WHAT IFS: Over the course of the 422plus Project certain questions have arisen multiple times at meetings, briefings and on-line at the website. Most of these questions start with WHAT IF.
WHAT IF vehicle classifications and discounts rates were applied in the study? How does that change the impact on the average 422 user? Many comments and questions received focused on the fairness of the toll rate used in the analysis. In the study it looks like every driver regardless of size of vehicle is to pay the same rate. But you wanted to know: what if trucks that take up the most room on the road and contribute more to roadway deterioration carry their fair burden? Or, what if daily local commuters /residents who only drive a short distance get a big discount? Or what if rates change based on the time of day, so you pay less to drive when the road isn t crowded? While the analysis sought to answer the BIG QUESTION of how much would the average toll have to be to cover the all costs of the envisioned 422 Corridor Improvement Program, it didn t set out a typical vehicle rate and classification schedule as is common practice by toll road agencies around the globe. We looked to the current average toll rates in the region simply as the best barometer of current public acceptance of toll rates for a similar distance of travel. If the program moved forward into design, the next step will be refining the tolling scheme or tariff. As an example, here are two different versions of toll systems. One is from the nation s earliest turnpike, the Pennsylvania Turnpike and the second from one of the world s newest toll systems by the South African National Roads Agency. As shown in the images from the Pennsylvania Turnpike Toll Rate Calculator using the same trip distance from Valley Forge to Reading the toll rate varies by the vehicle weight and number of axles. In this example, large trucks pay higher toll rates than cars. There is also a discount for those who use E-ZPass compared to those who pay cash. In the case of the South African National Roads Agency, those motorists who use the E-toll tag get a 25% discount. There is also another 2
discount for what is referred to as Time of Day discounts for traveling off peak time or those hours where traffic volumes are typically less than the congested rush hours in the morning or afternoon. The ability to vary tolls by vehicle types, time of day, or through the use of electronic toll tags provides flexibility to adjust toll rates to address the unique characteristics of the corridor and local objectives. For instance, a corridor with a relatively high percentage of trucks, similar to US 422, could have an even lower toll rate for cars with the goal of maintaining daily revenue. 3
WHAT IF instead of tolling the entire 422 Expressway you only toll additional lanes added to the roadway to ease congestion? We thought of that, but after crunching the numbers, assessing projected traffic volumes and looking at overall roadway improvements needed and the corridor s unique alignment: The addition of High Occupancy Toll (HOT)or Express Toll lane would do little to ease congestion along US 422 for daily commuters. Simply stated adding in two express lanes doesn t fit - at a price or into a construction time line that makes sense and wouldn t generate the additional dollars needed to meet all of the corridors transportation infrastructure and operating needs above those currently funded. HOT lanes are a hot topic today in roadway design and congestion management systems around the world. Here in the United States the implementation of HOT lanes on freeways or expressways is being developed from either the conversion of High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes previously restricted to carpools and buses only like I 15 near San Diego, CA, or through the addition of new capacity HOT lanes like those on the Capital Beltway, I 495, around Washington D.C. The pricing of the HOT Lane tolls is variable depending on the demand or volume of vehicles. The pricing is adjusted to meet a user performance metric of maintaining a travel speed of 45 or 55 mph in the HOT lane. You pay a premium for a guarantee of travel time, and make time of day travel choices accordingly. In the case of US 422, the implementation of Express Toll Lanes, including HOT lanes (Concept 1), would require the addition of two new travel lanes along US 422 in the median area west of the Schuylkill River Crossing Bridges. East of the Schuylkill River, the addition of express lanes would require purchasing additional right-of way due to the limited width of the median area, and the physical constraints and geometry of the roadway s and its current interchange locations along this section of US 422. Constructing new distinct dedicated toll lanes creates travel and development impacts and costs well beyond the current unmet improvement needs of the rest of the highway and bridge infrastructure of 422 Setting tolls to cover those costs undercuts the ability to ease the growing congestion impacts already felt along the corridor. Under the highway capital improvement program studied under the 422plus Project, the widening of US 422 for the 6 miles from Trooper to PA 29 would not occur until 2023 at the earliest under a 10 year Capital Plan and 2030 under a 15 year Capital Plan. The construction cost estimate for the US 422 widening along this section was $76.2M in today s dollars. This would not include the toll infrastructure needed to implement HOT Lanes along US 422. Express Toll Lanes from Pottstown to PA 29 would not be implementable until additional mainline capacity would be constructed. At this time, additional mainline capacity beyond PA 29 would not be a consideration until after 2030 when the initial 10 15 year Highway Capital Improvement Plan is completed. Access to the express lanes would be challenge as the traffic within the express lanes would be separated from 4
