Project Summary Project Name: Route 37 Corridor Safety Sweep Project Number:

Similar documents
I-75 at Overpass Road Interchange

Hot Springs Bypass Extension TIGER 2017 Application. Benefit-Cost Analysis Methodology Summary

I-44/US-75 Interchange and Related Improvements on I-44 in Tulsa County

FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act. TIGER Discretionary Grant Program

TIGER III Grant Application Benefit Cost Analysis Technical Memo October 31, 2011

32 nd Street Corridor Improvements

2012 TIGER Grant Application Benefit Cost Analysis Technical Memo March 19, 2012

Freight Rail Improvements Oklahoma City to Shawnee TIGER Grant Application Benefit Cost Analysis Technical Memo October 2009

Life-Cycle Cost Analysis: A Practitioner s Approach

FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act. TIGER Discretionary Grant Program

FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Act. TIGER Discretionary Grant Program

Benefit-Cost Analysis Guidance for Discretionary Grant Programs

APPENDIX E: ATM MODEL TECH MEMORANDUM. Metropolitan Council Parsons Brinckerhoff

Tampa Bay Express Planning Level Traffic and Revenue (T&R) Study

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS. Table 1: Total Cost Estimate (Economic Costs) (CNY million)

Review and Update of Year 2035 Regional Transportation Plan

Benefit Cost Analysis for the San Juan Multi-Modal Transportation System: Infrastructure and Safety Improvements

MEMORANDUM. For the purpose of this analysis, a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative were under consideration.

TIGER IV. Benefit Cost Analysis. Minot International Airport Access Road. Minot, ND

Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Appendix G Economic Analysis Report

SOLUTIONS FOR SAVING LIVES ON TEXAS ROADS

Table of Contents. Study Overview. Corridor Needs Analysis. Financial Strategies. Legislative Review

10-Year Capital Highway Investment Plan DRAFT

ALL Counties. ALL Districts

FY Statewide Capital Investment Strategy... asset management, performance-based strategic direction

Net Impacts of Detailed Travel Efficiencies I-49 South Economic Impact Analysis Eric McClellan, CDM Smith

Tools & Methods for Monitoring Performance Results

REPORT TO THE CAPITAL REGIONAL DISTRICT BOARD MEETING OF WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2010

A Benefit Cost Analysis of the 45th Street at Calumet Avenue Grade Separation Project. Presented to the Town of Munster

SR 520 BRIDGE. Investment Grade Traffic and Revenue Study Update. SR 520 Bridge and the Eastside plus West Approach Bridge Project

10-Year Capital Highway Investment Plan DRAFT

I-81 Corridor Improvement Plan. October 2018 Public Meetings

NCHRP Consequences of Delayed Maintenance

Economic Appraisal Objectives

Increased Transportation Infrastructure Investment Critical to State s Continued Economic Development

FINANCIAL INFORMATION NOTE. Preliminary estimates of cost and revenue projections for the REM project (Réseau électrique métropolitain)

Safety Target Meeting Summary 10/3/2017

Analysis of the Alameda County Transportation Expenditure Plan Prepared by Alameda County Transportation Commission

INVESTMENT STRATEGIES

10-Year Capital Highway Investment Plan

Projected Funding & Highway Conditions

Strategic Plan Performance Metrics & Targets

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Metro Budget Overview

UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines Methodology

GLOSSARY. At-Grade Crossing: Intersection of two roadways or a highway and a railroad at the same grade.

2017 UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM AND HB 20 IMPLEMENTATION

Highway Engineering-II

Implementing the MTO s Priority Economic Analysis Tool

State of Ohio. Department of Transportation ~ Innovative Contracting Manual

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS. A. Introduction

Tulsa Arkansas River Crossing TIGER Grant Application Benefit Cost Analysis Technical Memo September 10, 2009

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Figure 1-1: SR 156 Study Area & Monterey Expressway Alignment

INVESTING STRATEGICALLY

final report Benefit/Cost Analysis for U.S. 41 Corridor ITS New Start - Winnebago, Outagamie, and Brown Counties

0.- NEW JERSEY. and as of

TTFAC Hearing Regarding Chesapeake Transportation System June 18, 2012

Transfer of Federal Gas Tax Revenues Under the New Deal for Cities and Communities. Municipal Funding Agreement Guide.

