National Academies Press: OpenBook

Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects (2011)

Chapter: Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies

« Previous: Key Terms
Page 89
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 89
Page 90
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 90
Page 91
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 91
Page 92
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 92
Page 93
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 93
Page 94
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 94
Page 95
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 95
Page 96
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 96
Page 97
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 97
Page 98
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 98
Page 99
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 99
Page 100
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 100
Page 101
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 101
Page 102
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 102
Page 103
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 103
Page 104
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 104
Page 105
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 105
Page 106
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 106
Page 107
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 107
Page 108
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 108
Page 109
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 109
Page 110
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 110
Page 111
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 111
Page 112
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 112
Page 113
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 113
Page 114
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 114
Page 115
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 115
Page 116
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 116
Page 117
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 117
Page 118
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 118
Page 119
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 119
Page 120
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 120
Page 121
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 121
Page 122
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 122
Page 123
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 123
Page 124
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 124
Page 125
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 125
Page 126
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 126
Page 127
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 127
Page 128
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 128
Page 129
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 129
Page 130
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 130
Page 131
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 131
Page 132
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 132
Page 133
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 133
Page 134
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 134
Page 135
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 135
Page 136
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 136
Page 137
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 137
Page 138
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 138
Page 139
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 139
Page 140
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 140
Page 141
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 141
Page 142
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 142
Page 143
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 143
Page 144
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 144
Page 145
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 145
Page 146
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 146
Page 147
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 147
Page 148
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 148
Page 149
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 149
Page 150
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 150
Page 151
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 151
Page 152
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 152
Page 153
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 153
Page 154
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 154
Page 155
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 155
Page 156
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 156
Page 157
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Congestion Pricing Case Studies." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13648.
×
Page 157

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

90 Introduction 93 Variably Priced Managed Lanes 93 1. Colorado Department of Transportation I-25 Express Lanes 95 2. Florida Department of Transportation 95 Express 107 3. Harris County Toll Road Authority Katy Managed Lanes 113 4. Minnesota Department of Transportation MnPASS Lanes 120 5. Orange County Transportation Authority 91 Express Lanes 127 6. San Diego Association of Governments I-15 Express Lanes 133 7. Washington State Department of Transportation SR 167 HOT Lanes 148 Toll Facilities with Variable Pricing 141 8. Ontario Ministry of Transportation Highway 407 Express Toll Route 146 9. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Congestion Pricing Program 162 Cordon and Area Pricing 153 10. Central London Congestion Charging 160 11. Singapore Electronic Road Pricing 165 12. Stockholm Congestion Tax 89 A P P E N D I X A Congestion Pricing Case Studies

This appendix contains the 12 congestion pricing project case studies conducted as the main component of the original research undertaken for NCHRP Project 08-75. These case studies represent three major congestion pricing categories, as shown in Table A-1. Case study locations are provided in Figure A-1. The process for having assembled these case studies is described below. First, the Research Team completed national and international inventories of congestion pric- ing projects, identifying a total of 12 projects, and grouped them into three major categories: • Variably priced managed lanes • Toll facilities with variable pricing • Cordon and area pricing The research for the case studies was then completed in two phases. Initially, the Research Team conducted internet-based research to identify germane reports and other documenta- tion available on performance measurement activities associated with these active congestion pricing projects. The Research Team identified reports and other publicly available materi- als describing the methodologies used and the results of these performance evaluation pro- grams. In many cases, the research was supplemented with telephone conversations with staff from the transportation agencies sponsoring the projects to obtain additional information and clarifications. 90 Introduction Colorado Department of Transportation I-25 Express Lanes Florida Department of Transportation 95 Express Harris County Toll Road Authority Katy Managed Lanes Minnesota Department of Transportation MnPASS Lanes Orange County Transportation Authority 91 Express Lanes San Diego Association of Governments I-15 Express Lanes Variably Priced Managed Lanes Washington State Department of Transportation SR 167 HOT Lanes Ontario Ministry of Transportation Highway 407 Express Toll Route Toll Facilities with Variable Pricing The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Congestion Pricing Program Central London Congestion Charging Singapore Electronic Road PricingCordon and Area Pricing Stockholm Congestion Tax Table A-1. Case study congestion pricing projects by type.

