Enhancing Return on Investment for MnPASS Express Lanes

Similar documents
Title. Metropolitan Council Transportation Committee December 12, Brad Larson Metro District MnDOT

I-35W Solutions Alliance Project Update July 13, 2017

MnPASS System Today and the Future

Bus Rapid Transit Plans

Highway 169 Mobility Study Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #9 Meeting Record

Purpose and Need Report. Appendix B. Purpose and Need Report

Cedar Avenue Transitway/ METRO Red Line Implementation Plan Update. Metropolitan Transportation Committee July 27, 2015

Priced Managed Lanes in America. October 2013

MnPASS Study II. September 2010

Highway 169 Mobility Study Policy Advisory Committee Meeting #5 Meeting Record

MnPASS System Study Phase 2

Corridor Advisory Group and Task Force Meeting #10. July 27, 2011

Managed Lanes. Steve Schilke, P.E. Major Projects Unit Head District 1. Illinois Traffic Engineering and Safety Conference October 2016

South King County High-Capacity Transit Corridor Study

Washington DC Section of ITE Project Briefing

Spring Lake Park Mounds View North Oaks. Arden Hills. Shoreview. Roseville. Little Canada. Falcon Heights SNELLING. Lilydale. West Saint Paul 35E

ACTION TRANSMITTAL No

Purpose and Need. Chapter Introduction. 2.2 Project Purpose and Need Project Purpose Project Need

Memorandum. Fund Allocation Fund Programming Policy/Legislation Plan/Study Capital Project Oversight/Delivery Budget/Finance Contract/Agreement Other:

Tolling Study. July 23, 2009

Philip Schaffner Minnesota Department of Transportation October 22, 2013

Transportation Master Plan Advisory Task Force

TRB Managed Lanes Conference May 22 24, 2012, Oakland, CA

395 Express Lanes Extension

I-395 Express Lanes Northern Extension Project Crystal City Civic Association September 21, 2016

City of Hamilton s Transportation Master Plan (TMP) Public Consultation 3 December 2015

I-66 Corridor Improvements Route 15 to I-495. November 2014

I-105 Corridor Sustainability Study (CSS)

WEST SEVENTH COMMUNITY INFORMATION SESSION

Corridor Management Committee. February 11, 2016

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS of The Draft 2015 CLRP

A Federal Perspective on Congestion Pricing. Wayne Berman Federal Highway Administration July 8, 2010

Highway Transitway Corridor Study

T1-A - Service Reduction (Re-sizing)

ACTION TRANSMITTAL No

2. Context. Existing framework. The context. The challenge. Transport Strategy

DRAFT. Memo. Range of the Alternatives Considered in the EIS

Arterial Transitway Corridors Study. Sept. 26, 2011

North Coast Corridor:

Mobility Greater Johnson County Transportation Coalition. May 23, 2018

Tunnel Reconstruction Brooklyn CB 1 August 14, 2018

Gratiot Avenue Transit Study Tech Memo #4: Ridership

Metropolitan Council Transportation Committee

ITS-NY ANNUAL MEETING Bus Rapid Transit in New York City: Bus Lane Operations on One-Way Arterial Streets

Snelling Bus Rapid Transit June 17, 2013 Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #2 & VISSIM Traffic / TSP Evaluation Wrap-Up

Measuring and Communicating Mobility:

Preliminary Transportation Analysis

Northwest Corridor Project (I-75/I-575) Agenda. Brief Project History. Stakeholder Briefing January 27, Brief Project history

Town of Bethlehem. Planning Assessment. Bethlehem Town Board

Transportation Day at the Capitol. Charlie Zelle Commissioner, MnDOT Feb. 16, 2017

Highway 217 Corridor Study. Phase I Overview Report

ROUTES 55 / 42 / 676 BUS RAPID TRANSIT LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Managed Lane Bus Rapid Transit Alternative Technical Memo

ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Tulsa Metropolitan Area LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

I-25 PEL: CO Springs Denver South Connection. Presentation to Castle Rock Town Council

Tunnel Reconstruction South 5 th Street Association October 16, 2018

Bus Rapid Transit on Silicon Valley s El Camino Real: Working Together to Create a Grand Boulevard Steven Fisher

CHAPTER 7: TRANSPORTATION

ITEM 2.3 South of Fraser Rapid Transit Surrey-Langley technology decision. That the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation receive this report.

