Cost / Benefit Analysis Table 1: Input variables used in Cost / Benefit Analysis Parameters Units Values General External Costs -Vehicles

Similar documents
Energy Savings by replacing old facility o Energy savings o Emissions

2040 Transportation Policy Plan Conversion to Performance Based Planning Basis. 25 th Annual CTS Transportation Research Conference May 21, 2014

MONITORING IMPLEMENTATION AND PERFORMANCE

Introduction to Transportation Systems

AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE EVALUATION GUIDANCE

Benefit Cost Analysis 2016 TIGER Grant Application Funding Opportunity #: DTOS59-16-RA-TIGER8

Economic Viability of Mississippi Gulf Coast Rail Service. NCITEC Project Dr. Waheed Uddin Seth Cobb

A Win/Win Strategy: Fixing Transportation and Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Massachusetts

PROPOSED NEW STARTS AND SMALL STARTS POLICY GUIDANCE. January 9, 2013

The Point Intermodal River Port Facility at the Port of Huntington Project Benefit Cost Summary

The Economic Return on Transportation Investments

Evaluating the Potential Economic Efficiency of Project Delivery Options

Fairmount Line Feasibility Study

APPENDIX A: BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Table of Contents

Final Regional 2035 Transportation Plan Adopted: January 21, 2010

The Policies section will also provide guidance and short range policies in order to accomplish the goals and objectives.

The Cost Savings Potential of Sustainability Practices

PRICING STRATEGIES PRESENTED BY JEFFREY D. ENSOR MALAYSIA TRANSPORT RESEARCH GROUP TO THE NOVEMBER 25, 2003

Fairfax County Countywide Transit Network Study

Tool for Operations Benefit/Cost (TOPS- BC) for Florida DOT Applications

Transit Service Guidelines

Caltrain Fare Study Update

GIS-based Modeling for Statewide and Corridor Freight Planning

The role of externalities in the Cost Benefit Analysis of Rome Milan HS line

TRANSPORTATION FACTS. OUR CUSTOMERS: Travel Patterns

summary report West Texas Rail Feasibility Study Texas Department of Transportation Cambridge Systematics, Inc. HNTB August 2011

Long-Range Plan Task Force: Draft Analysis Results

Integrating High Speed Rail, Regional Rail, and Transit Services in California

Sustainable Return on Investment Benefits and Costs of Alternative Future Land Use Development Alternatives

CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD REPORT ON REGIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION REDUCTION TARGETS PURSUANT TO SB375

Wisconsin s Passenger Rail Development Program

Independent Accountants Report on Applying Agreed-Upon Procedures

Ridership and Revenue Risk: Implications for High Speed Rail Project Funding and Financing

THE ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF PHILLYCARSHARE IN THE PHILADELPHIA REGION

Los Angeles County Congestion Reduction Demonstration Project

A MODAL COMPARISON OF DOMESTIC FREIGHT TRANSPORTATION EFFECTS ON THE GENERAL PUBLIC EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. November 2007

Transportation Cost Estimation

Chapter 1: The 2035 Virginia Surface Transportation Plan 1. Challenges & Opportunities 2 VTrans2035: The Precursor 2 The VSTP and VTrans2035 2

HIGH SPEED RAIL PLANNING SERVICES. March 2012

LATTS II - Freight Investment Decision Principles

Sustainable Transport Development: Global Mandates & Regional Overview of Transport Development

Multi-modality assessments in promoting sustainable urban traffic

9 Before and After Study Plan

1.201 / / ESD.210 Transportation Systems Analysis: Demand and Economics. Assignment 2

Rail - What Does the Future Bring?

APPENDIX H: TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL VALIDATION AND ANALYSIS

VISION. 4. Vision. 31 Page

Chapter 2 Performance Measures

Appendix B. Benefit-Cost Technical Memorandum

The Economic Effects of High Speed Rail Investment

MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION

Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority Response to the State-Mandated Performance Audit, January 12, 2017

METRA UP-W LINE. Locally Preferred Alternative Report

Cost/Benefit Analysis of NJDOT Route 18/Hoes Lane Improvement Project

Delivering Sustainability: Transporting Goods in Urban Spaces

Transit, Intercity Bus, Taxi 8-1

Transform 66 Multimodal Project: Prioritization Process and Evaluation Criteria Approved March 3, 2016

METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. Independent Accountants Report on Applying Agreed-Upon Procedures

Transportation Report to SPC on Transportation and Transit 2017 March 15. ISC: UNRESTRICTED TT Page 1 of 7 ROUTEAHEAD UPDATE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT/DISCLAIMER

6.1 INTRODUCTION 6.2 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS COMPLIANCE STATUS TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY

PROTECTING Our Quality of Life... Why the Capital Region Needs to Invest in Mass Transit NOW

The Policy-Related Road Transport Research in MOT

Tower 55 At-Grade Improvement Project

Pima County Travel Reduction Ordinance

Please complete this checklist by referencing locations where the relevant material can be found in the OBC document