Following this initial effort, the Research Team conducted telephone and in-person interviews with staff from each of the sponsoring agencies of the 12 pricing projects. These interviews used a comprehensive list of questions to explore gaps in knowledge remaining from the initial inves- tigations. These discussions focused on (1) the unique goals and contexts of the different pricing projects, (2) a review of the specific performance metrics used to assess them, (3) how the spon- soring agencies use those different pieces of information in managing their facilities, and (4) the information they provide about them to the public and interested stakeholders. These discus- sions also explored the challenges sponsoring agencies had in developing monitoring procedures for their pricing projects, the types of information that would have been helpful to them in over- coming those challenges, and lessons derived from their experiences that would be helpful to other peers implementing pricing projects. Following the case study research, the Research Team organized its findings in written case studies providing salient information on the contexts in which the pricing projects had been implemented and the programs used to monitor and document their performance. The case studies are intended to provide readers with parallel information about each of the congestion pricing project case studies, enabling readers to identify parallels and distinguish unique aspects. Each case study consists of the following: • An overview of the agency sponsoring the congestion pricing project • A review of the agency’s congestion pricing program Congestion Pricing Case Studies 91 Figure A-1. Case study congestion pricing projects by location.

• A discussion of the different metrics used to monitor the performance of the agency’s conges- tion pricing projects • Identification of other data collection efforts associated with the implementation of the agency’s congestion pricing projects • A review of why performance evaluation takes place and how the agency uses the performance monitoring data it collects • A review of lessons learned and discussion of additional data or information that would be helpful to the sponsor or other agencies considering the use of congestion pricing In addition the case studies are accompanied by a detailed Facility Performance Monitor- ing Summary Matrix providing a comprehensive record of all current, known metrics used to monitor performance on the facility, organized by evaluation category. In addition, the matrices provide the following information for each individual metric: • Frequency of collection • Purpose • A simple indication of overall importance • Characterizations of the metric that relate back to agency or facility goals • Sources of information • Related notes The matrices, presented in a parallel format, list each and every performance metric identified among the 12 case studies, along with an indication of whether the different measures are actu- ally tracked for each specific project. This approach was used to facilitate easy comparison of the monitoring procedures used for the 12 case studies and to facilitate a further distillation of best practices by type of priced facility. The matrices organize the performance metrics in the follow- ing broad categories: • Traffic Performance • Public Perception • Facility Users • System Operations • Environment • Transit • Economics • Land Use 92 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

1. Colorado Department of Transportation I-25 Express Lanes On March 2, 2009, Governor Ritter signed into law S.B. 09-108, Funding Enhancement for Surface Transportation and Economic Recovery (FASTER). The legislation created the High Performance Transportation Enterprise (HPTE), replacing the Colorado Tolling Enterprise (CTE), which was established in 2002 to implement tolling and pricing projects in Colorado. Like its predecessor, HPTE is a government-owned business, vested with the authority to issue revenue bonds to accelerate construction of toll improvements on any corridor or roadway in the state of Colorado. The new statute eliminated the previous prohibition on tolling existing capacity, provided that all affected communities are in agreement. The new law also changed the composition of the Enterprise Board of Directors to include three members of the Colorado Transportation Commission and four external members, making it more independent of CDOT. There is also a new emphasis on congestion management, given that potential projects are assessed for congestion reduction rather than strictly on financial considerations. The HPTE operates the I-25 Express Lanes, a HOT-lane facility described in further detail below. In addition, it is considering the possible use of tolling and public-private partnerships to deliver improvements on other highway corridors in the state including • US 36, • I-70 East, • C-470, • I-70 West and • I-25 North. 1.1. Overview of HPTE’s Congestion Pricing Program The I-25 Express Lanes is a 7-mile, two-lane, reversible-flow HOT-lane facility operating between downtown Denver and US 36. The facility was created by converting the existing HOV lanes to provide two HOT lanes southbound into downtown Denver during the A.M. period and two lanes northbound during the P.M. period. HOV2+ vehicles and registered energy-efficient/hybrid vehicles may use the facility at no cost, while single-occupant passen- ger vehicles pay fixed variable toll rates based on time-of-day to use the facility. The preferred hierarchy of users is transit vehicles, HOVs, toll payers, and hybrids. The number of hybrids allowed on the facility is capped and the privilege will expire with SAFETEA-LU. There is a consistent two-to-one split between non-paying and tolled vehicles on the facility. The facil- ity provides declaration lanes for HOV vehicles, which are not required to carry transponders. 93 Variably Priced Managed Lanes