Transit Signal Priority (TSP) Application to Miami-Dade Transit

2045 Long Range Transportation Plan. Summary of Draft

PURPOSE AND NEED SUMMARY 54% Corridor Need 1. Corridor Need 2. Corridor Need 3. Corridor Need 4. Corridor Need 5

ACTION TRANSMITTAL No

Congestion Reducing Activities. Toby Carr GDOT Director of Planning April 10, 2014

Joshua Saak, P.E., PTOE Traffic Design Engineer Ada County Highway District May 23, 2013

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD. Continuous Access Priced Managed Lanes: What Have We Learned So Far? Thursday, September 20, :00-3:30 PM ET

Managed Lanes: A National Perspective Managed Lane Strategies

WHITE PAPER: TRANSIT SERVICE FOR SOUTH SHAGANAPPI

Performance Criteria for 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan

Managed Lanes: A Popular and Effective Urban Solution. Ed Regan Presented by Susan Buse

Contemporary Approaches in Congestion Pricing:

Welcome. The Brooklin Secondary Plan and Transportation Master Plan are collectively referred to as the Brooklin Study.

DULLES AREA TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION (DATA) February 18, Susan Shaw, P.E., VDOT, Megaprojects Director

What are Managed Lanes?

BETHEL ROAD AND SEDGWICK ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY

Arterial Management Plan for US Route 250 and State Route 623

Geometric and Trafc Conditions Summary

Highway 169 Mobility Study Policy Advisory Committee Meeting #4 Meeting Record

Toronto and East York Community Council. Director, Transportation Services, Toronto and East York District

Durham Region Long Term Transit Strategy

Alternatives Public Workshop

Transit Operations in the I-95 Express Lanes

Community Task Force July 25, 2017

I-405/SR 167 Corridor Executive Advisory Group

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... vii 1 STUDY OVERVIEW Study Scope Study Area Study Objectives

Topics To Be Covered. Summarize Tier 2 Council Direction Discuss Mill and Ash Alternatives Next Steps

Arterial Transitway Corridors Study

Planning Study SR 976. Project Advisory Team Meeting May 24, 2017

Appendix MSP Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota 2003 Annual Report on Freeway Mobility and Reliability

Operational Comparison of Transit Signal Priority Strategies

Arterial Transitway Corridors Study. Ave

Attachment One. Integration of Performance Measures Into the Bryan/College Station MPO FY 2019 FY 2022 Transportation Improvement Program

Update on Traffic Implications of Viking Lakes Development Including Vikings Practice Facility

Arnold Hinojosa

Scottsdale Road/Rural Road Alternatives Analysis (AA) Study. Arizona ITE/IMSA Spring Conference March 7, 2012

Hennepin County Transportation Department

IMPACTS TO TRANSIT FROM LOS ANGELES CONGESTION REDUCTION DEMONSTRATION. Word Count: 3,386 (body) + 2,000 (8 tables) + 1,500 (6 figures) = 6,886 words

Hennepin County Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning

VISION Long Range Plan Update Board Workshop. February 10, 2016

Transcription:

Enhancing Return on Investment for MnPASS Express Lanes Minnesota s Transportation Conference February 28, 2018 mnpass.org

Agenda MnPASS Express Lane Background MnPASS System Update Enhancing Return on Investment for MnPASS Research Project 3/8/2018 Optional Tagline Goes Here mndot.gov/ 2

MnPASS Express Lane Background MnPASS = MN s system of priced managed lanes (a/k/a High Occupancy Toll Lanes) MnPASS lanes currently in operation in in in in operation: I-394 since 2005 I-35W since 2009 I-35E since 2015 MnPASS is a key strategy for improving the efficiency of the region s highway and transit systems by providing a reliable, congestion-free option for commuters during peak-travel times mnpass.org

