DATA COLLECTION. March 15, 2013

Transcription

1 8140 Walnut Hill Lane, Suite 1000 Dallas, TX tel: fax: Mr. Scott Phinney, P.E. Office of Statewide Planning & Research The Ohio Department of Transportation 1980 W. Broad Street Columbus, OH Subject: Stark/Columbiana US 30 Sketch Level Traffic and Revenue Analysis Dear Mr. Phinney: Pursuant to your request, CDM Smith is pleased to provide you with sketch level traffic and revenue forecasts for the proposed Stark/Columbiana US 30 project, a proposed toll facility approximately thirty five miles in length from Trump Avenue in southeastern Canton in Stark County to SR 11 in Columbiana County. The four lane toll road will provide drivers in eastern Ohio an alternate route from the existing US 30 alignment and other east west corridors in the area. This study involved the incorporation of data from multiple sources into a travel demand model to generate sketch level traffic and revenue forecasts for the proposed US 30 toll road. Historical traffic count data was acquired for several of the major roadways near the US 30 corridor. The baseline demographic information for the project area was also adjusted using revised projections provided by ODOT staff. The traffic and demographic data were then used in conjunction with the travel demand model and CDM Smith s toll diversion methodology to generate traffic and revenue forecasts over a forty year period. It is important to recognize that this sketch level assessment is not intended for use in support of actual project financing. Considerably more detailed studies would be required prior to actual project financing. DATA COLLECTION The data collection effort for this project focused on obtaining historical traffic count data for several roadways near the US 30 corridor. Utilizing current transportation data for the area affords the opportunity to analyze existing current traffic patterns and trends in addition to supporting the validation of traffic forecasting tools. Historical Traffic Counts CDM Smith obtained historical traffic count data for several locations near the proposed US 30 corridor. ADT count data for 2003, 2006 and 2009 were acquired for 18 locations in Stark County

2 Page 2 and Columbiana County (see Figure 1). These historical counts from ODOT s traffic count database were then used to validate the travel demand model in the project area. A summary of the historical count data used in the analysis is shown in Table 1. Figure 1. Historical Traffic Count Locations County Roadway Limits Table 1. Historical Traffic Counts Stark US30 E. CORP. CANTON to US 30P ENTER RAMP 21,700 19,930 19,010 Stark US30 C 170 (TRUMP AVE.) to SR ,770 12,320 13,310 Stark US30 S.E. CORP. EAST CANTON to SR 44 9,430 9,380 8,150 Stark US30 SR 44 to N.W. CORP. MINERVA 6,890 6,790 6,470 Stark SR172 SR 44 (WOOD ST.) to E. CORP. EAST CANTON 4,480 4,090 4,490 Stark SR172 T 176 (MIDAY AVE.) to SR 183 3,240 3,300 3,050 Stark SR44 SR 172 (NASSAU ST.) to N. CORP. EAST CANTON 6,110 6,040 4,820 Stark SR183 N. CORP. MINERVA to SR 172 6,230 5,420 5,270 Columbiana US30 STARK CO. LINE to C 402 (AUGUSTA RD.) 6,020 6,190 7,250 Columbiana US30 C 402 (AUGUSTA RD.) to SR 9 (1ST. ST.) 3,920 3,930 3,360 Columbiana US30 SR 9 (1ST. ST.) to S.W. CORP. HANOVERTON 3,620 3,580 3,550 Columbiana US30 E. CORP. HANOVERTON to SR 172 2,710 2,900 2,620 Columbiana SR172 STARK CO. LINE to C 402 (ROCHESTER RD.) 3,370 3,070 2,920 Columbiana SR172 C 402 (ROCHESTER RD.) to SR 9 2,530 2,690 2,610 Columbiana SR172 SR 9 to ROUTE ENDS AT US 30 1,970 2,510 2,970 Columbiana SR164 SR 518 to S.W. CORP. LISBON 3,460 2,900 2,730 Columbiana US30 C 417 (STOOKESBERRY RD.) to SR 518 4,910 3,840 3,840 Columbiana SR11 US 30 to SR ,420 13,990 13,140 Source: Ohio Department of Transportation 2003 ADT 2006 ADT 2009 ADT