the US 422 mainline local lanes. Directional access ramps would be needed to access the express lanes at each of the interchanges at PA 29, Egypt Road, and PA 363. Potential ramp configurations at each of these interchanges are shown in interchange concept exhibits. The construction cost to include these ramps would be $40 - $50M, which would be in addition to the US 422 widening. Studying the potential implementation of HOT lanes for US 422 the project team sought comparisons of designs and operations with similar projects across the nation. These included Minnesota DOT s I 394 HOT lanes a double white center line separates the regular lanes from the HOT lanes. In the case of Washington DOT s SR 167 carpools of 2 or more, vanpools, buses, and motorcycles use the lanes for free without a transponder, single occupant vehicles (SOVs) pay a variable toll depending on congestion that is electronically collected using a transponder. A similar configuration is shown in Concept 2 (pictured below), where one HOT lane would be provided in each direction along US 422. It would be difficult to achieve the HOT lane usage needed to offset additional congestion in the regular lanes. Given the lack of HOV experience and the amount of Single Occupancy Vehicles (SOVs) needed to make HOT lanes viable, it would be impractical to consider this HOT lane configuration a potentially successful application. The impact to traffic would most likely result in an under-utilized HOT lane, and gridlock on the two existing lanes during rush hours. 5
WHAT IF you only toll the bridge just to pay for adding capacity? In order to evaluate what the toll rate would be at the bridge, the first step was to establish what subset of projects from the Highway Capacity improvement Plan (HCIP) would be included. The improvements considered were; one of the new Schuylkill River Bridge structures and the widening of US 422 from Trooper Road to US 202. The For anyone that travels the US 422 corridor, traffic congestion at the Schuylkill River Crossing is well known for its recurrent backups during rush hour traffic. While this is but one location along the US 422 corridor that has chronic congestion, the opportunity to provide additional lanes with a wider Schuylkill River bridge would help alleviate congestion and reduce travel times through the River Complex area shown on the aerial view. existing bridge would be widened to 6 lanes and will include improvements at the US 422/PA 23 interchange. The widening of US 422 from Trooper Road to US 202 will increase capacity from 4 to 6 lanes and include improvements at the Trooper Road interchange. The construction cost estimate for these improvements is $97.5M in today s dollars. Comparing the cost of these capacity-adding improvements to the original HCIP of $748.8, the improvements represent 13% of the HCIP with no transit capital investment. The financing of bridge and capacity adding projects as evaluated would require a couple of bond issuances. With a 30 year amortization schedule, these bonds would be repaid prior to 2050. The operations and maintenance of the roadway and toll infrastructure would still need to be maintained for the long term. The next step was to determine the toll revenue needed to support the cost of the capital improvements. Using the same approach and key assumptions from the toll revenue forecasting and financial analyses, a toll rate of 50 cents collected in both directions would support the financial plan for a 15 year Capital Program. Considering the full scale build program implementation, collecting tolls at the Schuylkill Bridge 6
would have less traffic diversions compared to the other toll locations. From the analyses, over 95% of motorists would continue to travel across the bridge when tolled. With a small percentage of traffic diversions, there would be less traffic impacts to the surrounding roadway network. Open Road Toll (ORT) gantries at the approaches to Schuylkill River Bridges similar to the images shown would be implemented to maintain highway speeds through toll gantries and to facilitate toll collection. Images are from the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority (ISHTA), I-294, Irving Park Road Toll Plaza (shown, right) and Sunrise Toll Plaza, in Sunrise Florida (shown, below). While the implementation of capacity adding projects does not address many of the needs along the US 422 corridor west of Trooper Road, it would benefit the more than 100,000 motorists that cross the Schuylkill River along US 422 on a daily basis. It would also help accelerate the construction of the River Crossing Complex bringing much relief to the most people in the near term. The challenges of implementing tolls on the corridor would still exist, but with getting the most bang for the buck early on, the travel benefits of reduced congestion and increased travel times would be a relief to many that are stuck in traffic everyday on US 422. 7
WHAT IF transit service were initially built as a shorter rail line? While the Transit Component of the 422plus Project examined several different configurations of transit service, all of the options presented in the final report planned for transit service to be constructed and operated to Reading. The 422plus project team has considered the possibility of staging the transit component with an initial, shorter rail extension as a way to reduce the up-front capital expenditures and recurring annual operating costs. Options for shorter extensions of the Rail Line beyond Norristown were analyzed using the characteristics of the potential terminal locations at the end of the rail line. A reasonable terminal station should have a strong local market for ridership, good road access for riders from the surrounding area, and should represent a substantial change (extension) to the current rail service terminating in Norristown. Based on those criteria, Monocacy, a low population area, and Valley Forge, only four miles from Norristown, were not considered. The three middle stations Phoenixville, Royersford, and Pottstown were analyzed as potential terminals. The analysis is based on the same operating scenario proposed in the final 422plus report: a through-service from Center City Philadelphia to the chosen terminal along the route of the SEPTA Norristown Line, with 7 roundtrips per day focused on the peak periods. The 422plus project team assessed how the estimates of transit ridership, fare revenue, operating costs, and capital costs for the full line to Reading would change if an initial, shorter line is implemented. All three shorter extension options present a reduction in overall capital and operating expenses. However, only the extension to Pottstown provided an improvement in farebox recovery ratio the portion of the total operating expenses covered by fare revenues over the full Reading transit build-out. Additionally, Pottstown represents the best terminal choice of the three towns given its population, its access to US 422 and Route 100, as well as the close proximity to Stowe Yard where a storage facility could potentially be located. The two other sites are more constrained in terms of providing access to riders, parking, and storage space and turning areas for trains. This WHAT IF details the analysis of an initial extension to Pottstown, and compares the shortened project to the full Reading build-out described in the final 422plus report. Pottstown Extension Ridership, Operating Cost, and Operating Subsidy The analysis of the Pottstown terminal option included estimates of potential ridership, operations and maintenance (O&M) costs, fare revenue and the resulting farebox recovery ratio, as well as capital costs for necessary improvements and other up-front expenditures. 8