What are the Benefits of MnPASS? MnPASS lanes reduce and better manage congestion in a manner that s sustainable over the long-term by: Increasing person throughput A single MnPASS lane can carry twice as many people as a single general purpose lane during peak-hour congestion Improving travel time reliability Transit buses and commuters can plan for and rely on a 50-55 mph trip in a MnPASS lane (general purpose lanes are much less reliable) Improving bus transit service/ridership and increasing carpooling. More than 80% of the people using the MnPASS lanes are either riding on buses or in carpools

MnPASS System Study Phase 3 Study goals Assist in updating the MnPASS system vision and corridor prioritization in the 2018 Transportation Policy Plan Update Evaluate key MnPASS issues, opportunities, and risks from both a regional needs perspective and a national state-of-the-practice perspective Study did not reevaluate the current TPP Tier 1 and 2 MnPASS corridors Study results Higher performing corridors Hwy. 252/I-94 between Hwy. 610 in Brooklyn Center and downtown Mpls. I-494 in Bloomington between W. Bush Lk. Rd. and Hwy. 5 Moderate performing corridors Hwy. 77 Northbound (Apple Valley-Bloomington) Hwy. 169 (Shakopee-Golden Valley) I-35 Extension (Lakeville) 3/8/2018 http://www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/projects/mnpassstudy/index.html 5

MnPASS System in Draft TPP Update Tier 1 MnPASS Corridors (current revenue scenario) - I-35W (Roseville-Blaine) Fall 2018 letting - I-94 (Mpls.-St. Paul) part of Rethinking I-94 study funding identified in 2022-23 Tier 2 MnPASS Corridors (increased revenue scenario) - I-35W (Roseville-Mpls.) - Hwy. 36 EB (I-35W-I-35E) - Hwy. 252/I-94 (Brooklyn Park-Mpls) - I-494 (Bloomington) Tier 3 MnPASS Corridors (increased revenue scenario) - Hwy. 77 NB (Apple Valley-Bloomington) - Hwy. 169 (Shakopee-Maple Grove) - I-35 extension (Lakeville) - I-35E extension (Lino Lakes) - Hwy. 36 WB (I-35E-I35W) - I-694 (New Brighton-Brooklyn Center) - I-94 (Brooklyn Center-Rogers) 3/8/2018 6

Enhancing Return on Investment for MnPASS Express Lanes MnDOT Research Project (2017-37) Title: Refining Return on Investment Methodology/Tool for MnPASS Completed October 2017 Final Report available at: http://dot.state.mn.us/research/reports/2017/201737.pdf 3/8/2018 7

The Problem Traditional benefitcost approaches: Move more cars Increase speeds Reduce congestion MnPASS lanes are designed to: Move more people Provide a choice Improve reliability Research conducted to improve methods and tools for estimating return on investment

Study Process Following Steps Literature Search Agency Interviews Individual Component Review Model and Data Availability Assessment Framework Refinement Demonstration Analysis

Agency Staff Interviews Participants MnDOT Metro District MnDOT Central Office Metropolitan Council RTMC Discussion Questions Existing shortcomings Expectations for refined methodology Specific elements to be included Other economic factors Unique aspects of MnPASS

Managed Lanes ROI Inclusion Importance vs. Component Maturity

ROI Benefit Categories Travel Time Savings Vehicle Operating Cost Savings Crash Cost Savings Travel Time Reliability Transit Benefit Emergency Response Induced Traffic Emission Impact Noise Impact

Demonstration Project Lexington Avenue ~ 10.5 miles Hwy 36

Existing Conditions

Background Information The BCA was conducted to capture the forecasted changes of both base year 2010 and forecasting year 2040 Benefit Definition Travel time savings Vehicle operating cost savings Safety improvement Cost Estimation Capital costs Operation and maintenance costs Remaining capital value The preferred Build alternative was found to have a benefit-cost ratio of 2.11 from this analysis