3 Scott Phinney, P.E. Page 3 DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION The proposed US 30 alignment lies in Stark and Columbiana Counties near the border of adjacent Carroll County, and the demographics of those three counties were focused upon in this study (see Figure 2). Table 2 shows the historical population in the project area of Stark County, Columbiana County and the Carroll County. As shown in the table, the project area has seen very little population growth in the last forty years, and the population actually decreased slightly between 2000 and The City of Canton experienced an average annual growth rate of 1.0 percent between 1970 and By 2010, Canton had lost one third of its 1970 population. However, although the population growth in the project area has been low, significant growth in employment is expected in the area due to oil and natural gas exploration along the Marcellus Shale and Utica Shale throughout the eastern portion of the state. Figure 2. US 30 Project Area To account for the anticipated employment impacts of the Marcellus Shale and Utica Shale developments, modifications to the baseline demographics in the statewide model were made based on recommendations provided by ODOT staff on October 12, Table 3 shows the baseline and adjusted demographics for the project area. As shown in the table, adopting the revised demographics results in an approximate increase of six percent in the population of the project area and a 29 percent increase in total employment. Additionally, although the population

4 Page 4 of the project area is expected to decrease slightly between 2020 and 2040, employment is expected to increase over the same period. This is due to increases in the employment topopulation ratio seen in the Ohio statewide demographic forecasts. Table 2. Historical Population in the US 30 Project Area County/City Source: US Census Bureau Table 3. US 30 Project Area Demographic Forecast Comparison TRAFFIC AND REVENUE ESTIMATION Source: Ohio Statewide Travel Demand Model Annual Growth ( ) Annual Growth ( ) Stark County 372, , , , , % 0.1% Columbiana County 108, , , , , % 0.4% Carroll County 21,579 25,598 26,521 28,836 28, % 0.0% City of Canton* 110,053 93,077 84,161 80,806 73, % 1.0% *The population of the City of Canton is also included in the population total for Stark County Population Forecast Year Baseline 520, , ,688 Adjusted 551, , ,468 Difference 5.9% 6.0% 5.8% Employment Forecast Year Baseline 262, , ,104 Adjusted 340, , ,368 Difference 29.8% 28.9% 28.1% An equilibrium diversion technique was used to carry out traffic assignment runs using the Ohio statewide model and CDM Smith s toll diversion methodology. The model runs were conducted for years 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035 and All other years were interpolated between or extrapolated beyond the modeled years to obtain the yearly traffic and revenue estimates. A nominal growth rate was assumed beyond Revised trip tables were created to reflect the updated demographic for the project area due to the expected oil and natural gas development near the project. The revised trip tables that

5 Page 5 include the revised demographic assumptions were then used to develop sketch level traffic and revenue forecasts for the US 30 toll project. Key Assumptions The following key input assumptions were made as part of the traffic and revenue forecasting process: The entire length of the facility from Trump Avenue in Stark County to SR 11 in Columbiana County is assumed to open to traffic on January 1, The proposed project configuration includes four toll lanes with intermediate access points between Trump Avenue and SR 11 (see Figure 3). Tolls will be collected electronically at toll gantries via transponder (E ZPass) and video identification (pay by mail) with no cash option. The toll rate will be 20 cents per mile in 2020 (opening year) and escalated at a 2.3 percent compound annual rate, with the toll rate adjustments applied every 5 years. The surcharge for video transactions is assumed to be 50 percent of the transponder toll charge. Tolls for vehicles with more than two axles are calculated based on N 1 weighting calculation, wherein each vehicle pays the prevailing toll rate multiple by one less than its number of axles For revenue estimation purposes, it is assumed that opening year transponder/video transaction shares will be 50/50, increasing to 85/15 by The number of annual revenue days is assumed to be 300 throughout the forecast period. Ramp up factors of 60, 70, 80 and 90 percent were applied in each of the first four years, respectively, with no ramp up factor applied from the fifth year forward. An average value of time of $10.77 (in 2011 dollars) per hour is assumed to determine willingness to pay. Vehicle operating costs are assumed to be $0.10 cents per mile for passenger cars (in 2000 dollars), adjusted annually for inflation. A 2.3 percent per year inflation rate is assumed based on CPI trends. Violation rates of 2.5 percent for transponder transactions and 30 percent for video transactions are assumed for the purposes of estimating revenue leakage. Truck percentage is assumed to be ten percent for all years based on traffic count data in the project area and historical experience on toll facilities in the US. Although the observed truck percentage in the project area exceeds ten percent in several locations, experience elsewhere in the US has shown that truck percentage is typically much lower on tolled facilities than on nearby non tolled routes.