Economic analysis of benefits and cost in different countries

State-Mandated Performance Audit

Metropolitan Transportation Authority

INTERSTATE CORRIDOR PLANNING

GO RAIL NIAGARA SERVICE EXTENSION

Justification Review. Public Transportation Program. Florida Department of Transportation

Re: Mobility Plan 2035 FEIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis

CONNECTICUT TRANSPORTATION BY THE NUMBERS:

Technical Memorandum MULTIMODAL NEEDS. Prepared for: Oklahoma Department of Transportation. Prepared by:

IPSWICH NORTHERN ROUTES STUDY. Stage 1 Progress

FUTURE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PLANS

Presentation to DATA on VTrans 2040 / HB2. October 21, 2015

STATE OF MINNESOTA Office of the State Auditor

ATTACHMENT A. Detailed Study Scope. I-66 (Inside) Multi-modal Study Scope

Louisiana Road And Bridge Conditions Threatened By $12.5 Billion Transportation Funding Backlog

Project Initiation Form

I-66 Corridor Improvements Outside the Capital Beltway in Northern Virginia, USA

Dallas ICM & 511 System. 87 th Annual Transportation Short Course

Greater Newcastle Transport Plan

1.0 INTRODUCTION. Athens Transit System Transit Development Plan 1.0 Introduction. 1.1 System Overview

AMPO Annual Conference Session: Performance (Part 1) October 18, 2017 Savannah, GA

Geospatial Intermodal Freight Transportation (GIFT) 2009 Rochester Institute of Technology

Management. VA SITE Annual Meeting June 27, 2013 Jay Styles Performance and Strategic t Planning Manager, Business Transformation Office

General Population Survey Summary

May 20, 2015 Russ Dudley VDOT - Local Assistance Division. May 20, 2015 Todd Halacy VDOT - Local Assistance Division

REGIONAL SOLICITATION ROADWAY APPLICATIONS: POTENTIAL CHANGES. TAB September 20, 2017

Sustainability. Sustainability Principles. 1. Framework. Spokane Transit s definition of Sustainability is:

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. Texas Statewide Long-Range Transportation Plan Executive Summary

Integrated Corridor Management --An Overview --

Eight County Freight Plan

California State Rail Plan. Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission November 2, 2017

NJ State Rail Plan. New Jersey Short Line Railroad Association Briefing September 12, 2012

Institute of Transportation Engineers Inc.

Service Standards and Policies

Transcription:

Cost / Benefit Analysis Input values used in this analysis are taken from the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) guidance on the preparation of Cost Benefit Analyses, including the recently published guidelines for the HSIPR program and TIGER and TIGERII Grant applications. Where USDOT has not provided valuation guidance or a reference to guidance, standard industry practice has been applied. Estimates used in the monetization of benefits include the cost of operating a vehicle, including maintenance, repair, and depreciation. Table 1 below lists input variables used in this analysis, adjusted for 2011 dollars. As part of calculating diversion benefits, the number of vehicles that would be taken off the road due to the improved rail service is calculated. The expected increase in ridership is used in conjunction with the average vehicle occupancy (1.2 persons/vehicle) to estimate the reduction in the number of vehicles. Benefits resulting from the reduction in the number of vehicles are based on values for congestion cost, pavement maintenance, noise pollution as well as accident costs, all in dollars per vehicle miles. Internal costs include those for fuel, both for vehicles as well as train miles, in addition to estimates for fare per passenger mile as well vehicle operating cost per car mile. Meanwhile, emission costs are expressed as dollars per ton and are based on the benefits associated with recently adopted regulations that limit emissions of air pollutants from passenger cars. Table 1: Input variables used in Cost / Benefit Analysis Parameters Units s General Period of Study (life cycle) Years 2011-2045 Vehicle occupancy normal (Dubuque MPO) Persons / Vehicle 1.2 External Costs -Vehicles Congestion cost per vehicle mile $/Vehicle mil 0.06 Pavement maintenance cost per vehicle mile $/Vehicle mil 0.003 Noise pollution cost per vehicle mile $/Vehicle mil 0.001 Accident cost per vehicle mile $/Vehicle mil 0.03 Gas mileage per vehicle miles/gallon 20.5 Internal costs-bus, Train, Air, Vehicle Fare per HSIPR passenger mile $/ride 45 Vehicle operating cost per car mile $/Vehicle mile 0.37 Air Fare $/one way 150 Bus Fare $/one way 45 Average Daily Airport Parking $/day 5