2018 Annual Report. Highway Department Accomplishments

Countywide Dialogue on Transportation

Instructions for Completing the Annual Road and Street Finance Report

2017 UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM AND HB 20 IMPLEMENTATION

Deck Preservation Strategies with a Bridge Management System. Paul Jensen Montana Department of Transportation

A New Cost-Benefit Methodology for Highway-Railway Grade Crossing Safety Programs

TOLLED MANAGED LANE POLICIES

Project 06-06, Phase 2 June 2011

2008 Citizens Guide to Sound Transit, Phase 2

RIDOA STATEWIDE PLANNING PROGRAM Transportation Planning

QUALITY TRANSPORTATION SUMMARY

Public Transportation and the Nation s Economy

FY2017 Budget Discussion

Oklahoma Transportation Authority Report to Bondholders Second Quarter Phil Tomlinson, Director and Secretary of Transportation

Keep Wisconsin Moving Smart Investments Measurable Results

Gladys Porter Early College High School. Alberto Velez. Brownsville, Texas

Measure I Strategic Plan, April 1, 2009 Glossary Administrative Committee Advance Expenditure Agreement (AEA) Advance Expenditure Process

Improving Bridge Risk and Deterioration Modeling

Parking Services and Transportation Planning

Financial Management. Adoption: CEO Date: May 2017 (Adoption/most recent revision) Review period: Executive Manager Business Performance

The Oregon Department of Transportation Budget

Chapter 3: Regional Transportation Finance

Purpose. 2 Third Crossing Business Plan

10-Year Capital Highway Investment Plan

Economic Implications of Selection of Long-Life versus Conventional Caltrans Rehabilitation Strategies for High-Volume Highways

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NUMBER

1.0 CITY OF HOLLYWOOD, FL

ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSES FOR TRANCHE 2

ABILENE MPO TRANSPORTATION POLICY BOARD MEETING

Travel Forecasting for Corridor Alternatives Analysis

Intercity Transit Community Update

Transit Asset Management Initial Performance Targets

Findings & Recommendations Discussion

Residential Street Improvement Plan

ADEPT NATIONAL BRIDGES GROUP COMMUTED SUMS FOR THE RELIEF OF MAINTENANCE AND RECONSTRUCTION OF BRIDGES

REVISED ENGINEER'S REPORT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO

Prioritising bridge replacements

METRO. Metro Funding. Associated Master Plan: Comprehensive Master Transportation Plan (MTP) for Arlington. Neighborhood(s):

Financial Snapshot October 2014

Environmental Planning Statement

ADEPT NATIONAL BRIDGES GROUP COMMUTED SUMS FOR THE RELIEF OF MAINTENANCE AND RECONSTRUCTION OF BRIDGES

Transcription:

Project Summary This project summary page details the benefit cost analysis (BCA) for the Route 37 Corridor Safety Sweep Project. A BCA provides estimates of the anticipated benefits that are expected to accrue from a project over a specified period and compares them to the anticipated costs of the project. The annual benefit, operation & maintenance costs and work zone costs are all explained in their respective tab. The annual construction cost was determined by taking the total construction cost over the service life of the project. Bridges have a longer service life, so 30 years was determined to be appropriate. The present value cost and benefit were calculated using the information in the U.S. Department of Transportation "Benefit Cost Analysis Guidance for TIGER and INFRA Applications". These figures were then used to determine the benefit cost ratio of the entire project. Project Benefits at Project Costs at 7% Net Project Benefits Year# Year Project Benefits Project Costs 7% Discount Rate Discount Rate at 7% Discount Rate Present Day Annual Benefit: Safety, Travel Time, Emissions: $ 10,035,119.48 Present Day Annual Operation & Maintenance Cost Savings: $ 610,881.06 1 2019 $ $ $ 14,851,610.73 $ 13,880,010.03 $ (13,880,010.03) Present Day Annual Work Zone Impact Cost Savings: $ 643,638.62 2 2020 $ $ $ 14,851,610.73 $ 12,971,971.99 $ (12,971,971.99) sub total: $ 11,289,639.17 3 2021 $ $ $ 14,851,610.73 $ 12,123,338.31 $ (12,123,338.31) 4 2022 $ $ $ $ $ Present Day Total Construction Costs: $ 44,000,000.00 5 2023 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 8,049,356.70 $ $ $ 8,049,356.70 Present Day Work Zone Impact Cost: $ 554,832.19 6 2024 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 7,522,763.27 $ $ $ 7,522,763.27 7 2025 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 7,030,619.88 $ $ $ 7,030,619.88 Service Life: 30 8 2026 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 6,570,672.78 $ $ $ 6,570,672.78 Discount: 7% 9 2027 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 6,140,815.68 $ $ $ 6,140,815.68 10 2028 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 5,739,080.08 $ $ $ 5,739,080.08 Present Value Cost: $ 38,975,320.32 11 2029 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 5,363,626.24 $ $ $ 5,363,626.24 Present Value Benefit: $ 101,853,204.49 12 2030 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 5,012,734.81 $ $ $ 5,012,734.81 13 2031 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 4,684,798.88 $ $ $ 4,684,798.88 Benefit Cost Ratio: 2.61 14 2032 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 4,378,316.71 $ $ $ 4,378,316.71 Net Present Value (NPV) $ 62,877,884.17 15 2033 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 4,091,884.78 $ $ $ 4,091,884.78 Return on Investment (ROI) 10% 16 2034 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 3,824,191.38 $ $ $ 3,824,191.38 Average User Cost Savings Per Year (NPV) $ 3,917,430.94 17 2035 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 3,574,010.64 $ $ $ 3,574,010.64 18 2036 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 3,340,196.86 $ $ $ 3,340,196.86 19 2037 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 3,121,679.31 $ $ $ 3,121,679.31 20 2038 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 2,917,457.30 $ $ $ 2,917,457.30 21 2039 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 2,726,595.60 $ $ $ 2,726,595.60 22 2040 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 2,548,220.19 $ $ $ 2,548,220.19 23 2041 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 2,381,514.20 $ $ $ 2,381,514.20 24 2042 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 2,225,714.20 $ $ $ 2,225,714.20 25 2043 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 2,080,106.73 $ $ $ 2,080,106.73 26 2044 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 1,944,024.98 $ $ $ 1,944,024.98 27 2045 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 1,816,845.78 $ $ $ 1,816,845.78 28 2046 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 1,697,986.71 $ $ $ 1,697,986.71 29 2047 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 1,586,903.47 $ $ $ 1,586,903.47 30 2048 $ 11,289,639.17 $ 1,483,087.35 $ $ $ 1,483,087.35 Total Present Day Benefit Value $ 101,853,204.49 Total Present Day Cost Value $ 38,975,320.32 Summary