6 Page 6 Toll Sensitivity Test Figure 3. Stark/Columbiana US 30 Access Points and Tolling Locations A toll sensitivity test was conducted to determine a toll rate for the US 30 corridor that would optimize the revenue generation potential of the new toll facility. A toll sensitivity analysis tests a series of toll rates to aid in the selection of the best toll rate for the study corridor. Future year toll sensitivity curves are based on changes in traffic characteristics in the corridor including congestion, value of time, competing facilities, and inflationary trends. These curves are essential in estimating the viability of future toll rate increases. In general, a toll sensitivity curve suggests that when the toll rate increases, a portion of travelers will leave the toll facility and choose other routes. Therefore, as toll rate increases transactions would decrease. However, as the toll rate increases, the toll revenue increases until it reaches the highest revenue point (the revenue maximization point) where the next higher toll rate increment would actually result in lower toll revenue. Toll sensitivity analyses were conducted for the proposed US 30 toll road for years 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035 and Toll rates, in actual year dollars, ranging between $0.10 per mile and $0.80 per mile were analyzed for each year. The resulting toll sensitivity curve for the opening year, 2020 as shown in Figure 4, indicates that the US 30 toll revenue maximization point would correspond with a toll rate of approximately $0.20 per mile. Toll rates are assumed to be indexed to inflation, so future year toll rates were compared to the toll sensitivity curves for future years to ensure that they do not exceed the revenue maximization points in those years. As shown in

7 Page 7 Figure 4, the toll rate in 2035 is below the maximum point for that year, with little room for potential increase Revenue 2035 Toll Rate ($0.29) 2020 Toll Rate ($0.20) $0.00 $0.10 $0.20 $0.30 $0.40 $0.50 $0.60 $0.70 $0.80 $0.90 Toll Rate per Mile Figure 4. Stark/Columbiana US 30 Toll Sensitivity To better illustrate the impact of the toll rate on demand, a comparison of the daily traffic on at Gantry #3 on the proposed US 30 toll road as well as the two nearest competing routes (the existing US 30 and SR 72) is shown in Table 4. As shown in the table, traffic on the toll road will decrease at higher toll rates while increasing on the parallel free routes. The total traffic along these three routes will also drop slightly as the increase in toll rate on US 30 drives more users to facilities further from the project corridor. Table 4. US 30 Toll Sensitivity (Gantry #3 Location) 2030 Weekday Traffic Volume Toll Rate 2030 Weekday Gantry #3 on Existing Per Mile Revenue (in 2011$) SR 172 TOTAL Proposed US 30 US 30 $0.10 $9,844 17,231 10,786 2,747 30,764 $0.20 $15,499 13,565 12,661 3,217 29,443 $0.30 $17,494 10,246 14,398 3,589 28,233 $0.40 $16,673 7,317 15,992 3,919 27,228 $0.50 $14,266 5,006 17,205 4,189 26,400 $0.60 $11,396 3,331 18,028 4,463 25,822 $0.70 $8,463 2,120 18,667 4,613 25,400 $0.80 $6,048 1,327 19,068 4,705 25,100

8 Page 8 Heavy Vehicle Tolling Structure An N 1 toll structure is assumed for all vehicles on the proposed US 30 toll road. Under this tolling structure, each vehicle will be required to pay the base toll rate multiplied by one less than its number of axles. As an example, Table 5 includes the toll that would be incurred in 2020 for multiple vehicle types on trips beginning at Gantry #1 and ending at various locations. Table Trip Toll Rates by Vehicle Type Number "N 1" Toll 2020 Toll for Trips beginning at Gantry #1 of Axles Multiplier to Gantry #2 to Gantry #3 to Gantry #4 to Gantry #5 2 1 $2.62 $4.38 $6.07 $ $5.24 $8.76 $12.14 $ $7.86 $13.14 $18.21 $ $10.48 $17.52 $24.28 $27.84 Annualized Traffic and Revenue Based on the traffic forecast at each tolling location, annual forecasts for the US 30 toll road were prepared through Potential toll revenue was estimated based on modeled traffic volumes at each toll collection location through year Estimates of annual transactions and toll revenue (in 2011 dollars) for the proposed US 30 toll project are presented in Table 6. The annual transactions and annual revenue were adjusted to reflect ramp up during the first few years of operation as described above. These ramp up factors are used to reflect the time that it takes for the general public to become aware of the new alternate route and begin adjusting their trip patterns. As shown in the table, the US 30 is expected to generate $1.02 billion (in 2011 dollars) in total revenue over the forty year forecast period. The toll facility is anticipated to produce just under $12 million in its first year of operation, with annual revenues growing to $29 million during the forecast period. Approximately $475 million is expected to be generated during the first twenty years of operation. Total transactions on the facility are expected to grow from nine million in the opening year to almost 19 million by The annualized transactions and revenue over the forty year forecast period are shown in Figures 5 and 6. It is also important to note that there will be sizable costs associated with the collection and processing of toll transactions, maintenance of the tolling equipment, and the operations and maintenance of the roadway. Those additional costs must be considered when evaluating the overall value of the project. The net revenue available for bond repayment will be less than the amounts shown in Table 6.

