New Search
11 1 1 1 <br /> ~ ~ 11 1 ~ I ~ 1 <br /> credits for common hybrid technologies ODOT and the Department of Land Con- <br /> and apply the credits to vehicle servation and Development, using exist- <br /> technologies that meet a high standard ing planning grant programs and addi- <br /> forefficiency such as Plug-in Hybrid tional resources made available in this <br /> Electric Vehicles (PHEV). If structured funding proposal, should support and <br /> correctly, the state could increase the assist the MPOs in developing accurate <br /> credit for higher efficiency vehicles and models for estimating the amount of car <br /> still be revenue neutral over the next and light truck travel in each metropoli- ~I <br /> two biennia. This credit could sunset tan travel-shed (commuting area} under <br /> as PHEV technology becomes more various combinations of future land use <br /> widespread. patterns, transportation investments, <br /> and transportation system manage- <br /> <br /> The programs described above reveal ment techniques. The state should <br /> larger questions about how the state also make grants and assist cities and <br /> adopts and approves vehicles for tax counties within those travel-sheds in <br /> credits. Despite technologies and the making changes to their comprehensive <br /> rapidly shifting marketplace, statutes plans and transportation system plans <br /> limit the Oregon Department of to ensure that future car and light truck <br /> Energy's ability to adapt. It has the emissions stay within emission targets. <br /> flexibility to set standards for new These regional plans and implementing <br /> appliances eligible for the tax credit, local plan amendments should be devel- <br /> but not for vehicles. The state should oped with broad public involvement to <br /> consider giving ODOE rulemaking ensure that the choices developed are <br /> authority to set standards for vehicle feasible and desirable. <br /> tax credits so it can stay as current as <br /> possible. Oregon's rural areas and smaller cit- <br /> ies outside the commuting areas of the <br /> 6. Plan land use and transportation state's MPOs have fewer alternatives to <br /> to include reduction of the automobile and are not projected <br /> greenhouse gases. to experience significant growth. These <br /> Oregon's transportation investments areas should be able to reach climate <br /> must be consistent with the state's change goals as residents change <br /> commitment to reduce greenhouse vehicles and fuels in the future. These <br /> gases. In addition to policies and in- communities should be exempt from the <br /> centives for more efficient vehicles planning requirements described here <br /> and lower carbon fuels, the legislature unless growth projections change or <br /> should enact planning requirements to communities wish to plan for significant <br /> enable the state's federally designated new growth. <br /> metropolitan areas to grow, without <br /> causing an increase in the need for au- 7. Create logistical hubs for rail <br /> tomobile travel. Each of Oregon's met- freight. <br /> ropolitan planning organizations and the Rail has much lower energy intensity <br /> local governments within the commut- than trucks and cars. The Vision Com- <br /> ing area of each MPO should develop mittee believes it makes sense to build <br /> integrated land use and transportation on existing resources and preserve rail <br /> plans that ensure existing and future resources. The Committee encourages <br /> residents have sufficient choices in the increased use of rail for long haul <br /> where they live and how they travel so shipping to improve efficiency, reduce <br /> that growth in driving does not violate greenhouse gasses and create savings <br /> climate standards. for businesses and consumers. <br /> <br />