Home >Documents >Feasibility of a Metropolitan Truck-only Toll Lane Network: The Case of Atlanta, Georgia

Feasibility of a Metropolitan Truck-only Toll Lane Network: The Case of Atlanta, Georgia

Date post:29-Jan-2016
Category:
View:44 times
Download:0 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
Feasibility of a Metropolitan Truck-only Toll Lane Network: The Case of Atlanta, Georgia. Michael D. Meyer, P.E., Professor School of Civil and Environmental Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology. High level proof-of-concept analysis Not an exhaustive list of options - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript:
  • Feasibility of a Metropolitan Truck-only Toll Lane Network: The Case of Atlanta, Georgia

    Michael D. Meyer, P.E., ProfessorSchool of Civil and Environmental EngineeringGeorgia Institute of Technology

  • TOT StudyHigh level proof-of-concept analysis Not an exhaustive list of optionsAnalysis based upon Available regional truck travel dataHOT lane study analysis methodsAssumed facilities (engineering feasibility not examined.)

  • HOT/TOT Steering CommitteeAtlanta Regional Commission (ARC) Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT)Georgia Regional Transportation Authority (GRTA) State Road and Tollway Authority (SRTA)Georgia Motor Trucking AssociationAmerican Transportation Research InstituteIndustry representatives (United Parcel Service, Lithonia Lighting, Drug Transport, Inc.)SteeringCommittee

  • Congestion in 2030 Afternoon Peak (PM)

  • The Opportunity & aChallengeMost HOVcorridors have excesscapacityBut some HOV corridors will becongested

  • HOT and TOT Study Primary Assumptions2030 target analysis year

    Managed lanes network on all limited access facilitiesOne lane in each direction inside I-285Two lanes in each direction on and outside of I-285Scenarios evolved based on expected performance levels and ability to handle demand at reasonable levels of service.TOTAssumptions

  • TOT Lane ObjectivesMANAGE the new lanesBuilding to achieve ---Free flow conditions for managed lane usersFree flow conditions for the regions planned BRT networkMaximum use of the highway capacity

  • Why Interested?Trucks constitute significant portion of highway flowsTrucks take up a lot of space (capacity)Logistics industry in Atlanta region is significant and likely to growGrowth in national economy suggests tremendous growth in through truck tripsTruck/auto crashes

  • TOT AssumptionsVoluntary use of TOT lanesValue of time: $35/hr for heavy trucks (over 8,000 lbs.)$18/hr for light trucks Fees charged when needed and in the amount needed to manage performance of TOT lanesConservative passenger car equivalents used (1 truck = 2 cars) Truck lane interchanges provided at HOV interchanges for initial assessmentBuses can use TOT lanes as well

  • Three Alternatives EvaluatedAlternative 1: TOT lanes are established along side of planned HOV lanes.

    Alternative 2: Same as above, PLUS in midday hours (10am-3pm) light service trucks can use HOV lanes inside I-285.

    Alternative 3: TOT lanes are established in place of planned HOV lanes along I-285 and outside of I-285.

  • Alternative 1 Voluntary TOTI-75 NI-85 NI-285I-75 S HOV networkEntire region

  • Alternative 2 Current HOV lanes inside I-285 restricted to light duty trucks in midday

  • Alternative 3Voluntary TOTOutside I-285On I-285HOV networkInside I-285 onlyTOT replaces HOV outside and on I-285

  • Truck ProductivityTOT Scenarios

  • TOT Alt 3:North-South corridor travel time 2030 PM Peak Period Through trip in TOT lanes saves 70 minutes in TOT lanes compared to travel time in GP lanesAlternative 3 North-South Truck TripN

  • Alternative 3 East-West Truck Trip 2030 PM Peak Period Through trip in TOT lanes saves 80 minutes in TOT lanes compared to travel time in GP lanesN

  • Truck Trip Performance

  • Change in Weekday Vehicle Hours and Vehicle Miles, 2030Network Performance

    TOT Alternative ScenarioWeekday VMT (000s)Change in Weekday VMT from Base (000s) Weekday VHT (000s)Change in Weekday VHT (from Base (000s)HOV 2+ Base159,787-6,139-A1: Major Truck Corridors160,1080.2%5,742-6.5% A2: Service to Deliveries160,1380.2%5,747-6.5% A3: Regional TOT Network159,692-0.1%5,843-4.8% * Regional measures include all vehicle types on all arterials, collectors, and limited access facilities.

  • Change in Weekday Vehicle Hours and Vehicle Miles, 2030Network Performance

    TOT Alternative ScenarioWeekday VMT (000s)Change in Weekday VMT from Base (000s) Weekday VHT (000s)Change in Weekday VHT (from Base (000s)HOV 2+ Base159,787-6,139-A1: Major Truck Corridors160,1080.2%5,742-6.5% A2: Service to Deliveries160,1380.2%5,747-6.5% A3: Regional TOT Network159,692-0.1%5,843-4.8% * Regional measures include all vehicle types on all arterials, collectors, and limited access facilities.