The ridership estimates developed for the full extension to Reading were adjusted to estimate the level of ridership that could be expected from a service to Pottstown. All trips destined to stations west of Pottstown (Monocacy and Reading) were assumed to revert to driving. Additionally, trips originating west of Pottstown and destined for stations close to Pottstown were also assumed to revert to driving. For trips destined for more distant stations closer to Philadelphia, it was assumed that a portion of travelers would drive to Pottstown to complete their trip on transit. This share of travelers driving to Pottstown varied by destination; the longer the trip, the higher the share of travelers that would continue to use transit since the relative negative impact of the having to drive to Pottstown versus boarding closer to home is less for a long trips. Overall, ridership on a Pottstown service was estimated to be about 30% less than the total ridership of a full extension to Reading. Fare revenues would be about 25% lower, somewhat less of a reduction than the ridership since many of the trips that would not occur are short trips (intra-berks) and are therefore lower fare trips. Operating and Maintenance cost estimates were also assessed for the Pottstown scenario. The service levels are the same as those described in the 422plus report for the full extension to Reading; however train lengths would be shorter since the lower ridership could be accommodated by three car trains instead of four car trains. The resulting O&M costs for service to Pottstown are estimated to be approximately 30% less than those for the full extension to Reading. One Seat Ride to Philadelphia Seven Round Trips Extension to Pottstown Extension to Reading Projected Daily Boardings 2,310 3,272 Projected Annual Fare Revenue $2.83 M $3.79 M Total Annual O+M Cost $10.89 M $15.47 M Farebox Recovery Ratio 26.0% 24.5% Annual Operations Deficit $8.06 M $11.68 M Operation of the initial phase to Pottstown would cost $10.89 million annually, compared to $15.47 million for the full extension to Reading. As shown in the table above, when combined with the projected fare revenue, the projected annual operating deficit for an initial operation to Pottstown would be approximately $8 million, $3.6 million less than for the full service to Reading. In the final study report, it was assumed that the local share of the operating deficit would be 15%, which would be split between the local counties. Maintaining this assumption, local counties could be expected to cover approximately $1.2 million of the costs for service to Pottstown. 9
Pottstown Extension Capital Costs In addition to O&M costs, the planned capital expenditures needed to provide service to Pottstown were considered. Station and track costs were adjusted to reflect the Pottstown extension. The table below summarizes the Pottstown and Reading capital cost estimates. The capital expenditures necessary for an extension to Pottstown are estimated to be about 25% lower than those for an extension to Reading. Although Pottstown is about half the distance between Reading and Norristown, a large portion of capital costs are fixed and do not vary in proportion to the length of the extension. The cost for trains and the storage facility at the end of line would be very similar. Additionally, the infrastructure improvements needed to maintain Norfolk Southern freight capacity are more heavily concentrated in the eastern portion of the line between Norristown and Pottstown. Similarly, it is anticipated that the cost for access rights to the Norfolk Southern line would not decrease proportionally. Cost Category Extension to Extension to Pottstown Reading * Construction $76.9 M $104.6 M Station Property $6.1 M $7.9 M Rolling Stock $72.5 M $80.0 M Soft Costs/Contingencies $45.2 M $58.8 M Subtotal $200.8 M $251.3 M Norfolk Southern Rights $66.7 M $100.0 M Total Capital Cost (2010 $) $267.4 M $351.3 M Total Capital Cost (Year of Expenditure $) $313.6 M $408.9 M * Values do not include additional costs to Wyomissing described in the Final Report The capital expenditures necessary for an extension to Pottstown are estimated to be about 25% lower than those for an extension to Reading. Although Pottstown is only slightly more than half the distance between Reading and Norristown, a large portion of capital costs are fixed and do not vary in proportion to the length of the extension. The cost for trains and the storage facility at the end of line would be very similar. Additionally, the infrastructure improvements needed to maintain Norfolk Southern freight capacity are more heavily concentrated in the eastern portion of the line between Norristown and Pottstown. Similarly, it is anticipated that the cost for access rights to the Norfolk Southern line would decrease, but that the reduction would not be fully proportional to the length of the rail extension. Conclusion Constructing and operating the proposed transit service over a shorter initial segment terminating at Pottstown would provide savings over the full Reading build-out described in the 422plus final report (Alternative 2A). This shorter initial operating segment would save about $95 million in capital expenditures and $3.8 million in annual operating expenses compared to full build-out to Reading. The annual operating subsidy for a service to Pottstown would be approximately $8 million compared to $11.7 million for service to Reading. Based on an assumed local share of 15%, local counties could expect to contribute about $1.2 million annually for the operation of the service. 10