Prior to the HOT conversion, the I-25 facility was constructed as a bus-only HOV lane by the Regional Transportation District, the local transit authority, with 50 percent of the funding pro- vided by the FTA. Transit ridership in the I-25 corridor was the most robust in the Denver region, providing 6-minute bus headways during peak periods from park-and-ride staging areas, making it easier for most commuters to use transit rather than forming carpools. The intent of the conversion was to take advantage of under-used capacity on the managed lanes without affecting the express bus service. Given the importance of providing high-quality transit service in the corridor, express bus travel times are a key performance metric in the corridor and can trigger a toll adjustment if a degradation is detected. In addition, peak-hour tolls on the I-25 Express Lanes cannot be less than the express bus fare on the corridor. Pricing on the I-25 Express Lanes is variable on a fixed time-of-day schedule. The lanes are closed for maintenance activities from 3:00 to 5:00 A.M. and from 10:00 A.M. to noon each week- day. Tolls range from a low of $0.50 during off-peak period and a high of $3.50 during the morn- ing peak period and feature various shoulder rates. Revenues from the facility are used to repay a $3.0 million loan from the Colorado Transportation Commission for capital expenditures on toll collection technology and signage needed for the HOV-to-HOT conversion on the I-25 cor- ridor. Revenues also pay for contracted and internal maintenance, toll collection and back office operations, enforcement, toll violation processing, and administration. Any remaining proceeds are put into a reserve fund for major capital improvements—per the I-25 capital plan, which includes a proportional share paid by the I-25 Express Lanes. Revenues are approximately $2.5 million annually, with expenses of roughly $1 million. In addition to the loan cited above, CDOT also received a $3.2 million grant from the FHWA Value Pricing Pilot Program, which was used to cover other implementation and outreach costs. 1.2. What Is Monitored? The full spectrum of HPTE’s performance monitoring activities is provided in the accompa- nying Facility Performance Monitoring Summary Matrix for the I-25 Express Lanes. The matrix is a comprehensive record of all current, known metrics used to monitor performance on the facility, organized by evaluation category. The matrix provides the following information for each individual metric: frequency of collection, purpose, a simple indication of overall impor- tance, and particular characterizations of the metric that relate back to agency/facility goals or applications. An expanded version of the matrix providing sources of information and other notes is included in the Final Report for NCHRP 08-75 which is available on line. The matrix is intended to be a visual overview of HPTE’s complete monitoring effort, easily comparable with other HOT-lane facilities with similar matrix summaries. A more qualitative discussion of how these metrics are applied in practice and which ones are the most significant is provided below. Not all metrics noted in the matrix are discussed here. Prior to the conversion of the I-25 HOV lanes, a formal performance monitoring plan was established for the facility. FHWA had required that the HOV lanes perform at LOS C, but CDOT and its partners found that this was a difficult criterion to measure. Because the man- aged lanes were essentially a long ramp with a single point of access and egress, they instead used travel times on the facility as the major criterion. A study was performed to track travel times for buses by installing non-revenue transponders to monitor travel times and speeds. This continues to be the primary means for measuring transit travel times in the corridor and to verify that the 45 mph average speed threshold is not degraded. The average on-time rate for buses operating on the I-25 Express Lanes for the past 4 years has been achieved 97 percent of the time. The travel time savings for motorists using the I-25 Express Lanes during peak periods is approximately 10 minutes. 94 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