Parameters Units s of time * of travel time(per hour)-air $ / Hour 45.9 of travel time(per hour)-auto $ / Hour 23.8 of travel time(per hour)-bus $ / Hour 13 of travel time(per hour)-hsipr $ / Hour 22.3 Emissions cost per Ton NOX $ / ton 4,166 PM $ / ton 174,976 VOC $ / ton 1,771 CO2 $ / ton 34 * Transportation Economics & Management Systems, Inc. 2004. Midwest Regional Rail Initiative Project Notebook. Results The benefits of the Intermodal facility and rail service are evaluated in this analysis based on the HSIPR funding evaluation criteria published in CFR Vol. 74 No. 119 Docket No. FRA 2009 0045 and TIGER II Operational and Ridership Benefits Metrics It was estimated that opening year ridership from Dubuque would be 14,450 which is 17% of overall ridership in the corridor. The first year of operation is 2015 and the annual growth rate in ridership is assumed to be 2.00%. Table 2 below shows the estimated average annual level of ridership for the passenger rail service from Dubuque station over the 31year analysis period. In addition the table shows how many rail passengers are diverted from other modes (auto, air and bus) or represent newly Induced trips. Table 2: Incremental ridership by source Average Annual Level of Passenger Train Ridership 20,430 Average Annual Trips Diverted from Auto 14,207 Average Annual Trips Diverted from Air Travel 3,065 Average Annual Trips Diverted from Bus 1,739 Average Annual Induced trips 1,420 As a result of the above mentioned diversion of trips from auto to passenger rail, Table 3 below shows the total amount of auto trips diverted throughout the study period and estimated average annual reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Induced trips are not included in these calculations, since induced users previously made no trips at all.

A result of the diversion from auto usage to the passenger rail service, Table 3 below show the total VMT avoided over thirty years in addition to the pavement maintenance cost savings. Table 3: VMT Reduction and Pavement Maintenance Savings Total VMT avoided 63,931,599 Pavement Maintenance Savings $191,795 In terms of Vehicle Operating Cost (VOC) savings, Table 4 below illustrates the net VOC savings, in addition to the induced demand benefits for new passenger rail users. Induced demand benefits accrue to users who were not making the trip between Chicago and Dubuque using the available modes of transportation prior to the project, and are now using the rail service for the trip. Table 4: VOC Net Savings to New Users and Induced Demand Benefits Net VOC savings 44,087,613 Induced Demand Benefits $0 Benefits to remaining highway users include average annual VMT reduction, which results in a reduced cost of congestion and reduced accident costs (from fewer accidents). Table 5 below shows these benefits for 30 years of the projects. Table 5: Benefits to Remaining Highway Users and Safety Benefits Average Annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT)Reduced 2,131,053 Total VMT avoided for 30 years 63,931,599 Reduced Cost of Congestion 3,835,896 Reduced Accident Costs 1,917,948 Environmental Benefits Environmental benefits are calculated by: (1) estimating the reduction in vehicle and plane emission from trips being diverted to rail; and, (2) estimating the increase in emission from introducing new passenger rail service. Table 6 indicates the total life cycle emission reduction for the project in 30 years Table 6: Environmental Reduction Reduced Gallons of Fuel 3,118,615 Reduced Nox Emissions (tons) 102 Reduced PM Emissions (tons) 1 Reduced CO Emissions (tons) 1,307 Reduced CO2 Emissions (tons) 45,088

Table 7 shows Emission Cost Savings for 30 years. Table 7: Emission Cost Savings Energy savings (Gas) 8,077,212 Nox Cost Savings 423,399 PM Cost Savings 186,300 CO Cost Savings 2,314,159 CO2 Cost Savings 1,532,979 Noise Emission Savings 91,935 Findings and Overall Results The table below summarizes the benefits over a long run planning horizon and summarized over the life cycle of the project. Transportation Benefits Benefits to High Speed Rail Users Total Ridership 612,900 Average Annual Ridership 20,430 Average Annual Reduction in VMT 2,131,053 Transportation Cost Savings to New Users $44,087,613 Induced Demand Benefits $0 Revenues $27,580,500 Benefits to Remaining Highway Users Congestion Cost Savings $3,835,896 Accident Cost Savings $1,917,948 Pavement Maintenance Savings $191,795 Environmental Benefits NOx $423,399 PM $186,300 CO $2,314,159 CO2 $1,532,979 Noise Emission $91,935 Energy Benefits Gas savings $8,077,212 Economic Benefits Direct & In direct jobs impact on the community $291,673,461 Table below explains costs need to construction and maintain the facility and benefits generated by the facility during construction and long term.

Cost Cost of Construction $20,669,000 Annual subside $357,000 Subside for 30 years $10,710,000 Annual maintenance $200,000 Maintenance cost for 30 years $6,000,000 Benefits Transportation Benefits $44,087,613 Environmental Benefits $4,548,771 Energy Benefits $8,077,212 Economic Benefits $291,673,467 The table below summarizes the CBA findings. Annual costs and benefits are computed over a long run planning horizon and summarized over the life cycle of the project. The project is assumed to have a useful life of at 30 years, and that time horizon is used in the analysis. Construction is expected to be completed by end of 2012, but operating costs continue through the whole horizon of the project. Benefits also accrue during the full operation of the project. At a 7% discount rate, a $27.5million investment (capital and O&M) results in fully $114.1 million of benefits. This yields a benefit to cost ratio of approximately 5.21. At a 3% discount rate, a $31.6 million investment (capital and O&M) results in fully $227.6 million of benefits. This yields a benefit to cost ratio of approximately 7.18. 7% Discount Rate 3% Discount Rate Benefit Cost Analysis Results Total Discounted Benefits $144,104,980 $227,618,006 Total Discounted Costs $27,680,836 $31,686,446 Benefit Cost Ratio 5.21 7.18 Net Present $116,424,144 $195,931,560