Transit Benefits

Express Bus Service 1,500 Space Park & Ride DT Mpls

Transit Advantages No Build MnPASS Managed Lane Bus Shoulder

Transit Forecasts Traffic Forecasts CORSIM Models Bus Speeds Mixed Traffic Link Speeds BOS Managed Lane Bus Travel Times Ridership Forecasts Person Throughput

Existing Bus Shoulder Use SB: 95th Ave to CR E2 NB: CR E2 to TH 10 * GP speeds were estimated from CORSIM model. NB: Stinson to TH 280

2040 No Build Bus Shoulder Use SB: CSAH 23 to CR 10 NB: CR C to TH 10 * GP speeds were estimated from CORSIM model. NB: Stinson to TH 280

2040 Managed Lane Bus Shoulder Use Buses use managed lanes Buses use managed lanes * GP speeds were estimated from CORSIM model. NB: 4 th St to TH 280

Bus Travel Time CSAH 23 to Mississippi River Travel Time Three-hour peak period (min) AM PM Round Trip SB I-35W NB I-35W Total Travel Time Total Savings Bus GP* Bus GP* Bus GP* Two-Way 2040 No-Build 26 33 33 42 59 75 16 2040 MnPASS Build *GP = General Purpose Lanes 20 28 24 39 44 67 23

Ridership Forecasts Alternative Route 250 Route 252 Route 288 Total 2040 No-Build 3,400 200 700 4,300 2040 Build MnPASS 3,700 200 700 4,600

The Annual Transit Benefit Estimation - Year 2040 Measures 2040 No-Build 2040 Build Round Trip Transit Travel Time (hr) 0.98 0.73 Round Trip Auto Travel Time (hr) 1.25 1.12 Ridership 4,300 4,600 Auto (if no MnPASS) 300 - Total Travel Time (hr) 4,603 3,373 Value of Time ($/hr) $ 17.65 $ 17.65 Total Cost ($) $ 81,249 $ 59,539 Benefit ($) - $ 21,710 Annual Benefit ($) - $ 5,644,600

Travel Time Reliability

Reliability Evaluation Method 1. Collect 1 year of travel time data along project corridor 2. Obtain and integrate weather and crash data 3. Collect 1 year of travel time data in GP and MnPASS lanes along I-394 and I-35W South Capture relationship between GP and MnPASS lanes Project travel time savings for I-35W North MnPASS

Northbound - Existing

Northbound 2040 No Build

Northbound 2040 MnPASS MnPASS Lane

Reliability by Person Trips Peak Period/Peak Direction

Travel Time Reliability Measurement Methodology

Travel Time Reliability Calculation Results

Benefit-Cost Analysis Results

Benefit-Cost Analysis Results Positive Benefits by Category

Benefit-Cost Analysis Results

Comparison Analysis and Conclusion Category Original Framework Refined Framework Cost Component Capital Cost $169,466,823 $169,466,823 Operation and Maintenance Cost $20,848,172 $26,838,533 Remaining Capital Value -$35,522,760 -$35,522,760 Total Cost (2015$) $154,792,236 $160,782,596 Benefit Component Travel Time Savings (VHT) $368,122,531 $398,386,602* Vehicle Operating Cost (VMT) -$49,037,258 -$36,154,055* Crash Cost/Safety $6,766,596 $7,624,153* Travel Time Reliability $129,588,931 Transit Benefit $57,120,143 Induced Travel - Emergency Response $1,521,542 Emission Impact -$7,715,881 Noise Impact -$4,024,296 Total Benefit/Net Present Value (2015$) $325,851,870 $546,347,139 Benefit-Cost Ratio 2.11 3.40

Comparison Analysis and Conclusion Capture a wider range of project impacts in the alternative evaluation Improve the accuracy of the current MnPASS ROI methodology Improve the ability to verify the financial desirability of MnPASS alternatives Make project/alternative comparisons more comprehensive and consistent Provide better recommendations for practical investments

Thank you again! Brad Larsen brad.larsen@state.mn.us Paul Morris pmorris@srfconsulting.com John Wilson john.wilson@state.mn.us 39