In addition to bus travel times, HPTE collects various secondary performance metrics. These include traffic volumes reported by time of day in 15-minute intervals, enforcement statistics, incident data and response times, and various maintenance measures. Maintenance activities, including plowing and sweeping, are contracted out to a private vendor and are per- formed at a higher level of service than that of the general-purpose lanes. The metrics included in the performance monitoring plan were identified by a stakeholder group tasked with addressing various policy issues associated with the conversion of the I-25 HOV lanes to HOT operation. This group was composed of CDOT, CTE, FHWA, FTA, the City and County of Denver, the Regional Transportation District (RTD—Denver’s transit authority), and the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG—greater Denver’s Metropolitan Planning Organization). CDOT and CTE coordinated separately with the local and regional police departments to develop incident management plans with protocols for emergency response, detours, and related monitoring information. 1.3. Other Essential Data Gathering Activities Prior to the opening of the I-25 Express Lanes, CTE conducted a series of focus groups and surveys to gauge expectations for the facility. CTE also conducted outreach activities to inform the public about the rationale for the conversion and how the new HOT lanes would function. These included a video, which was available on CTE’s website and on DVD, a moving billboard installed on the back of a flatbed truck, which was deployed in the I-25 corridor, and compre- hensive press coverage. HPTE staff report that response to these activities was positive. The DRCOG recorded an initial increase in the number of carpool registrations prior to the opening of the I-25 Express Lanes, and there was also an increase in the number of EXpressToll transpon- ders issued by the E-470 Public Highway Authority, which also provides back-office services for the I-25 Express Lanes. HPTE staff report that equity has not been found to be a concern in the conversion of the I-25 HOV lanes to HOT operation. When HPTE marked the milestone of the 500,000th paying customer using the I-25 Express Lanes, the motorist turned out to be a lower income, single mother who commutes to downtown Denver and appreciates having the option of using the I-25 Express Lanes. This coincidence reinforces the fact that people of all income levels take advantage of the I-25 Express Lanes and generally hold favorable opinions of the facility. 1.4. Why Performance Evaluation Takes Place and How Performance Monitoring Data Is Used The primary purpose for performance monitoring on the I-25 Express Lanes is to manage traf- fic on the facility and ensure that the bus speed threshold is maintained. Traffic performance on the facility has been very constant and no adjustments to toll levels have been necessary to main- tain bus travel times, even with the addition of license plate tolling in early 2009. Although there has been one adjustment to peak-period tolls on the Express Lanes since their opening, this was due to an increase in bus fares, rather than conditions on the lanes themselves. Most data collection and management on the facility is automated. Monthly and annual per- formance reports are produced. However, HPTE staff report that after 4 years of service, the rou- tine operational nature of the Express Lanes suggests that quarterly reports would be sufficient. HPTE uses cameras deployed on the facility to detect incidents. These include an initial set of cameras installed prior to the conversion and others that were added because of it. Congestion Pricing Case Studies 95

96 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects Congestion Pricing Case Studies 97 Table 1-1. Colorado Department of Transportation I-25 Express Lanes summary matrix.

HPTE has used information from its outreach efforts to make some minor adjustments to the I-25 Express Lanes. These include some initial changes to signage due to customer feedback early on, as well more recent requests from customers to accommodate special events, especially foot- ball on the weekend. HPTE staff report that they receive approximately one to two customer service calls per week. 1.5. What Additional Performance Metrics or Data Would Be Helpful to HPTE or Other Agencies Considering Congestion Pricing? HPTE staff believe that there is no cookie-cutter approach to developing performance moni- toring programs for priced highway facilities. Each facility is different and pricing is imple- mented to address differing operational objectives. With the I-25 Express Lanes, the impetus behind the HOT conversion was not congestion, but rather HOV underutilization. At the time there was some legislative pressure to simply allow general-purpose use of the HOV lanes, so conversion to HOT was seen as a compromise. HPTE staff believe that it is necessary to identify performance management goals up front and then develop monitoring metrics around these goals. Staff also believe that selling a pricing project as a pilot that can be changed and is flexible is helpful, but that proponents of pricing should not be overly cautious or nothing will get done. In terms of what might have been done differently, HPTE staff noted that they would like to have performed before-and-after traffic counts on the general-purpose lanes to explicitly iden- tify any congestion reduction due to the HOT conversion. This was not done because the oper- ative issue behind the conversion was to meet the legislature’s mandate of optimizing the utiliza- tion of the HOV lanes, rather than reducing congestion on the I-25 general-purpose lanes. This dynamic was also reflected in the negotiations with stakeholder agencies, which focused on meet- ing the mandate of addressing the underutilization issue, rather than “testing the waters” of implementing congestion pricing on the I-25 Express Lanes. 98 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

