FAST Lanes Program Transportation and General Government Policy Committee Association of Metropolitan Municipalities August 16, 2004 Minnesota Department of Transportation

Terminology : System of express lanes funded by tolls HOT Lanes: Converts existing HOV lanes to allow toll- paying SOVs FAST Lanes: Adds new lanes to an existing highway; used by toll-paying vehicles

FAST Lanes Structure New lanes built to add capacity to an existing highway. In certain cases, conversion of short segments of existing lanes may be considered to maintain system continuity. Fees rise or fall as congestion increases or decreases on adjacent lanes. Fees are collected using non-cash, electronic technology (no toll booths).

Benefits of FAST Lanes Provide users with a new travel option Leverages private sector innovation and equity to increase highway capacity Manages congestion and traffic flow through pricing Provides congestion relief for adjacent “free” lanes

MnPASS FAST Lanes Work Plan Identify Funding Sources to be Leveraged Public Outreach, Education & Involvement  MnPASS System Study  Stakeholder Advisory Committee  Community & Industry Feedback  Identify Potential Systems  Request for Partnership Proposals (RFPP)  Evaluate Proposals  Select Proposals  Negotiate Development Agreements  Approval by Transportation Commissioner  Local Veto Period  Notice to Proceed  Ground Breaking Phase I: System Feasibility Phase II: Solicitation for Partnership Proposals Phase III: Development Agreement Phase IV: Design and Construction Phase V: MnPASS Operations Municipal Consent & Environmental Approvals  Open for Public Use I-394 MnPASS Implementation

Phase I: System Feasibility MnPASS System Study Objectives: – Identify a potential Twin City Metro Area MnPASS system – Provide cost, operational, revenue and system implication information – Identify impacts that MnPASS will have on existing transportation system and policy plans

Task Month AugSeptOctNovDecJanFeb 1. Mobilization & Data Collection 2. Identify & Screen Candidate Systems 3. Develop Forecasting Tools & Baseline Forecasts 4. Evaluation of Traffic, Revenue, System Effectiveness & Impacts (Round 1 & 2) 5. Design & cost analysis (Round 1 & 2) 6. Financial Analysis & Synthesis (Round 1 & 2) 7. Final Documentation 8. Support Outreach & Legislative Efforts Tasks & Timeframe * Through June, 2005 *

Study Team Steering Committee ( James Hovland, Chair) Met Council – Transportation Advisory Board: Apple Valley Washington County Edina Excelsior Golden Valley Mendota Heights Minneapolis Anoka County White Bear Lake Humphrey Institute Minnesota House of Representatives (Ron Erhardt) Minnesota Senate (Sharon Marko) Mn/DOT Technical Team (Paul Czech, Mike Sobolewski – Co-Chairs) FHWA Met Council Mn/DOT Project Management Paul Czech Mike Sobolewski Consultant Team Cambridge Systematics URS

Key Study Assumptions The new 2030 Met Council travel demand model will be used for this analysis Study horizons: Long Term (2030) to consider ultimate system Short Term (2010, with 10 year work program) to consider immediate implementation opportunities Two rounds of analysis are proposed – to allow for initial evaluation, and then fine tuning of concepts

Key Study Assumptions Scenarios will be evaluated for up to three tolling policies Maximize revenue Maximize traffic flow Mid-level Corridors ranked according to development opportunity (e.g., high/medium/low) Transit,HOVs & hybrids: HOVs & buses free access to existing HOV lanes (I-394, I-35W South) All other MnPASS lanes will be new capacity, with all traffic paying tolls except for transit vehicles Limited off-model analysis of the potential impacts of allowing HOVs and hybrids into the MnPASS system

Phase II: Soliciting Project Proposals Corridors can be anywhere in the State – Interstate or State Trunk Highway systems – High Potential corridors identified in MnPASS System Study Public cost participation considered for desirable projects that might otherwise not be feasible – Eligible projects include those in the 10-year work plan, STIP and bond funded projects. – Options should also recognize projects in Mn/DOT’s 20-year plan. Willing to work with private partners to share revenue risks – Non-compete clauses will NOT be considered – Need to explore options to ensure predictable revenue sources

Phase III: Development Agreement Development agreement will define build, operation and maintenance responsibilities – Developer is responsible for construction – Developer is responsible for operating, maintaining and administering toll collections system – Mn/DOT provides ‘routine’ maintenance

Public Outreach Local community involvement and support is key Desire to engage communities early and often – MnPASS System Study – Regular and frequent contact with high potential corridor communities Local veto provision contained in toll road enabling statute

Minnesota Department of Transportation Mike Sobolewski Metro District – Program Management 651/ John Doan FAST Lanes Program Director 651/