Jeffrey F. Paniati Executive Director Federal Highway Administration US Department of Transportation Washington, DC Reducing Congestion Tools of the Trade Maryland Transportation Operations Summit Maritime Institute Linthicum Heights, MD May 1, 2008

Strategy for Reducing Congestion Congestion on I-95 in Northern Virginia Crisis of Congestion: A Tax on the Nation Commuting costs: Each motorist stuck in traffic wastes on average 47 hours and 30 gallons of fuel every year – at a cost of $800 per person annually. Quality of life: Reduced air quality, less time with family and friends. Productivity: Delays to trucks and unreliability of delivery times increase costs for businesses and reduce economic competitiveness.

Strategy for Reducing Congestion Congestion has increased dramatically over the past 20 years in the 85 largest U.S. cities. During this time the number of hours lost each year by an average driver to congestion increased from 17 to almost 50.* In the 13 largest cities, drivers now spend the equivalent of almost 8 work days each year stuck in traffic.* Annual Hours Lost to Congestion Per Peak Hour Driver Very Large Metro Areas, 1983 v. 2003* Philadelphia Hours Atlanta Washington Dallas LA/Long Beach Chicago San Francisco Detroit Miami Boston New York Phoenix Houston City Average * Texas Transportation Institute, 2005 Urban Mobility Report Crisis of Congestion: Wasted Hours Across America

Strategy for Reducing Congestion 1.Relieve urban congestion. 2.Unleash private sector investment resources. 3.Promote operational and technological improvements. 4.Establish a “Corridors of the Future” competition. 5.Target major freight bottlenecks and expand freight policy outreach. 6.Accelerate major aviation capacity projects and provide a future funding framework. USDOT Congestion Initiative

Strategy for Reducing Congestion Congestion on I-95 in Northern Virginia 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 rationing by delay

Strategy for Reducing Congestion Miami Minneapolis -St. Paul San Francisco Seattle Congestion Pricing: UPAs/CRDs Los Angeles Chicago

Strategy for Reducing Congestion Congestion Pricing: UPA/CRD Highlights HOV – HOT Lane Conversions -Minneapolis -Miami -Los Angeles Dynamically Priced Shoulder Lanes -Minneapolis Moving from Fixed to Variable Bridge Tolls -San Francisco Pricing of Existing Free Lanes -Seattle

Strategy for Reducing Congestion Congestion Pricing: UPA/CRD Highlights Active Traffic Management Systems - Minneapolis -Seattle -Miami Parking Pricing -San Francisco - Chicago Express Transit Services / Bus Rapid Transit - All Sites

Strategy for Reducing Congestion Provides choice of reliable trip. Uses excess capacity on HOV facilities. Demonstrates value of pricing. Congestion Pricing: HOV to HOT Conversions

Strategy for Reducing Congestion Implemented in miles. Converted pre-existing HOV facility. Dynamic pricing to ensure 50 mph to 55 mph flows (tolls range from $0.25 to $8). Congestion on corridor’s non- MnPASS lanes down by half. 2:1 public approval. Congestion Pricing: HOT to HOV Conversions MnPass

Strategy for Reducing Congestion HOV and HOT Lanes in the U.S. HOV Lane Locations HOT Lane Locations

Strategy for Reducing Congestion Technology and Operations Source: “ Traffic Congestion and Reliability;” FHWA (September, 2005) Sources of Highway Congestion

Strategy for Reducing Congestion Technology and Operations 25 percent of all congestion. 1-minute closure = 4-minute delay. Key elements of a comprehensive incident management program. Service patrols with incident management capabilities. Policies with performance goals. Move It / Clear It laws. Reduce Incident Delay

Strategy for Reducing Congestion Some Jurisdictions have Realized the Promise – We Know It Works Traffic Incident Management Atlanta, Georgia TIME Task Force (over 6 Agencies represented). HERO - Full Function Service Patrols Operating 24/7 (Across country, B/C up to 36:1). 90 Minute Clearance Goal. “Steer It and Clear It” Law.

Strategy for Reducing Congestion Technology and Operations 511 accessible to 47 percent of USA Travel times on DMS 38 cities nationwide 28 of top 40 metro areas Improve Traveler Information

Strategy for Reducing Congestion Some Jurisdictions have Realized the Promise – We Know it Works DMS Example Houston – 85% of respondents to a Web survey said they have changed their route in response to a DMS message. Travel time messages are the 2 nd most cited type of message causing users to change their route. Traffic incident alerts are 1st 66% said the route change was to save time.

Strategy for Reducing Congestion Technology and Operations Of 330,000 traffic signals in USA, about 75 percent could operate more efficiently – National Report Card score of “D”. Low cost approach to congestion reduction – BCRs as high as 40:1. Improve Traffic Signal Timing

Strategy for Reducing Congestion Some Jurisdictions have Realized the Promise – We Know It Works Signal Timing Denver Regional Council of Governments Partnership between the MPO and 30 traffic signal operating agencies to coordinate signals on major roads. Reduced delay by more than 41,000 vehicle hours/day.

Strategy for Reducing Congestion “Congestion is not a fact of life. We need a new approach, and we need it now.” Former Secretary Norman Y. Mineta, May 2006 “ Mobility is one of our country’s greatest freedoms, but congestion…limits predictable and reliable movement of people and goods and poses a serious threat to continued economic growth.” Secretary Mary Peters, October 2006 Closing