Congestion Pricing Case Studies 99 2. Florida Department of Transportation 95 Express The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) operates a total of 1,471 centerline miles of Interstate highway out of a statewide network of 121,526 miles of roads. There are a total of 44 standalone toll facilities in Florida, the largest number of any state. Toll revenues represented approximately 12 percent of FDOT total revenues in 2007, or nearly $1.1 billion out of $9.2 billion.1 FDOT is converting and expanding 21 miles of HOV lanes on I-95 between I-395 in Miami and I-595 in Fort Lauderdale—known as 95 Express—with the support of a $62.9 million Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA) grant from USDOT. It is also implement- ing a $1.8 billion expansion of I-595 on a public-private partnership basis. The expansion will feature a new three-lane reversible flow, 10.5-mile, variably priced HOT lane that, with the con- verted I-95 facility, will create the beginning of a network of priced lanes in the Miami-Fort Lauderdale region. The impetus for the 95 Express conversion was congestion on the existing I-95 HOV lanes, which no longer offered reliable trips during peak travel periods. Working with multiple partners— including the metropolitan planning organizations of Miami-Dade & Broward Counties, Miami-Dade & Broward County Transit, Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (FTE), Miami-Dade Expressway Authority, and South Florida Commuter Services—FDOT took advantage of USDOT’s UPA program to gain funding for the conversion and implement transit enhance- ments in the corridor. The goals established for the I-95 Express Lanes are as follows: 1. Maximize throughput 2. Maintain free-flow speed on the Express Lanes and travel time savings 3. Increase trip reliability 4. Incentivize transit and carpooling 5. Reduce congestion by diverting traffic to non-peak periods 6. Meet increasing travel demand in the future 7. Facilitate trip-reducing carpool formation A conscious decision was made by FDOT to maximize the throughput and operational effi- ciency of the 95 Express, rather than optimize revenues. However, it is not guaranteed that the express lanes will be congestion-free during peak hours, even with the payment of a toll. Nonetheless, motorists are provided a high level of reliability to expect free-flow conditions. 2.1. Overview of the FDOT’s Congestion Pricing Program The 95 Express involves the conversion of the existing HOV lane to HOT operation and addi- tion of a second HOT lane in each direction within the existing I-95 right-of-way made possible by narrowing the existing travel lanes slightly. The project is being developed in two sections. The first is a 7-mile segment at the southern end of the corridor from SR 112 in downtown Miami to the Golden Glades Interchange in Miami Gardens. Phase 1 of the 95 Express has been completed with the northbound lanes in this section opening to operation on December 5, 2008 (Phase 1A), and the corresponding southbound lanes (Phase 1B) opening on January 15, 2010, together with both north and southbound lanes between SR 112 and I-395 near Miami. Phase 2, expected to be completed in 2011, extends the facility 14 miles north to Fort Lauderdale from the I-395 Interchange to a point north of I-595 in Fort Lauderdale. The completed 21-mile facil- ity will have eight access and egress points. 1AASHTO Center for Excellence in Project Finance