  • Performance of GP Lanes PM Peak Hour17 to 24% reduction in congested general purpose directional miles

  • Change in PM Truck Volume TOT Alternative 3

  • Performance of Arterials and CollectorsA 10-15% reduction of congested arterial and collector miles

  • ARC modeled air quality impact and found little change in expected emissions, however.Safety benefits are potentially huge ($3 million per fatality, not to mention delay costs)Air Quality and Safety

  • 2030 Projected Annual Revenue

    2030 TOT ScenarioWeekday Revenue per TOT Lane MileTotal Weekday Revenue (000s)Projected Annual Revenue (000s)A1: Major Truck Corridors $ 694 $ 327 $ 89,400 A2: Service to Deliveries $ 614 $ 372 $ 101,000 A3: Regional TOT Network $ 554 $ 724 $ 198,000

  • What We Learned About TOT LanesImproved freight and passenger movement Regional travel time saving (for all, except HOV users) More reliable travel conditionsSafer travel conditions (we believe)Efficient Truck operators save time, increase productivity Regionally, similar vehicle miles traveled in fewer hoursPotentially cost effectiveOpportunity to offer substantial benefits, earn revenue

  • Comparative Results of Regional Managed Lane Strategies

    2030 HOV, HOT and TOT Scenarios

  • System-wide Annualized Capital & Operating Costs (M)

  • Regional Value of Annual Time Savings* Estimates ($M)

  • PM Peak Hour Level of Service General Purpose Lanes20% increase in free flow performance

  • Implementa-tionRange of responsibilities for TOT planning, development, operation, maintenance, and enforcementCommon visions and principlesDetermine pricing strategy early onRegional vs. corridor-level issuesConsistency with RTPTOT alternative in corridor studiesPotential for PPPUse of revenuesPublic outreachConsistency with regions fee collection strategy

  • Lessons LearnedTravel demand model can be used for an analysis-driven debateConfluence of technical analysis and political advocacyTrucking representativesStrategy tied to BRTVoluntary use of laneCorridor-level studies with freight componentTrade-off between HOV and .

  • Some Extensions Since the Study Was Donehttp://www.TOT_Final_Report_July2005

  • Application of Screening Criteria (1)Screening Criterion 2: Daily truck volumeSource: Hsing-Chung Chu, Implementing Truck-Only Toll Lanes at the State, Regional, and Corridor Levels: Development of a Planning Methodology, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, 2007.Screening Criterion 1: PM level of service

  • Application of Screening Criteria (2)Screening Criterion 4: High truck-related crashesScreening Criterion 3: Daily truck percentageSource: Hsing-Chung Chu, Implementing Truck-Only Toll Lanes at the State, Regional, and Corridor Levels: Development of a Planning Methodology, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, 2007.

  • Application of Screening Criteria (3)Potential TOT corridors Combine screening criteriaSource: Hsing-Chung Chu, Implementing Truck-Only Toll Lanes at the State, Regional, and Corridor Levels: Development of a Planning Methodology, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, 2007.Screening Criteria 5: 90% cost saving threshold

  • Planning Guidance Implementation Steps for TOT Lanes Public-private partnerships Connect freight generatorsTrucking industry supportScreening ProcessEfficiency, Safety, Freight productivity, Self-financing, Environment Through truck trafficExcess capacity medium trucksVariable pricing / Optimum toll rates Source: Hsing-Chung Chu, Implementing Truck-Only Toll Lanes at the State, Regional, and Corridor Levels: Development of a Planning Methodology, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, 2007.

    There are some HOV lanes that are congested (red) There are some HOV lanes that are free-flowing (Green)Managed lanes could help both.Green areas could sell the extra HOV lane space to toll-paying SOVs.Orange and red areas could toll HOV 2 or even HOV 3 to ease the congestion on the lane.2030 PM Peak Hour congestion on HOV lanes without toll The regional VMT under the TOT scenarios represent a range of difference from an increase of 0.22% over the base scenario VMT under alternative 2 to a 0.0006% decrease in regional VMT under alternative 3. These relatively low differences suggest that the concept of TOT lanes on the regions highway network does not threaten the attainment of air quality standards in the Atlanta region due to VMT. The change in VHT ranges from a decrease of 6% to 7% over the base scenario regional VHT. This suggests a slight improvement across the region. The regional VMT under the TOT scenarios represent a range of difference from an increase of 0.22% over the base scenario VMT under alternative 2 to a 0.0006% decrease in regional VMT under alternative 3. These relatively low differences suggest that the concept of TOT lanes on the regions highway network does not threaten the attainment of air quality standards in the Atlanta region due to VMT. The change in VHT ranges from a decrease of 6% to 7% over the base scenario regional VHT. This suggests a slight improvement across the region. Issues include impacts on carpooling, engineering feasibility, trucking industry coordination, public acceptance of taking HOV lanes

    What is needed?Investment grade analysisDataespecially in the short term Willingness to pay of customersRegional transportation planFlexibil9ity in design

    Clearly, A3 with more lane miles of TOT will generate more revenue twice as much as A1Rev per TOT lane mile suggests that major truck corridors were well-selected Suggests that further study on corridor-by-corridor basis may add high-demand corridors to the A1 systemNot a thorough cost-benefit analysis but in generalCost effectiveness through comparing (revenues generated and) value of time saved by commercial vehicles versus capital and operating costs Explain that HOT scenario was run with TOT refinements in order to perform fair comparison of scenarios.Not a thorough cost-benefit analysis but in generalCost effectiveness through comparing (revenues generated and) value of time saved by commercial vehicles versus capital and operating costs Not a thorough cost-benefit analysis but in generalCost effectiveness through comparing (revenues generated and) value of time saved by commercial vehicles versus capital and operating costs

of 36/36
Feasibility of a Metropolitan Truck-only Toll Lane Network: The Case of Atlanta, Georgia Michael D. Meyer, P.E., Professor School of Civil and Environmental Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology
Embed Size (px)
Recommended