9 Page 9 Year Table 6. Stark/Columbiana US 30 Sketch Level Traffic and Revenue Estimates Per Mile Rate (2011$) Average Daily Traffic Annual Transactions Annual Revenue (2011$) Cumulative Revenue (2011$) 2020 $ ,800 8,773,000 $11,766,258 $11,766, $ ,000 10,559,700 $13,821,754 $25,588, $ ,300 12,452,100 $15,906,816 $41,494, $ ,600 14,456,000 $18,022,135 $59,516, $ ,100 16,577,000 $20,168,602 $79,685, $ ,400 17,110,000 $23,305,334 $102,990, $ ,600 17,446,600 $23,183,144 $126,174, $ ,900 17,789,600 $23,061,619 $149,235, $ ,100 18,139,500 $22,940,634 $172,176, $ ,300 18,496,400 $22,820,272 $194,996, $ ,600 18,860,300 $25,695,974 $220,692, $ ,700 19,008,500 $25,273,980 $245,966, $ ,800 19,157,900 $24,859,028 $270,825, $ ,900 19,308,400 $24,450,747 $295,276, $ ,000 19,460,200 $24,049,148 $319,325, $ ,100 19,613,200 $26,404,336 $345,729, $ ,200 19,767,200 $26,017,193 $371,746, $ ,300 19,922,500 $25,635,717 $397,382, $ ,400 20,079,300 $25,259,921 $422,642, $ ,500 20,237,100 $24,889,598 $447,532, $ ,600 20,396,000 $26,994,873 $474,527, $ ,700 20,497,800 $26,519,888 $501,046, $ ,700 20,600,600 $26,053,160 $527,100, $ ,800 20,703,300 $25,594,883 $552,695, $ ,900 20,807,000 $25,144,421 $577,839, $ ,900 20,911,000 $27,819,209 $605,658, $ ,000 21,015,600 $27,329,694 $632,988, $ ,100 21,120,700 $26,848,923 $659,837, $ ,200 21,226,200 $26,376,429 $686,213, $ ,200 21,332,300 $25,912,326 $712,126, $ ,300 21,438,900 $28,280,661 $740,406, $ ,400 21,546,300 $27,783,075 $768,189, $ ,400 21,654,000 $27,294,237 $795,483, $ ,500 21,762,300 $26,813,951 $822,297, $ ,600 21,871,000 $26,342,143 $848,640, $ ,700 21,980,500 $29,122,751 $877,762, $ ,700 22,090,500 $28,610,243 $906,373, $ ,800 22,200,800 $28,106,869 $934,479, $ ,900 22,311,900 $27,612,319 $962,092, $ ,900 22,423,300 $27,126,471 $989,218, $ ,000 22,535,600 $29,592,295 $1,018,811,031 Total 797,640,100 $1,018,811,031 $1,018,811,031

10 Page Annual Transactions (millions) Figure 5. Annual Transactions Annual Revenue ($millions) Figure 6. Annual Revenue (in Constant 2011 Dollars)

