Examining the Economic Trade-offs of Alternative Transportation Funding NC I-95 Economic Assessment

Transcription

1 Examining the Economic Trade-offs of Alternative Transportation Funding NC I-95 Economic Assessment presented to ITED Conference presented by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Paula Dowell, PhD April 2014

2 Background I-95 in NC is 182 mile corridor Built in 60s and 70s with little improvement since completion Reached end of engineering life and needs modernization NCDOT received 1 of 3 FHWA pilots to toll existing interstate for rehab and rebuilding Legislature instructed NCDOT to conduct economic analysis of tolling

3 Study Purpose Compare economic impacts of the proposed alternatives» Business as Usual» Funding improvements by tolling» Funding improvements by other methods Provide information for decision making

4 Key Elements Engage stakeholders, the public & officials Analyze impacts to:» Freight and logistics» Tourism» Local traffic» Economy in general Screen & analyze funding options

5 Involving Stakeholders Advisory Council Interviews Meetings Electronic updates Surveys Trucking industry General public Interviews Shippers/Agriculture Trucking industry Economic developers Site selection consultants County engineers Tourism officials NCDOT management Website Study updates Fact sheets Meeting notices Comments Public survey link Meetings No Tolls I-95 board Advisory Council NCDOT mgmt Public (in May) Focus Groups Shippers Trucking Industry Economic developers Tourism stakeholders General public Agriculture businesses Roadway contractors

6 Scenarios No-build or Business as Usual (BAU) Build - No Specified Funding Build - Fund via Tolls Build - Fund via Tolls with Mitigation Build - Fund via Alternative Funding» 10-Year Statewide Sales Tax - 1/3 of revenue goes to fund I-95» Revenue package Sales Tax (10 year), Highway Use Tax (HUT) and Vehicle Registration Fees» Personal Income Tax Statewide with ~ 1/3 going to fund I-95» Motor Fuels Tax Statewide increase with region s allocated portion funding I-95

7 Estimating Costs of No-build Travel time costs Increase in VHT per VMT Buffer time costs Impact on truck turns Increase total trip time Crash delay costs Increase in crashes Increase in impacted vehicles 7

8 Buffer Time Impacts Only estimated for BAU scenario Assumed no buffer time impacts until 2020 Assumed 60% of all trucks are impacted based on license plate survey indicating portion of trucks traveling short distance Estimated 5% increase in number of truck trips necessary as result of congestion in 2020 (reduction in number of turns per truck) Estimated 20% increase in number of truck trips in 2040 due to congestion Applied per mile VOC and VOT costs for North Carolina to monetize the impacts each year

9 Crash Delay Impacts Source: CS analysis of 2012 INRIX data and NCDOT crash data

10 Economic Cost of Business as Usual Metric BAU Business Transportation Costs ($ billions) $66.9 Gross Regional Product ($ billions) ($78.4) Personal Income ($ billions) ($72.6) Job (avg annual full-time) (16,352) ( ) denotes negative value Source: CS analysis using the REMI economic model

11 The Economic Cost of BAU Jobs Foregone jobs Year

12 Invest with No Funding Specified Metric BAU Invest No Funding Business Transportation Costs ($ billions) $66.9 ($67.3) Gross Regional Product ($ billions) ($78.4) $85.0 Personal Income ($ billions) ($72.6) $79.1 Job (avg annual full-time) (16,352) 19,105 ( ) denotes negative value Source: CS analysis using the REMI economic model

13 Economic Analysis of Investing with Tolls Metric BAU Build, No Funding Build, Tolls Business Transportation Costs ($ billions) $66.9 ($67.3) ($62.4) Toll cost ($ billions) $9.6 Gross Regional Product ($ billions) ($78.4) $85.0 $77.8 Personal Income ($ billions) ($72.6) $79.1 $67.6 Job (avg annual full-time) ( ) denotes negative value Source: CS analysis using the REMI economic model (16,352) 19,105 16,872

14 The Economic Impact of Tolls Lost jobs due to tolls Construction and new long-term jobs Jobs Capture foregone jobs Year

15 Key Findings Employment will grow by an average of 16,000 fewer jobs per year under the no-build or BAU All the funding options examined lead to a net increase in statewide economic benefits relative to no build Of the scenarios examined, no funding alternative significantly better or worse based on total economic impacts Results would have been dramatically different if impacts of BAU was not estimated first