HOT Lanes on I-77 Today vs 2010 May 6, 2013

2010: MUMPO Priority #93 Source: 2035 LRTP

2010: The Initial Solution Source: “I-77 Feasibility Study HOV-HOT Lanes Conversion”, Parsons- Brinkerhoff, May 6, 2010

Reasons for HOT lanes: 2010 Environmental restrictions There’s no money It can only be spent HOT lanes MUMPO priority State priority

Speaker Thom Tillis on Tolling I-77 "I think the takeaway is that… the choice is (a high-occupancy toll lane) project ... or no improvements to I-77 for 15 or 20 years." Source: “Tillis: Toll Lanes or Wait 20 Years for I-77 Widening”, LKN Citizen, March 27, 2013

The Current HOT Lane Proposal 27.5 Miles of HOT Lanes Cost: $550 Million Source: “I-77 HOT Lanes Project Overview NCSITE Lunch N’ Learn”, August 21, 2012; “I-77 Widening Update”, MUMPO (Bill Coxe), Sept 19, 2012; “Billions invested in Roads”, Charlotte Observer, Jan 14, 2013

Reasons for HOT lanes: 2010 Environmental restrictions There’s no money It can only be spent HOT lanes State priority MUMPO priority

Environmental Restrictions 2010: GP lanes must have full-blown EA Today: MAP 21 Legislation… Grants categorical exclusion to every capacity addition within the existing ROW… Puts GP lanes on same legal footing as toll lanes Key Enabling Environmental Legislation Now In Place.

Reasons for HOT lanes: 2010 Environmental restrictions There’s no money It can only be spent HOT lanes State priority MUMPO priority

Cost Breakdown I-77 Toll Lanes -$M Source: “Billions invested in Roads”, Charlotte Observer, Jan 14, 2013

A GP Lane Estimate A ballpark cost for two GP lanes from exit 23 to exit 36: $80- $130M Source: “I-77 HOT Discussion with Cornelius Town Board”, email from Bill Coxe to Andrew Grant, Oct. 10, 2012

Toll Lanes vs GP Lanes Public Funds: $170M GP lanes: $80- $130M

Majority of travel time savings Why the difference? Majority of travel time savings Majority of Cost Source: RFP

Reasons for HOT lanes: 2010 Environmental restrictions There’s no money It can only be spent HOT lanes State priority MUMPO priority

HOT Lane Funding- Federal What do the Feds Say? Source: NCDOT

From the NCDOT WidenI-77: “Does Federal funding (NHPP) receive a higher priority due to HOT lanes?” NCDOT: ”We are going to get the same amount… from the feds funding regardless of what projects we build.  The feds play no part in the selection process for projects that use NHPP funding.” So the Feds are a non-issue… Source: NCDOT

Reasons for HOT lanes: 2010 Environmental restrictions There’s no money It can only be spent HOT lanes MUMPO priority State priority

Speaker Tillis on MUMPO “Unless the local entity prioritizing roads changes that (prioritization), the only way you could potentially move up is to move other things down.“ - Mar 27, 2013 (emphasis added)

MUMPO Criteria Source: LRTP Roadway Project Ranking Methodology, MUMPO

MUMPO Tier 1 Impact on I-77 GP Lanes Priority Highly Negative Highly Positive Source: LRTP Roadway Project Ranking Methodology; MUMPO LRTP Roadway Ranking Methodology, approved 11/14/07

MUMPO Tier 2 Impact on I-77 GP Lanes Priority Source: Ibid. Highly Negative Highly Positive I-77 General Purpose Lanes Poised to Be Much Higher Priority

Reasons for HOT lanes: 2010 Environmental restrictions There’s no money It can only be spent HOT lanes MUMPO priority State priority

State Priority- As Is What if MUMPO Supported GP Lanes? Priority Source: Prioritization Scores for Roads, NCDOT

State Priority w/MUMPO Priority With Local Support, I77 Moves to the Top of the List…

State Priority Based on Merit Competing on Merit, There’s a Clear Winner…

McCrory Plan- Allocation Division(20%) ~$1.2B Regional (40%) ~$2.4B Statewide (40%) ~$2.4B Project Merit (Data) Per capita by region Equally to Divisions A B C D E F G 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 3 2 1 14 Interstates/ NHS/STRAHNET /Tolls/Etc (S) + Hwys, Airport, Rail, Transit (S) + (R) + Local Three-Plus Chances for Funding GP Lanes HB817, Strategic Transportation Investments,

McCrory Plan- Criteria Division(20%) ~$1.2B Regional (40%) ~$2.4B Statewide (40%) ~$2.4B Benefit/Cost Congestion Economic competitiveness Freight Multi-modal Pavement condition Lane width Shoulder width 100% Benefit/Cost Congestion Economic competitiveness Freight Multi-modal Pavement condition Lane width Shoulder width 70% Benefit/Cost Congestion Economic competitiveness Freight Multi-modal Pavement condition Lane width Shoulder width 50% Local considerations 50% Local considerations 30% Much Greater Emphasis on Project Merit

Local Participation 50% bonus allocation for local government funding participation For projects that serve the local entity providing the funding 50% bonus allocation for toll revenue bonds For projects within the county (or counties) of the toll project

Reasons for HOT lanes: 2010 Environmental restrictions There’s no money It can only be spent HOT lanes MUMPO priority State priority

Summarizing All the necessary technical elements are coming together to build GP lanes sooner rather than later Funding ($170M) Federal Legislation (MAP 21) State Legislation The state priority is a function of MUMPO priority With MUMPO priority, the project obtains NCDOT support Completely Different Picture Than in 2010

Conclusions & Recommendation The proposed GP project calls for LESS taxpayer funding The project will compete favorably on its own merit Recommendation for MUMPO Rank I-77 GP lane projects according to new criteria BEFORE amending LTRP for HOT Lanes Determine project timing for GP lanes under this new paradigm