In addition to providing a second HOT lane in each direction, FDOT has also increased the occupancy requirement for free use of the 95 Express from two to three people per vehicle mak- ing work-related trips. These vehicles must also be registered with the South Florida Commuter Services—a regional commuter assistance program established by FDOT—in order to use the lanes at no cost. As part of the registration process, carpoolers must document that they have at least three commuters traveling to and from work in one vehicle. Each participant is provided with a 95 Express decal that allows them to use the facility without incurring toll charges. The 95 Express decals are valid for 6 months, after which registrations must be renewed. Hybrid vehicles are also allowed to use the 95 Express at no cost. To do so, hybrid owners must first have a valid State of Florida HOV decal in order to register for 95 Express. Qualified regis- trants receive a 95 Express decal which is valid for a year. Hybrid vehicle must have both decals in order to use the 95 Express without paying tolls. Motorcycles, transit vehicles, and registered vanpool vehicles may also use the 95 Express at no cost. Toll rates for all other vehicles on the 95 Express are dynamically priced and updated every 15 minutes based on the traffic conditions of the express lanes only. Detection equipment pro- vides continuous information on the number of vehicles in the express lanes, their speeds, and distance of separation. An algorithm compares the real-time information to historical data and generates toll rates reflecting traffic densities on the express lanes. Toll rates are designed to main- tain travel speeds of at least 45 miles per hour on the 95 Express while maximizing throughput. Typical toll rates for Phase 1 fluctuate between $0.25 and $4.00 and may rise to $7.10 under extreme conditions. Toll rates are displayed on the variable message signs upstream of all entrance points to the 95 Express, providing drivers with time to decide whether to use the lanes. 2.2. What Is Monitored? The full spectrum of FDOT’s performance monitoring activities is provided in the accompany- ing Facility Performance Monitoring Summary Matrix for the 95 Express. The matrix is a com- prehensive record of all current, known metrics used to monitor performance on the facility, organized by evaluation category. Provided in the matrix for each metric used are frequency of collection, purpose, a simple indication of importance, and particular characterizations of the met- ric that relate back to agency/facility goals or applications. An expanded version of the matrix pro- viding sources of information and other notes is included in the Final Report for NCHRP 08-75 which is available on line. The matrix is intended to be a visual overview of FDOT’s complete mon- itoring effort, easily comparable with other HOT-lane facilities with similar matrix summaries. A more qualitative discussion of how these metrics are applied in practice and which ones are the most significant is provided below. Not all metrics noted in the matrix are discussed here. FDOT collects a comprehensive set of monitoring parameters for the 95 Express. It had a for- mal monitoring in place prior to the opening of the 95 Express. The plan has been updated numerous times, with most of the changes consisting of repackaging the data to enable better management. The monitoring plan requirements drove the selection of the systems and equip- ment used to collect data. Battelle, which is responsible for monitoring the performance of all UPA and CRD projects, was involved in the formative stages of the monitoring plan. All moni- toring requirements were vetted through workshops with the different stakeholders involved. One recurring challenge was tracking the performance of a facility being opened in phases, which meant that monitoring would begin when the facility was only partly opened and affected by ongoing construction. FDOT’s monitoring activities have been so intensive that they have hired a dedicated staff person to coordinate requests and have developed a master matrix to track the different pieces of information measured. FDOT also makes performance data available to the public on a weekly basis through the 95 Express website. 100 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

