1 / 33

The USDOT Urban Partners & FHWA

The USDOT Urban Partners & FHWA. August 20, 2007 Webcast with Division Offices . Jeffrey F. Paniati Associate Administrator, Office of Operations Federal Highway Administrator U.S. Department of Transportation. Path to the Urban Partners. Retreat for USDOT leadership

mae
Download Presentation

The USDOT Urban Partners & FHWA

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  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 • Retreat for USDOT leadership • Congestion identified as the Issue that should be addressed • Initiated major Departmental effort to scope out a plan Early 2006 USDOT Retreat Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  3. Path to the Urban Partners • Six Points • Cornerstone – Relieve Urban Congestion (Congestion Pricing) May 2006 Early 2006 USDOT Congestion Initiative Announced USDOT Retreat Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  5. Path to the Urban Partners Dec 2006 • Three Notices • Urban Partnership Agreements • Value Pricing Pilot Program • ITS Operational Testing to Mitigate Congestion • $130 Million Available (Eventually grew to over $1 Billion) Early 2006 May 2006 Three Federal Register Notices Released USDOT Congestion Initiative Announced USDOT Retreat Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  7. Path to the Urban Partners Apr 2007 • Over half included a pricing component • Most included transit features • Most had a technology component • Relatively few major telecommuting proposals Dec 2006 Early 2006 May 2006 Received UPA Applications From 27 Metro Areas Three Federal Register Notices Released USDOT Congestion Initiative Announced USDOT Retreat Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  8. Path to the Urban Partners May 2007 • Extensive inter-departmental review • UPA Coordination Team • Technical Review Teams • Involved consensus-building in context of OST defined over-arching objectives May 2006 Early 2006 Dec 2006 Apr 2007 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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  9. Path to the Urban Partners Jun 2007 • Seattle, San Francisco, Minneapolis-St. Paul, New York City, Miami • San Diego, Denver, Dallas, Atlanta 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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

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

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

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  14. New York • Partners • New York City Department of Transportation • New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority • New York State Department of Transportation Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  22. Seattle • Partners • Washington State Department of Transportation • Puget Sound Regional Council • King County Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  26. Minneapolis – St. Paul • Partners • Minnesota Department of Transportation • Twin Cities Metropolitan Council Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 • Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  31. Miami • Sources of Funds - $62.9 million • FHWA – $43.4 million • Interstate Maintenance - $43.4 million • FTA – $19.5 million • RITA - None Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

  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 Strategy to Reduce Congestion

More Related