The Future of Twin Cities Transportation Policy

1
The Future of Twin Cities Transportation Policy

• November 28, 2007

2
A number of factors are converging to exacerbate
congestion in the metro area.

• The Met Council predicts that the seven county
  metro area will continue to grow in the next 20
  years
• Add over 1 million people and 470 thousand
  households
• Add nearly 500 thousand new jobs and generate 4
  million additional daily trips
• Automobile ownership has increased significantly
  since 1970
• From 1/3 of homes with two cars to nearly 2/3
  with new cars since 1970
• On average, there is slightly more than one car
  for every licensed driver in MN
• Road usage, as measured by vehicle miles traveled
  (VMT) is expected to grow 51 by 2030.
• 93 of all daily trips are motorized
• Nearly 80 of urban interstates are already
  congested
• Over 2,530 lane miles are needed to eliminate
  severe congestion by 2030, almost all in the
  metro
• Minnesotans continue to become more mobile, yet
  demand far outpaces supply of roads
• Households living outside Minneapolis/St. Paul
  have increased from 54 to 73 since 1970
• Jobs outside Minneapolis/St. Paul have increased
  from 44 to 69 in same period
• Lane miles of freeway construction have declined
  significantly in the past 35 years
• Only 151 miles added in the 1990s only 29 miles
  from 2004 to 2006
• Minnesotans annually lose over 59 million hours
  in traffic at a cost of 1.1 billion including
  nearly 42 million excess gallons of fuel used due
  to congested roads
• The average driver wastes 43 hours in traffic and
  30 gallons of fuel per year
• The Texas Transportation Institute (TTI)
  estimates that metro drivers add a buffer of 1.3
  to 1.7 times the normal travel time due to
  congestion
• Delays have increased by 37 hours in the past
  twenty years, fifth worst in the nation

3
Minneapolis/St. Paul has become one of the most
congested metropolitan areas in the country.
Source Texas Transportation Institute
4
Does congestion really matter? Not if we want to
be like LA.
Source David T Hartgen, Professor of
Transportation Studies, UNCC

• Congestion weakens urban economies because it
  slows the motion that makes our cities vital
• City economies are losing to the suburbs In
  1969, only 11 of Americas largest corporations
  were in the suburbs, now its over 50
• Unreliable delivery bottlenecks the supply chain
  and increases costs to consumers
• Extra warehouses, vehicles, expeditors and other
  non value added items
• Companies must pay higher salaries to attract
  talent willing to offset commuting time
• Unreliable travel times cause drivers to build in
  buffer time to our trips
• Congestion costs lives think EMS

5
Transportation funding in Minnesota is less than
1 of the general fund, meanwhile other funding
sources are declining.

• Funding facts
• Gas tax rate has not increased in over 20 years
• MVST revenues are forecasted to decline
• Federal funding is generally flat

2008 Minnesota General Fund Allocations
Gas Tax Rankings (by state)
MNDOT Construction Program
6
According to the Transportation Alliance, there
is over 1.5 billion of unmet annual needs in
Minnesota.
System Category Annual unmet need
MN Trunk Highway MNDOT 20 year district plans 920 million
Local Roads and Bridges City/County bridges 50 million
Local roads 158 million
City roads/streets 130 million
Township bridges 9 million
Transit Metro area transit 208 million
Greater MN transit 50 million
Ports, Freight, Rail, Air Ports and waterways 5 million
Freight and rail 1.8 million
State airport fund 1.5 million

Total 1.53 billion
However, its unclear what if any impact this
funding will have on reducing congestion.
7
2030 A tale of two cities?

• Likely, though not yet funded

Needed
8
Our current transportation policy is not a
vision, its a fight over funding gaps and taxes.

• Ask for as much as we can get
• Minimal discussion of key metrics like congestion
  and safety
• Funds are allocated based on politics of
  re-election
• Earmarks fund low priority projects
• Pressure at state level to fund projects in every
  district so large projects that reduce congestion
  often dont get funded
• Many competing interests all vying for their
  piece of the worm
• K-12 education
• Higher education
• Environment
• Energy
• Health care
• Human services
• Public safety

Our issue isnt funding, its priorities!
9
There is an absence of leadership on
transportation.