Congestion Pricing Case Studies 101 Speed information on the 95 Express is collected by 31 vehicle detection sensor sites through- out the corridor, processed by the ETC software. Speed data for each site can be averaged across a specified number of detectors or made at a single location. Speed data are tracked in both the express lanes and general-purpose lanes, with comparisons made for the A.M. and P.M. peak peri- ods, as well as weekday, weekend, and monthly averages. FDOT has also made before-and-after speed comparisons on both the express and general-purpose lanes. FDOT calculates reliability on the express lanes by documenting the amount of time they operate at speeds above a mini- mum threshold of 45 miles per hour. Data on vehicle volumes are collected at toll gantry locations and synthesized by the ETC software. FDOT’s philosophy is to use as much instrumentation as possible to collect speed and volume data because it can be better managed. For example, data can continue to be collected even when a particular detector is disconnected. In addition, data can be cherry-picked using information by the most reliable detectors to produce standard reports. Traffic volume data are compiled for the same time analysis periods as speed data described above. FDOT also calculates person throughput on the I-95 corridor using average vehicle occupancy (AVO) rates and volumes by type of vehicle for both the express and general-purpose lanes. Express bus ridership is added manually. Before-and-after comparisons were made of person throughput during the peak period, in accordance with the UPA framework. FDOT tracks safety conditions on state roadways using police crash reports. Two years’ worth of crash data will be needed for the 95 Express before definitive safety information is available. However, initial evaluation of incidents has not provided any indication of safety concerns. FDOT also has installed video monitoring equipment on the 95 Express that operates around the clock. This may enable FDOT to capture incidents that might not have been recorded in the past. In addition, FDOT monitors incident clearance times. Revenue and toll data are tracked by Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (FTE). FTE summarizes all the applied tolls, tolled and toll-exempt trips, and gross revenue into monthly performance measure reports and delivers them to FDOT. FDOT tracks monthly revenue trends and revenue receipts during different time periods—P.M. peak, weekend, or weekday, for example—from month to month. FDOT compiles similar information for toll rates. In addition, it tracks max- imum tolls. FDOT’s systems also allow it to identify the express lane travel speeds that occurred at any period of time, which enhances the ability to understand the relationships between toll rates, traffic volumes, and speeds on the 95 Express. In addition to revenue data, FDOT tracks both toll-exempt registrations and actual toll- exempt trips by vehicle class. Although toll-exempt trips only represent 1 percent of the total trips on the express lanes, they have important implications for project goals such as a mode shift from SOVs to transit and ride sharing. FDOT also tracks the overall availability of the 95 Express, meaning the amount of time that the lanes are open and available to motorists, making a distinction between planned closures (due to construction) and unanticipated closures (due to traffic incidents). In addition to the number of traffic incidents, FDOT documents the average duration of lane blockages as a result of such incidents. FDOT also monitors enforcement data compiled by the Florida Highway Patrol, which tracks HOV occupancy warnings and citations, toll violation citations, and other infringements (e.g., speeding, seat belt use, and driving while intoxicated). Information on toll violations is generated automatically by the SunPass ETC system. However other enforcement activities rely on visual enforcement by the Florida Highway Patrol. FDOT monitors the performance of the different ETC and detection equipment installed on the 95 Express. These include closed-circuit television cameras, dynamic message signs, and microwave

vehicle detection system sensors used to measure spot speeds, volumes, and lane occupancy. Mal- function of any pieces of equipment is noted, along with downtimes. FDOT uses this information to calculate the percentage of time that the different systems are operable and available. FDOT monitors the performance of express bus services operated on the 95 Express by Miami-Dade Transit (MDT). An evaluation of the impacts of the 95 Express, Phase 1A, on tran- sit services was conducted by the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) at the Uni- versity of South Florida. The evaluation was based on the comparison of transit operations from January to March 2008 (Pre-Deployment) with January to March 2009 (Post-Deployment) using data provided by MDT. In addition, onboard surveys were conducted by FDOT in May 2008, May 2009, and June 2010 to gauge the effect of the project on user perceptions. The tran- sit evaluation report also draws on information from FDOT’s I-95 Lane Monitoring Reports in order to assess the effect on transit mode share. FDOT and its partners will continue to monitor transit performance as additional components of the 95 Express become operational. Lastly, FDOT tracks public perception of the 95 Express. In May 2009, a survey was distrib- uted to commuters in the South Florida Region to gauge feedback on the I-95 Express Lanes (northbound). The survey was sent to 160,000 SunPass account holders in Broward and Miami- Dade Counties; 30,000 South Florida Commuter Services database participants; 28,000 Miami- Dade County government employees via their newsletter; and 126 employers along the I-95 cor- ridor. A total of 9,156 individuals participated, of whom 8,986 traveled on I-95 in Broward or Miami-Dade County in the prior 6 months. Participants were queried on their overall use of the I-95 Express, the purpose of their trips on the facility, their familiarity with the express lanes, the reliability of trips on the 95 Express, and whether they would favor the development of express lanes on other roadways in southeast Florida. 2.3. Other Essential Data Gathering Activities Prior to the opening of the 95 Express, FDOT conducted various public outreach activities. FDOT held two public hearings, numerous presentations to local municipalities and elected officials, and two public meetings within the areas affected by the project. In addition, FDOT organized a webinar on the 95 Express and launched a project website providing detailed infor- mation on all aspects of the facility. FDOT held public hearings during the rulemaking phase prior to project implementation. There was extensive discussion about the expected performance with all the groups mentioned above. FDOT informed stakeholders that HOT lanes would provide users with travel options and that the facility was expected to improve overall travel times on I-95. Most queries focused on congestion reduction. 2.4. Why Performance Evaluation Takes Place and How Performance Monitoring Data Is Used FDOT uses the monitoring data it collects on the I-95 Express for various purposes described in further detail below. Maintaining Traffic Service and Speed Levels on the HOT Lanes. As described earlier, FDOT uses dynamic tolling on the 95 Express, whereby toll levels are adjusted every 15 minutes in order to maintain traffic service and speed levels on the express lanes using real-time information on travel conditions in the corridor. The application used to calculate toll rates collects real-time traffic data from the express lanes (including speeds and volumes), compares it to historical data, and analyzes this information to dynamically generate tolls based on traffic density within the express lanes. FDOT has made some minor adjustments to the pricing algorithm after reviewing 102 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

