Multi-Modal and Multi-Jurisdictional Transportation Investment Decision-Making: The Case of the Washington DC-Baltimore Region

摘要

In the Washington DC and Baltimore region, a number of federal, state, metropolitan, and localagencies in the District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia participate in the transportationplanning and investment process. Each agency has its own objectives and plays an importantrole, and interacts with other agencies through formal and informal processes. The influence ofeach agency on the overall transportation investment process is often limited within theirjurisdictional boundaries. The resulting transportation system is the product of previous andcurrent investment decisions made collectively by these agencies. When making transportationinvestment decisions or providing input to the decision-making process, some agencies rely onwell-developed state and local master planning tools, others are often restricted by policyinitiatives, emerged priorities, and funding availability. The existing investment decision-makingprocess has its advantages and disadvantages, and there exist alternative processes fortransportation funding and resource allocation.This paper describes and analyzes the decision rules and processes currently adopted by variousagencies in the Washington DC and Baltimore region. Interviews have been conducted with staffmembers at the county, metropolitan, state and regional transportation and planning agencies.The key research questions are how multimodal highway and transit investment decisions aremade in this region, how transportation funds are allocated to different modes, differentjurisdictions, and different projects, and how agencies at different levels of government interactwith each other. Figures and tables are developed to visually present the research findings andthe actual investment process. Findings suggest that policy initiatives, political factors, andtechnical evaluation intertwine in the decision-making process, and conflicts often arise whenregional and local interests collide. Agencies have developed qualitative and quantitativemethods to handle competing objectives and various considerations. Analyzing the existingtransportation planning and investment process is the first step toward the comparison ofalternative investment processes (e.g. more centralized or decentralized processes), and towardmodeling future transportation system states under current and alternative investment processes.