Safety Benefit Crash Severity is labeled by the KABCO injury scale, which can also be used for establishing crash costs. This scale was developed by the National Safety Council (NSC) and is frequently used by law enforcement for classifying injuries: K Fatal; A Incapacitating injury; B Nonincapacitating injury; C Possible injury; and O No injury. Two safety countermeasures were identified for this project that would improve the study area and potentially decrease overall crash severity. These two countermeasures are the weaving and queuing between Interstate 95 and Route 37. When evaluating countermeasures crash modification factors (CMF) clearinghouse are used to determine the percentage decrease in crashes with the proposed improvements. CMF descriptions can be reviewed at cmfclearinghouse.org. Crash data was collected for the study area between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2016. From the U.S. Department of Transportation "Benefit Cost Analysis Guidance for TIGER and INFRA Applications", the monetized value for the value of injuries were obtained to determine a monetary benefit. Safety Issue: Weaving Issues from the interchange of Interstate 95 and Route 37 Predicted Number to affected by Annual Crash Value of Crash Severity Total per Year CMF factor Improvement Reduction Injuries Annual Savings B 2 0.4 0.79 0.316 0.084 $ 125,000.00 $ 10,500.00 C 12 2.4 0.79 1.896 0.504 $ 63,900.00 $ 32,205.60 O 69 13.8 0.79 10.902 2.898 $ 4,252.00 $ 12,322.30 $ 55,027.90 Safety Issue: Queue on Interstate 95 due to Route 37 Number to affected by Predicted Annual Crash Value of Crash Severity Total per Year CMF factor Improvement Reduction Injuries Annual Savings B 2 0.4 0.79 0.316 0.084 $ 125,000.00 $ 10,500.00 C 11 2.2 0.79 1.738 0.462 $ 63,900.00 $ 29,521.80 O 47 9.4 0.79 7.426 1.974 $ 4,252.00 $ 8,393.45 $ 48,415.25 Total Annual Savings (2016 Dollars) $ 103,443.14 Safety Benefit

