Outer Loop.
Winston-Salem recommendations include: increasing the focus on signal optimization and signal improvements; address bottlenecks; and investigating high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes.
High Point recommendations include: finishing the U.S. 311 bypass, particularly the connection to Interstate 85; increasing attention to intersection improvements; and developing a bottleneck removal strategy.
Burlington recommendations include: evaluating existing plans for cost-effectiveness; placing more focus on intersection treatments; and cautiously adding new exits on I-40.
The statewide proposals include: changing the highway distribution formulas to account for congestion; appointing “congestion tsars” and establishing congestion reduction programs for each region; using innovative highway and intersection designs; increasing the weight placed on congestion in selecting projects; implementing flex-time, ridesharing, and work-at-home programs; removing bottlenecks; improving intersection turns and signal systems; expanding incident management programs; using tolls and public-private partnerships; and planning land use and transportation capacity jointly.
The state cannot afford to ignore growing congestion problems, Hartgen said. “North Carolina is not generally recognized as one of the most congested states, but it is,” he said. “My recent national assessment ranked North Carolina 48th among the 50 states in urban interstate congestion.”
“Pulled by competing priorities, many communities appear to be focusing largely on other objectives and are de-emphasizing the congestion problem,” Hartgen added. “Refocusing efforts on relieving congestion could have a major economic impact by saving travel time. The report estimates the value of travel time saved at about $855 million annually.”
David Hartgen’s Policy Report, “Traffic Congestion in North Carolina: Status, Prospects, and Solutions,” is available at the JLF web site. For more information, please contact Hartgen at (704) 687-5917 or [email protected]. To arrange an interview, contact Mitch Kokai at (919) 306-8736 or [email protected].