The USDOT Urban Partners

1
The USDOT Urban Partners FHWA

• August 20, 2007
• Webcast with Division Offices

Jeffrey F. PaniatiAssociate Administrator,
Office of OperationsFederal Highway
AdministratorU.S. Department of Transportation
2
Path to the Urban Partners
Early 2006
USDOT Retreat

• Retreat for USDOT leadership
• Congestion identified as the Issue that should be
  addressed
• Initiated major Departmental effort to scope out
  a plan

3
Path to the Urban Partners
May 2006
Early 2006
USDOT Congestion Initiative Announced
USDOT Retreat

• Six Points
• Cornerstone Relieve Urban Congestion
  (Congestion Pricing)

4
Congestion Pricing Bringing Supply and Demand
into Alignment

• Failure to properly price travel on highways is a
  root cause of congestion
• The price of highway travel (gas taxes,
  registration fees, etc.) bears little or no
  relationship to the cost of congestion
• Unlike other public utilities, the public
  expectation is that the service is free or does
  not change with changes in demand
• Allocating transportation services via pricing is
  more efficient than allocating by delay

5
Path to the Urban Partners
Dec 2006
Early 2006
May 2006
Three Federal Register Notices Released
USDOT Congestion Initiative Announced
USDOT Retreat

• Three Notices
• Urban Partnership Agreements
• Value Pricing Pilot Program
• ITS Operational Testing to Mitigate Congestion
• 130 Million Available (Eventually grew to over
  1 Billion)

6
Urban Partnership Agreements Congestion Pricing

• Integrated 4T Strategy
• TOLLING (pricing) Key Element
• Direct user charge based on use of facility
  varies based on level of congestion
• Toll collection via electronic means (no booths)
• Transit
• Telecommuting/Travel Demand Management
• Technology

7
Path to the Urban Partners
Apr 2007
Dec 2006
Early 2006
May 2006
Received UPA Applications From 27 Metro Areas
Three Federal Register Notices Released
USDOT Congestion Initiative Announced
USDOT Retreat

• Over half included a pricing component
• Most included transit features
• Most had a technology component
• Relatively few major telecommuting proposals

8
Path to the Urban Partners
May 2007
May 2006
Dec 2006
Apr 2007
Early 2006
Modal Administrators Briefed On Top 16 Proposals
Three Federal Register Notices Released
Received UPA Applications From 27 Metro Areas
USDOT Congestion Initiative Announced
USDOT Retreat

• Extensive inter-departmental review
• UPA Coordination Team
• Technical Review Teams
• Involved consensus-building in context of OST
  defined over-arching objectives

9
Path to the Urban Partners
Jun 2007
May 2007
May 2006
Dec 2006
Apr 2007
USDOT Announces Nine PUPs
Modal Administrators Briefed On Top 16 Proposals
Three Federal Register Notices Released
Received UPA Applications From 27 Metro Areas
USDOT Congestion Initiative Announced

• Seattle, San Francisco, Minneapolis-St. Paul, New
  York City, Miami
• San Diego, Denver, Dallas, Atlanta

10
Path to the Urban Partners
Jul/Aug 2007
May 2007
Dec 2006
Jun 2007
Apr 2007
USDOT Develops Term Sheets
Modal Administrators Briefed On Top 16 Proposals
Three Federal Register Notices Released
USDOT Announces Nine PUPs
Received UPA Applications From 27 Metro Areas

• Multi-modal effort to identify projects and
  sources of funds
• Discussions with potential Urban Partners
• Develop final list based on requirements and
  available funds
• Non-binding agreements with Urban Partners

11
Path to the Urban Partners
Aug 2007
May 2007
Jul/Aug 2007
Jun 2007
Apr 2007
USDOT Announces Five Urban Partners
Modal Administrators Briefed On Top 16 Proposals
USDOT Develops Term Sheets
USDOT Announces Nine PUPs
Received UPA Applications From 27 Metro Areas

• Seattle, San Francisco, Minneapolis-St. Paul, New
  York City, Miami
• San Diego funded for SWOOP, but not a Urban
  Partner
• 850 Million of discretionary resources committed

12
New York

• 354 million IF cordon/area pricing is
  implemented in Manhattan by March 31, 2009
• Will charge drivers 8 and trucks 21 a day to
  enter or leave Manhattan below 86th Street on
  weekdays during the workday
• Those who drive only within the congestion zone
  would pay 4 a day for cars, 5.50 for trucks
• Final plan yet to be determined must meet
  specified performance measure (6.3 reduction in
  the pricing zone)
• 1.6 million to cover up-front planning costs
• Tolling authority required by March 2008 to
  receive remainder of funds
• Significant because this is the first time
  cordon/area pricing will be implemented in the US

13
New York

• Project Highlights - 354 Million Total
• Implementation of area Pricing
• Bus Facilities and Other Improvements
• Initiation of Bus Rapid Transit
• Regional Ferry Services
• West of Hudson Regional Transportation
  Alternative Analysis

14
New York

• Partners
• New York City Department of Transportation
• New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority
• New York State Department of Transportation

15
New York

• Sources of Funds - 354.0 million
• FHWA 20.8 million
• Value Pricing Pilot Program - 5.0 million
• Ferry Boat - 15.8 million
• FTA 328.3 million
• RITA - 5.4 million

16
San Francisco

• 158.7 million IF variable pricing is implemented
  on Doyle Drive by Sept 2009
• Doyle Drive is the 1.5 mile elevated roadway
  leading to the Golden Gate Bridge
• Will charge an extra (one-way-fee above the 5
  toll on the Golden Gate Bridge) electronic
  collection
• Revenues will help pay to reconstruct the 70-year
  old Doyle Drive
• 1.6 million to cover up-front planning costs
• Tolling authority required by Spring 2008 to
  receive remainder of funds
• Significant because an existing facility will be
  priced