Emissions Benefit Due to the proposed safety improvements, daily VHT in the traffic network is expected to decrease from 2,460 vehicle hours in the No Build Condition to 1,210 vehicle hours in the Build Condition, while the average speed is expected to increase from 16.5 mph to 40.0 mph. This results in a decrease of pollutants across the project area. CO2 is expected to decrease by 1,684 tons per year, NOX will decrease by 0.3 tons per year, VOC decrease by 0.3 tons per year, PM10 will decrease by 1.2 tons per year, and PM2.5 will decrease by 0.2 tons per year. Damage Costs were assessed based on the results of the pollutant inventory. The unit costs for NOX, VOC, and PM2.5 were obtained from the Benefit Cost Analysis Guidance for Tiger and Infra Applications document. This document has rescinded guidance on quantifying CO2 damage costs but allows applicants to use their own unit cost. CO2 damage costs were quantified in this assessment using the same methodology that it is applied for NOX, VOC, and PM2.5, where costs are sourced from the Corporate Average Fuel Economy for MY 2017 MY 2025 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks. Total Annual Savings (2016 Dollars) $ 95,360.00 Emissions Benefit

Travel Time Savings Figure 1. 2040 PM Queues with and without TIGER A Vissim modal was completed to depict multi modal traffic flow simulation throughout the network. This model determined how many vehicles were traveling within the network (14,546), and the approximate delay with and without the TIGER Grant funding (0.07 and 0.01 hour delays respectively). See Table 1 below. It was determined that mainly workdays would be effected due to the delay and there are 260 workdays per year. From the U.S. Department of Transportation "Benefit Cost Analysis Guidance for TIGER and INFRA Applications", the average vehicle occupancy for cars is 1.39 and for trucks is 1.00. Approximately 5% of all the average daily traffic is trucks. In addition to the vehicle operating costs, there will be a slight monetized value for travel time added to this diversionary cost. From the U.S. Department of Transportation "Benefit Cost Analysis Guidance for TIGER and INFRA Applications", All Purpose private vehicle travel monetized value is $14.10 and for Commercial Vehicle operators (an average of truck drivers and bus drivers) is $27.75. Cost of Additional Travel Time (cars): 14.1 dollars Cost of Additional Travel Time (commercial): 27.75 dollars Weekdays during the year: 260 days Percentage of daily trucks: 5% Percentage of daily cars: 95% Average Vehicle Occupancy (cars): 1.39 persons per vehicle Average Vehicle Occupancy (trucks): 1 persons per vehicle Total Vehicles Traveling within the Network: 14,546 vehicles per day Hour Delay per vehicle for 2040 No TIGER: 0.07 hour Hour Delay per vehicle for 2040 TIGER: 0.01 hour Hours of Delay (include AM and PM Peak) 2 hours Total Annual Savings (2016 Dollars) $ 9,836,316.34 Travel Time Saving

Work Zone Closure Impact (with TIGER) Figure 1: Existing and Diversionary Routes RIDOT is requesting to replace/or rehabilitate a series of 15 bridges and culverts, built in the 1960s, located along the eastern portion of Route 37. Only 5 bridges will be completely replace with the other 10 bridges being rehabilitation only. Each replaced bridge would take one full weekend. The 10 rehabilitated bridges would need to be completed regardless of receipt of the TIGER grant so the cost and benefits are negated for those 10 bridges. From RIDOT's permanent count station data, dated 2017, the daily weekend traffic is 75,000 vehicles. Figure 1 depicts the three diversionary routes possible with the bridge closures. An average of 3.1 additional mileage would be incurred with the diversionary routes. From the U.S. Department of Transportation "Benefit Cost Analysis Guidance for TIGER and INFRA Applications", the monetized value for vehicle operating costs for cars is $0.40 and for trucks is $0.96. Approximately 5% of all the average daily traffic is trucks. In addition to the vehicle operating costs, there will be a slight monetized value for travel time added to this diversionary cost. From the U.S. Department of Transportation "Benefit Cost Analysis Guidance for TIGER and INFRA Applications", All Purpose private vehicle travel monetized value is $14.10 and for Commercial Vehicle operators (an average of truck drivers and bus drivers) is $27.75. Timeframe: 5 weekends Daily Weekend Traffic: 75,000 vehicles Average Additional Mileage: 3.1 miles Vehicle Operating Cost (Cars): 0.4 dollars Vehicle Operating Cost (Trucks): 0.96 dollars Percentage of daily trucks: 5% Percentage of daily cars: 95% Cost of Additional Travel Time (cars): 14.1 dollars Additional Travel Time (commercial): 27.75 dollars Speed Limit: 60 mph Total Work zone Diversion Cost (one time cost) (2016 Dollars) $ 554,832.19 Work Zone Closure Impact