• Governor
• Committed 1 billion in early days of
  administration to fast track high priority
  projects
• Has not articulated a longer term vision for
  transportation policy
• Unclear what level of funding he is willing to
  support
• Appears willing to consider gas taxes along with
  a bonding package
• Does not support other tax increases as funding
  mechanisms
• Legislature
• Has not articulated a vision for transportation
  policy
• Appear willing to fund at higher levels than the
  governor including sales tax increases
• Unclear on the priority of transportation policy
  relative to other issues
• Transportation advocates
• Have not articulated a vision for transportation
  policy trying to get as much as we can get
• Do of good job of providing information and
  statistics to decision makers
• Do a good job of identifying the needs and
  raising awareness
• Met Council
• Created 2030 Regional Transportation Policy
• Goal for congestion actually increases the level
  of congestion in the next 25 years
• Goal for highway capacity increase is 20, goal
  for transit ridership increase is 100
• Defined criteria and scenarios for funding

10
We need a vision for transportation policy.

• It should focus on improving our quality of life
• Reduce congestion
• Improve safety
• Reflect our desire to be mobile and drive
• Drive economic growth
• It must be measurable
• Congestion relief
• Accident avoidance
• It must be based on facts, not emotions
• Life cycle analysis
• Specific criteria for project selection
• It should include a combination of funding
  mechanisms
• Free market approaches such as public private
  partnerships (PPPs)
• Traditional sources such as bonding
• Radical ideas such as increasing allocation
  from the general fund

We can start by learning from others.
11
Houston

• Implemented congestion relief program in the
  early 80s
• Added 100 miles/year of highways from 1986 to
  1992
• Reduced average delays for peak travelers 21
• Stopped spending in 1992 and congestion increased
  to pre-1985 levels
• Business community created Trip2000
• Build more road capacity
• Manage demand through tolls and access management
• Increase overall transportation efficiency
• Governor created Texas Metropolitan Mobility Plan
• Created congestion targets
• Quantified costs/benefits

12
Atlanta

• Recognized that congestion was the biggest
  problem facing the city
• Time to work increased by 24 to 31 minutes in
  the 90s
• Transit market share was falling
• Port of Savannah projected to double volume in
  seven years
• Created the Congestion Mitigation Task Force in
  2004
• Made recommendations to the Atlanta Regional
  Commission (ARC)
• Selection criteria based on cost/benefit ratio
• Those that helped reach the congestion-mitigation
  goal the quickest
• Projects judged on their merit, efficiency and
  effectiveness, rather than political benefits

13
Tampa

• Constructed the Crosstown Expressway
  www.tampa-xway.com/home2
• Reversible lanes
• Electronic tolling
• Computer based safety controls
• Useage is 33 higher than planned with 50 higher
  than planned tolls

14
The solution will require strong leadership and
new ideas.

• Need champions to articulate the vision
• Governor Pawlenty
• Legislators
• Business leaders
• Create a congestion reduction task force to lead
  the effort
• Define goals for congestion and safety
• Develop criteria for selecting projects
• Determine funding needs and methods to achieve
• Reconsider existing funding formulas
• Determine accountability for results
• Consider free market options
• Public Private Partnerships (PPPs)
• Toll truckways
• Bridge endowments
• Twin Cities Express and/or BRT network
• Life cycle analysis
• Supplement with more traditional funding schemes
• Reconsider general fund priorities Increase
  percentage given to transportation funding
• Increased gas tax Minnesota has not kept pace
  with inflation

"There are risks and costs to a program of
action. But they are far less than the long-range
risks and costs of comfortable inaction." - John
F Kennedy
15
A word about the gas tax its not a viable long
term funding alternative.

• Decline in real value of fuel taxes in 1997
  dollars

16
Benefits of Public/Private Partnerships (PPPs)

• Lease, not sale of asset
• Source of new capital
• Typically raise more money than public agencies
• Upfront fees and/or toll revenue sharing
• Better management
• Life cycle management
• New infrastructure faster
• Minimize risks to taxpayers

17
Information Sources

• The Road More Traveled Ted Balaker and Sam
  Staley
• Safeguarding and Modernizing Americas Highway
  Infrastructure Bob Poole, Reason Foundation
  www.reason.org/
• Minnesotas Transportation System Our Future is
  Riding On It Minnesota Transportation Alliance
  www.transportationalliance.com
• Atlanta Regional Commission www.atlantaregional.co
  m
• Texas Transportation Institute tti.tamu.edu/
• Minnesota Department of Transportation
  www.dot.state.mn.us
• American Road and Transportation Builders
  Association www.artba.org
• The Metropolitan Council www.metrocouncil.org/