11 Page 11 Comparison of Baseline and Adjusted Traffic Forecasts Table 7 includes a comparison by gantry of the baseline and adjusted traffic volumes from 2020 to The baseline volumes were generated using the base demographics from the statewide model, and the adjusted volumes include the impacts of the demographic adjustments made as part of this study. As shown in the table, the adjustments made to the demographics in the project result in significant traffic increases at all locations on the US 30 toll road. Table 7. Stark/Columbiana US 30 Traffic Estimates (Baseline vs. Adjusted) Baseline ADT Adjusted ADT Year Gantry Gantry Gantry Gantry Gantry Gantry Gantry Gantry Gantry Gantry #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #1 #2 #3 #4 # ,920 4,270 4,450 4,410 4,650 8,350 4,990 5,460 5,100 5, ,150 5,020 5,230 5,180 5,470 9,950 5,950 6,550 6,220 6, ,410 5,780 6,020 5,970 6,300 11,630 6,940 7,700 7,430 7, ,690 6,540 6,810 6,770 7,140 13,380 7,970 8,920 8,740 9, ,990 7,320 7,620 7,580 7,990 15,200 9,040 10,190 10,160 10, ,110 7,370 7,670 7,640 8,050 15,530 9,230 10,490 10,620 11, ,230 7,420 7,720 7,690 8,120 15,880 9,430 10,690 10,810 11, ,350 7,470 7,770 7,750 8,180 16,240 9,620 10,890 11,000 11, ,470 7,520 7,820 7,820 8,240 16,600 9,830 11,100 11,200 11, ,590 7,570 7,880 7,880 8,310 16,970 10,030 11,310 11,400 11, ,710 7,620 7,930 7,940 8,370 17,350 10,240 11,530 11,610 12, ,840 7,670 7,980 8,000 8,430 17,480 10,320 11,620 11,710 12, ,970 7,720 8,030 8,060 8,500 17,620 10,410 11,720 11,800 12, ,090 7,770 8,090 8,130 8,570 17,760 10,490 11,820 11,900 12, ,220 7,830 8,140 8,190 8,630 17,900 10,580 11,910 12,000 12, ,350 7,880 8,190 8,250 8,700 18,040 10,660 12,010 12,100 12, ,480 7,930 8,250 8,320 8,770 18,180 10,750 12,110 12,210 12, ,610 7,990 8,300 8,380 8,830 18,320 10,830 12,210 12,310 12, ,750 8,040 8,360 8,450 8,900 18,460 10,920 12,320 12,410 12, ,880 8,090 8,410 8,510 8,970 18,610 11,010 12,420 12,520 12, ,020 8,150 8,470 8,580 9,040 18,750 11,090 12,520 12,620 13,000 Comparison of Toll Rates Across the United States Figure 7 shows the average per mile rate (for passenger cars) assumed for the US 30 toll road (in 2011 dollars) compared to the average per mile rates in use in several states in the US. As shown in the figure, the assumed toll rate for US 30 ($0.20 per mile in 2020) is higher than the per mile rates charged in most states across the country and is approximately four times higher than the per mile rate currently being charged on the Ohio Turnpike. However, per mile rates on shorter roadways like the proposed US 30 project are typically much higher than those on very long

12 Page 12 corridors such as the Ohio Turnpike. The results of the toll sensitivity analysis discussed previously indicate that the $0.20 per mile rate in 2020 will optimize the financial performance of the road and maximize the amount of revenue generated. Lower toll rates could be chosen to improve the traffic usage on the new US 30 toll road, but that would likely result in a decrease in net revenue available for bond repayment due to an increase in the operation/maintenance costs and decrease in the toll revenue. $0.30 $0.25 Average Per Mile Toll Rate (2011$) $0.20 $0.15 $0.10 $0.05 $0.00 Figure 7. Average Per Mile Toll Rates (2011$) in the US I trust that this information addresses your current needs. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or need any additional information. Sincerely, Justin R. Winn, P.E. Project Manager CDM Smith, Inc.

13 Page 13 DISCLAIMER Current accepted professional practices and procedures were used in the development of these traffic and revenue forecasts. However, as with any forecast of the future, it should be understood that there may be differences between forecasted and actual results caused by events and circumstances beyond the control of the forecasters. In formulating its forecasts, CDM Smith has reasonably relied upon the accuracy and completeness of all of the information provided (both written and oral) by the Ohio Department of Transportation and several local and state agencies. Publicly available and obtained material has neither been independently verified, nor does CDM Smith assume responsibility for verifying such information. CDM Smith has relied upon the reasonable assurances of the independent parties that they are not aware of any facts that would make such information misleading. CDM Smith has made qualitative judgments related to several key variables within the analysis used to develop the traffic and revenue forecasts that must be considered as a whole; therefore selecting portions of any individual results without consideration of the intent of the whole may create a misleading or incomplete view of the results and the underling methodologies used to obtain the results. CDM Smith gives no opinion as to the value or merit to partial information extracted from the report. All estimates and projections reported herein are based on CDM Smith s experience and judgment and on a review of independent third party projections and information obtained from multiple state and local agencies as well as the Ohio Department of Transportation. These estimates and projections may not be indicative of actual or future values, and are therefore subject to substantial uncertainty. Future developments cannot be predicted with certainty, and may affect the estimates or projections expressed in the report, such that CDM Smith does not specifically guarantee or warrant any estimate or projections contained within this report.