Bridge Rehabilitation Work Zone Impact (No TIGER) RIDOT is requesting to replace/or rehabilitate a series of 16 bridges and culverts, built in the 1960s, located along the eastern portion of Route 37. Only 4 bridges will be completely replace with the other 12 bridges being rehabilitated or preseved only. The rehabilitated bridges would need to be completed regardless of receipt of the TIGER grant so the cost and benefits are negated for those bridges. However, without the TIGER funding the 4 bridges that need complete replacement would need to undergo maintenance over the next 30 years and would cause delay and detouring during maintenance. It is assumed due to the overall daily volume that the three lane roadways would have to maintain at least 2 lanes during maintenance. This maintenance work would also mainly be performed during the off peak hours and weekends, however there may be a chance of maintenance overlapping with peak hour commutes, therefore a peak hour impact was calculated. It was assumed that only one bridge would be rehabilitated a year. It is estimated that approximately 35,689 vehicles will be impacted in the network due to the maintenance. It is also assumed that due to these delays due to maintenance that some people would detour creating a longer commute then normal, due to slower speeds on local roadways and additional traffic. The difference in commute time during the peak hour was calculated assuming the difference between a detouring vehicle and one that remained on Route 37. This difference in commute time takes into account a vehicle traveling the entire corridor and the delays it would experience. In addition to the vehicle operating costs, there will be a slight monetized value for travel time added to this diversionary cost. From the U.S. Department of Transportation "Benefit Cost Analysis Guidance for TIGER and INFRA Applications", All Purpose private vehicle travel monetized value is $14.10 and for Commercial Vehicle operators (an average of truck drivers and bus drivers) is $27.75. Daily Weekend Traffic: 35,689 vehicles Percentage of daily trucks: 5% Percentage of daily cars: 95% Cost of Additional Travel Time (cars): 14.1 dollars Cost of Additional Travel Time (commercial): 27.75 dollars Additional commuting time: 1.22 hours Total Bridge Rehab Work Zone Impact (2016 Dollars) $ 643,638.62 Bridge Rehab Work Zone Impact

Operations and Costs Operating and Maintenance costs were projected for both the no build baseline and with proposed improvement project. Without the proposed project the bridges called to be reconstructed/replaced would just be rehabilitated to maintain minimum maintenance. The bridges slated for preservation would still experience this under both no build and build scenarios. This minor rehabilitation over the long run would require these bridges to be completely reconstructed, which would cost a lot more then just replacing the bridges that currently need replacement. Therefore the existing rehabilitation costs would just be additional costs and therefore a loss of money. This is why the operating and maintenance expenditures creates a net positive for the project. For the no build baseline, general bridge rehabilitation and preservation would be necessary to maintain the bridges as shown in Table 1. Table 2 shows the annual maintenance cost with the bridge reconstruction and preservation. Table 1. Existing Rehabilitation Costs (2016) Bridge Rehabilitation Cost Contract Number Deck Area (sf) Cost/SF Bridge #063401 $1,300,000 2013 CB 025 7360.63 $176.62 Bridge #062701 $2,095,133 N/A 11862.69 $176.62 Bridge #062801 $2,064,810 N/A 11691 $176.62 Bridge #062901 $1,688,884 N/A 9562.5 $176.62 Number of Major Rehabilitation in 30 year Period 1.5 Subtotal Rehabilitation Cost $10,724,000 Engineering (10%) $1,072,400 Total Rehabilitation Cost for Next 30 years $11,796,400 Total Preservation Costs $13,050,832 Total No Build Cost for Next 30 years $24,847,232 Table 2. Annual Maintenance Costs for Reconstructed Bridges (with the Proposed Improvement Project) Description / Task Cost # of times task performed in 30 years 30 year Maintenance Cost Bridge Inspection $15,000 15 $225,000 820.0300 High Pressure Water Cleaning on Bridge Structure $25,000 15 $375,000 820.0110 Concrete Surface Treatment (Protective Coating) $18,000 3 $54,000 Joint Replacement 1 $40,000 3 $120,000 Deck Repairs 2 $280,000 1 $280,000 825.8041 Painting Existing Structural Steel 3 $200,000 1 $200,000 Number of Bridges in Question 4 Subtotal 30 year Maintenance Cost $5,016,000 Misc Items/Contingencies (10%) $501,600 Mobilization (10%) $501,600 Engineering (10%) $501,600 Total 30 year Build Maintenance Cost $6,520,800 1 Cost is dependent on Joint type. For estimating purposes and new construction assume 823.1750 Asphaltic Expansion Joint System. Note that Joint replacement occurs every 6 years after the initial 20 year replacement. 2 Assume 20% of the bridge deck needs partial depth repairs (818.2020) 3 Zone/Over coat Painting (includes cleaning/surface preparation) Total Operations and Costs per year for 30 years (2016 Dollars) $ 610,881.06 Operations and Costs