17
San Francisco

• Project Highlights - 158.7 Million Total
• Tolling Equipment
• Reconstruction of Doyle Drive
• Variable Pricing for On/Off Street Parking in
  Downtown San Francisco
• SFgo Arterial Traffic Management System/Traffic
  Controller Upgrades
• Improvements to Regional Ferry Service
• Creation of Integrated Mobility Accounts
• 511 Upgrades

18
San Francisco

• Partners
• Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
• Bay Area Toll Authority
• San Francisco Country Transportation Authority
• California Department of Transportation
• Golden Gate bridge highway and Transportation
  District
• Metropolitan Transportation Commission
• San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency

19
San Francisco

• Sources of Funds - 158.7 million
• FHWA 80.1 million
• Public Lands - 47.3 million
• Value Pricing Pilot Program - 10.0 million
• Transportation Community, and System Preservation
  - 10.0 million
• Ferry Boat - 12.8 million
• FTA 58.4 million
• RITA - 20.2 million

20
Seattle

• 138.7 million IF legal authority is adopted and
  variable pricing is implemented on the State
  Route 520 floating bridge by September 2009
• King County crossing that currently carries about
  160,000 people per day between Seattle and its
  Eastside suburbs
• Tolls on the existing bridge are intended to help
  pay for the new bridge
• 1.6 million to cover up-front planning costs
• Significant because this will be among the first
  of existing facilities to be priced

21
Seattle

• Project Highlights - 138.7 Million Total
• Implement variable pricing
• Enhance bus service and provide supporting
  amenities
• Regional ferry service
• Real-time multi-modal traveler information
• Active traffic management

22
Seattle

• Partners
• Washington State Department of Transportation
• Puget Sound Regional Council
• King County

23
Seattle

• Sources of Funds - 138.7
• FHWA 50.7 million
• Innovative Bridge - 5.1 million
• Transportation, Community, and System
  Preservation 24.0 million
• Value Pricing Pilot Program - 10.0 million
• Ferry Boat - 11.6 million
• FTA 41.0 million
• RITA - 47.0 million

24
Minneapolis St. Paul

• 133 million IF legal authority to implement
  congestion pricing has been adopted and placed in
  effect within 90 days following the opening of
  the next session of the Minnesota State
  legislature and the following happens on I-35W
  between downtown Minneapolis and the southern
  suburbs by September 30, 2009
• Existing HOV lanes are converted to
  dynamically-priced HOT lanes (along the lines of
  the existing MnPASS operation)
• The existing HOT lanes are extended
• The shoulder lanes along the northbound portion
  of I-35W from 46th Street to downtown Minneapolis
  are dynamically priced
• 1.6 million to cover up-front planning costs

25
Minneapolis St. Paul

• Project Highlights - 133.0 Million Total
• Conversion of the I-35W HOV lane to HOT
  extension of HOT lanes priced dynamic shoulder
  lanes
• Establish a Bus Rapid Transit lane into downtown
  Minneapolis
• Advanced BRT stations and park and ride
  facilities for the North metro suburbs along the
  I-35W corridor
• Transit advantage bypass lane/ramp
• Contra-flow transit lanes in downtown Minneapolis
• ITS Technology to improved transit services
• Arterial and freeway management

26
Minneapolis St. Paul

• Partners
• Minnesota Department of Transportation
• Twin Cities Metropolitan Council

27
Minneapolis St. Paul

• Sources of Funds - 133.0 million
• FHWA 20.8 million
• Interstate Maintenance - 6.6 million
• Transportation, Community, and System
  Preservation - 16.4 million
• Value Pricing Pilot Program - 5.0 million
• FTA 85.9 million
• RITA - 19.4 million

28
Miami

• 62.9 million to establish 21 miles of HOT lanes
  on I-95 from Fort Lauderdale to downtown Miami
  (no new tolling authority required) HOV3 free
  access
• SunPass electronic toll collection (requires new
  construction)
• Expand 10-lane highway to 12 lanes (by reducing
  the width of the existing lanes from 12 to 11
  feet and using a portion of the shoulder)
• Revenues to fund construction and expand BTR
• All funds immediately available

29
Miami

• Project Highlights - 62.9 Million Total
• I-95 HOV to HOT Conversion
• Operation of BRT on HOT lanes
• Express Bus Service
• Transit Facility Improvements

30
Miami

• Partners
• Florida Department of Transportation
• Miami-Dade Metrop0olitan Planning Organization
• Broward Country metropolitan Planning
  Organization
• Broward Country Transit
• Miami-Date Transit
• Miami-Dade Expressway Authority
• Floridas Turnpike Enterprise

31
Miami

• Sources of Funds - 62.9 million
• FHWA 43.4 million
• Interstate Maintenance - 43.4 million
• FTA 19.5 million
• RITA - None

32
FHWA Responsibilities

• Fiscal oversight
• Reporting Requirements Divisions ? HOP ?
  Multimodal Coordination ? OST
• High Expectations
• Key is No Surprises
• Multimodal modeled after the initial UPA Team
• High interest/High visibility program Congress,
  Media, OIG, GAO, OST

33
FHWA Responsibilities

• Expedited Approvals
• Again, key is no surprises
• Anticipate roadblocks and address quickly (engage
  all relevant parties cross-Agency,
  cross-Department)
• Lessons Learned ? Lessons Transferred
• Resource Center involvement
• Idea is to take the UPA experience and broadly
  promote/facilitate