APPENDIX A - COMPILATION OF HYPOTHESIS/QUESTIONS FROM THE MINNESOTA UPA NATIONAL EVALUATION PLAN
| Evaluation Analysis |
Hypothesis/Question Number |
Hypothesis/Question |
| Congestion |
MNCong-1 |
Deployment of the UPA improvements will reduce the travel time of users in the I-35W corridor. |
| Congestion |
MNCong-2 |
Deployment of the UPA improvements will improve the reliability of user trips in the I-35W corridor. |
| Congestion |
MNCong-3 |
Traffic congestion on I-35W will be reduced to the extent that travelers in the corridor will experience a noticeable improvement in travel time. |
| Congestion |
MNCong-4 |
Deployment of the UPA projects will not cause an increase in the extent of traffic congestion on surrounding facilities adjacent to I-35W. |
| Congestion |
MNCong-5 |
Deploying the UPA improvements will result in more vehicles and persons served in the I-35W corridor during peak periods. |
| Congestion |
MNCong-6 |
A majority of survey respondents will indicate a noticeable reduction in travel times after the deployment of the UPA improvements. |
| Congestion |
MNCong-7 |
A majority of survey respondents will indicate a noticeable improvement in trip-time reliability after the deployment of the UPA projects. |
| Congestion |
MNCong-8 |
The majority of survey respondents will indicate a noticeable reduction in the duration of congestion after deployment of the UPA projects. |
| Congestion |
MNCong-9 |
A majority of survey respondents will indicate a noticeable reduction in the extent of congestion after the deployment of the UPA projects. |
| Tolling |
MNTolling-1 |
Vehicle access on the HOT lanes and PDSL on I-35W will be regulated to improve operation of I-35W |
| Tolling |
MNTolling-2 |
Some general-purpose lane travelers will shift to the I-35W HOT lanes and PDSL, while HOV lane travelers will remain in the HOT lane |
| Tolling |
MNTolling-3 |
HOV violations will be reduced |
| Tolling |
MNTolling-4 |
After ramp-up, the HOT lanes and PDSL on I-35W maintains improved operations |
| Transit |
MNTransit-1 |
The HOT lanes, PDSL, MARQ2 bus lanes, and Transit Advantage project, and shoulder running lane guidance system will increase bus travel speeds, reduce bus travel times, and improve bus trip-time reliability in the I-35W and Cedar Avenue corridors, and downtown Minneapolis |
| Transit |
MNTransit-2 |
The new park-and-ride lots and new and expanded transit services will result in ridership increases including a mode shift to transit. |
| Transit |
MNTransit-3 |
The mode shift to transit from the UPA transit strategies will reduce congestion on I-35W, downtown Minneapolis, and other roadways. |
| Transit |
MNTransit-4 |
What was the relative contribution of each of the Minnesota UPA transit strategies to mode shift to transit? |
| Telecommuting/TDM |
Tele/TDM-1 |
Use of telecommuting, ROWE, and other flexible work schedules removes trips and VMT from the I-35W corridor. |
| Telecommuting/TDM |
Tele/TDM-2 |
Integration of telecommuting into the UPA project enhances congestion mitigation. |
| Telecommuting/TDM |
Tele/TDM-3 |
What was the relative contribution of the telecommuting strategies to overall travel behavior changes, including secondary impacts of telecommuting |
| Technology |
MNTech-1 |
Active traffic management strategies, including speed harmonization and DMS with transit and highway travel times, promoting better utilization and distribution of traffic to available capacity in the I-35W corridor. |
| Technology |
MNTech-2 |
Active traffic management strategies will reduce the number and duration of incidents that result in congestion in the I-35W corridor. |
| Technology |
MNTech-3 |
What was the relative contribution of each technology enhancement on congestion reduction in the I-35W corridors? |
| Safety |
MNSafety-1 |
Active traffic management will reduce the number of primary and/or secondary crashes. |
| Safety |
MNSafety-2 |
The HOT lanes and the PDSL on I-35W South will not adversely affect highway safety. |
| Safety |
MNSafety-3 |
The MARQ2 dual bus lanes in Downtown Minneapolis will not adversely affect safety. |
| Safety |
MNSafety-4 |
The lane guidance system for shoulder running buses will not adversely affect safety. |
| Equity |
MNEquity-1 |
What are the direct social effects (tolls paid, travel times, adaptation costs) for various transportation system user groups from the I-35W HOT lanes, PDSL, transit, and other UPA strategies? |
| Equity |
MNEquity-2 |
What is the spatial distribution of aggregate out-of-pocket and inconvenience costs, and travel-time and mobility benefits? |
| Equity |
MNEquity-3 |
Are there any differential impacts on certain socio-economic groups? |
| Equity |
MNEquity-4 |
How does reinvestment of revenues from the I-35W HOT lanes and PDSL impact various transportation system users? |
| Environmental |
MNEnv-1 |
What are the impacts of the Minnesota UPA strategies on air quality? |
| Environmental |
MNEnv-2 |
What are the impacts on perceptions of overall environmental quality? |
| Environmental |
MNEnv-3 |
What are the impacts on energy consumption? |
| Goods Movement |
MNGoods-1 |
CVOs will experience reduced travel time by using the HOT lanes and PDSL on I-35W if CVO use is permitted. |
| Goods Movement |
MNGoods-2 |
CVOs will experience reduced travel time by the overall reduction in congestion on I-35W from the UPA projects. |
| Goods Movement |
MNGoods-3 |
CVOs hauling or delivering goods will perceive net benefit of HOT and PDSL (e.g., benefits such as faster service and greater customer satisfaction outweigh higher operating costs due to tolls). The exception may be in downtown Minneapolis, where delivery and service vehicles will not be allowed to use the dual bus lanes during the peak hours. |
| Business |
MNBusiness-1 |
What is the impact of the UPA strategies on employers? e.g.,
employee satisfaction with commute
perceived productivity impacts
employee retention/hiring impacts
negative impacts (increased cost of doing business) |
| Business |
MNBusiness-2 |
How are businesses that are particularly impacted by transportation costs affected (e.g., taxis, couriers, distributors, tradesmen)? |
| Non-Technical |
MNNonTech-1 |
What role did factors related to people play in the success of the deployment?
People (sponsors, champions, policy entrepreneurs, neutral conveners) |
| Non-Technical |
MNNonTech-2 |
What role did factors related to process play in the success of the deployment?
Process (forums including stakeholder outreach, meetings, alignment of policy ideas with favorable politics, and agreement on nature of the problem) |
| Non-Technical |
MNNonTech-3 |
What role did factors related to structures play in the success of the deployment?
Structures (networks, connections and partnerships, concentration of power and decision-making authority, conflict-management mechanisms, communications strategies, supportive rules and procedures) |
| Non-Technical |
MNNonTech-4 |
What role did factors related to media play in the success of the deployment?
Media (media coverage, public education) |
| Non-Technical |
MNNonTech-5 |
What role did factors related to competencies play in the success of the deployment? Competencies (cutting across the preceding areas: persuasion, getting grants, doing research, technical/technological competencies; ability to be policy entrepreneurs; knowing how to use markets) |
| Non-Technical |
MNNonTech-6 |
Does the public support the UPA/CRD strategies as effective and appropriate ways to reduce congestion? |
| Cost Benefit |
MNCBA-1 |
What is the net benefit (benefits minus costs) of the UPA/CRD strategies? |
