Evaluating congestion reduction strategies in four large metropolitan areas.
Miami, Florida, United States
Los Angeles, California, United States
Los Angeles, California, United States
Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States
Contemporary Approaches to Congestion Pricing: Lessons Learned from the National Evaluation of Congestion Pricing Strategies at Six Sites
Summary Information
This report examined cross-cutting findings and overall lessons learned from six U.S. DOT Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA) demonstration projects in Atlanta, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis, San Francisco, and Seattle. The overall objectives at each site were to improve tolling (congestion pricing), enhance transit, emphasize telecommuting and travel demand management (TDM), and implement advanced technology.
A variety of congestion reduction strategies were implemented between 2008 and 2013. Four UPA sites (Atlanta, Los Angeles, Miami, and Minneapolis) converted high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes to high-occupancy-toll (HOT) lanes using demand-based pricing, one site (Seattle) deployed demand-based pricing on a bridge, and two cities (San Francisco and Los Angeles) implemented demand-based parking pricing. In addition, five sites (Atlanta, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis, and Seattle) implemented TDM to enhance ridesharing on tolled facilities, and a telework program was implemented in Minneapolis.
Methodology
A before and after data collection approach was used to evaluate impacts on commuters and other stakeholders, operations, and the environment. Evaluators relied on data collected from local partners.
Mobility and Congestion Reduction Analysis
The congestion analysis used four main measures: average travel time, average travel speed, and travel time reliability (travel time index and buffer index). The travel time index used a comparison between peak period travel conditions and free-flow conditions. The buffer index represented the amount of extra time needed to allow for on-time arrival.
Data limitations were encountered at all sites, influencing the ability of evaluators to analyze measures and identify changes in congestion. In some cases, traffic sensors were not working due to construction activities, and in other cases additional lanes were constructed making comparisons with before data more difficult.
Findings
Atlanta I-85 Southbound (A.M. Peak Period Peak Direction) Trip-time reliability on Express Lanes decreased slightly while trip-time reliability on General Purpose Lanes increased. Travel times on Express Lanes decreased slightly while travel times on General Purpose Lanes increased slightly.
General Purpose Freeway Lanes | Pre-Deployment | Post-Deployment | Change |
---|---|---|---|
Mean Travel Time | 16.1 minutes | 16.9 minutes | +0.80 minutes |
Mean Travel Speed | 46.1 mi/hr | 43.9 mi/hr | -2.20 mi/hr |
Travel-Time Index | 1.39 | 1.46 | +0.07 |
Buffer Index | 77% | 66% | -11% |
HOV/HOT Lanes | Pre-Deployment | Post-Deployment | Change |
---|---|---|---|
Mean Travel Time | 14.1 minutes | 13.8 minutes | -0.30 minutes |
Mean Travel Speed | 50.1 mi/hr | 51.5 mi/hr | +1.4 mi/hr |
Travel-Time Index | 1.28 | 1.25 | -0.30 |
Buffer Index | 44% | 57% | +13% |
Los Angeles I-110 Northbound (A.M. Peak Period Peak Direction) Travel time reliability on Express Lanes decreased while travel time reliability on General Purpose Lanes increased. Travel times on Express Lanes increased while travel times on General Purpose Lanes were relatively unchanged.
General Purpose Freeway Lanes | Pre-Deployment | Post-Deployment | Change |
---|---|---|---|
Mean Travel Time | 27.09 minutes | 27.07 minutes | -0.02 minutes |
Buffer Index | 51% | 48% | -3% |
HOV/HOT Lanes | Pre-Deployment | Post-Deployment | Change |
---|---|---|---|
Mean Travel Time | 12.40 minutes | 14.29 minutes | +1.90 minutes |
Buffer Index | 43% | 85% | +42% |
Los Angeles I-10 Westbound (A.M. Peak Period Peak Direction) Travel time reliability on both Express Lanes and General Purpose Lanes increased. Travel times on Express Lanes decreased slightly while travel times on General Purpose Lanes increased slightly.
General Purpose Freeway Lanes | Pre-Deployment | Post-Deployment | Change |
---|---|---|---|
Mean Travel Time | 30.88 minutes | 33.90 minutes | +3.02 minutes |
Buffer Index | 57% | 34% | -23% |
HOV/HOT Lanes | Pre-Deployment | Post-Deployment | Change |
---|---|---|---|
Mean Travel Time | 15.96 minutes | 15.08 minutes | -0.85 minutes |
Buffer Index | 40% | 26% | -14% |
Miami I-95 (A.M. Peak Period Peak Direction) Travel time reliability in Express Lanes increased. Travel speeds in Express Lanes increased from approximately 20 mi/hr during the pre-deployment period to 64 mi/hr in the post-deployment period, while travel speeds in the General Purpose Lanes increased from approximately 15 mi/hr to 51 mi/hr. In addition, total person throughput for the Express Lanes and the General Purpose Lanes increased by approximately 21 percent.
General Purpose Freeway Lanes | Pre-Deployment | Post-Deployment | Change |
---|---|---|---|
Mean Travel Speed | 15 mi/hr | 51 mi/hr | +36 mi/hr |
HOV/HOT Lanes | Pre-Deployment | Post-Deployment | Change |
---|---|---|---|
Mean Travel Speed | 20 mi/hr | 64 mi/hr | +44 mi/hr |
Minneapolis I-35 section south of I-494 Only (A.M. Peak Period Peak Direction) Travel time reliability and vehicle throughput increased in the MnPASS Express Lanes. Travel times decreased in General Purpose Lanes.
General Purpose Freeway Lanes | Pre-Deployment | Post-Deployment | Change |
---|---|---|---|
Mean Travel Time | 18.9 minutes | 16.8 minutes | -2.10 minutes |
Mean Travel Speed | 50.7 mi/hr | 55.3 mi/hr | +4.6 mi/hr |
Buffer Index | 100% | 70% | -30% |
HOV/HOT Lanes | Pre-Deployment | Post-Deployment | Change |
---|---|---|---|
Mean Travel Time | 6.4 minutes | 6.0 minutes | -0.4 minutes |
Mean Travel Speed | 67.2 mi/hr | 65.7 mi/hr | -1.5 mi/hr |
Buffer Index | 40% | 20% | -20% |