Congestion Pricing Case Studies 103 monitoring data. However, the only outcome that the algorithm is expected to achieve is the Fed- eral requirement to maintain a minimum speed of 45 miles per hour (LOS C) 90 percent of the time. Other than this requirement, the process of setting tolls is flexible and can be adjusted based on FDOT’s judgment as well as feedback from the public. Fulfilling Federal UPA Performance Monitoring Requirements. One of the primary rea- sons behind USDOT’s decision to provide over $850 million in dedicated funding for conges- tion pricing projects through the UPA and CRD programs is to gain a better understanding of the effects of congestion pricing in its different forms on congestion levels and travel behavior. As a result, UPA and CRD grants require recipients to meet rigorous and standardized perfor- mance monitoring requirements. The information obtained through this process is part of a national effort to assess the effects of the UPA/CRD projects in a comprehensive and system- atic manner across all sites. The intent of the national evaluation is to generate information and produce technology transfer materials to support deployment of the strategies in other metro- politan areas. The national evaluation requires recipient DOTs to track the following perfor- mance monitoring categories: • Highway Performance • Transit Performance • Public Acceptance • Safety Performance • Enforcement Performance • Revenue and ETC System Performance • Greenhouse Gas Emissions The national UPA and CRD evaluation is being conducted by a team led by Battelle. The Battelle team has worked closely with FDOT and its fellow sponsors of the 95 Express to ensure that the monitoring program for the facility is consistent with needs and overall structure of the national evaluation. Improving Operational Performance. The performance monitoring and user satisfaction data FDOT collects enables it to assess the operational performance and safety of the 95 Express and identify potential adjustments to them, which since opening has only resulted in several “tweaks.” Validating the Case for Congestion Pricing. The monitoring plan also reflects issues of concern to local stakeholders identified through the project public outreach efforts. There has been an unanticipated level of interest in the effects of the 95 Express in Miami—so much so that FDOT has had to hire an additional staff person to coordinate responses and provide information on the project. This level of interest within the local community and the fact that FDOT is respon- sive to it provides FDOT with an excellent opportunity to document the benefits of the project and the ways in which it influences and ameliorates local concerns. It also allows FDOT to build cred- ibility with local stakeholders both in its own abilities to implement congestion pricing and in the ability of pricing to help reduce traffic congestion and meet other needs. FDOT has articulated a vision of implementing a network of managed lanes in southeast Florida and the credibility it has established through the 95 Express will be an essential tool in advancing that vision. 2.5. What Additional Performance Metrics or Data Would Be Helpful to FDOT or Other Agencies Considering Congestion Pricing? FDOT staff remarked that they would have liked to have had more “before” data from prior to the facility’s opening, but maximized the volume of “after” data through extensive collection efforts and instrument deployment to provide the flexibility to analyze their operations and performance

104 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects Congestion Pricing Case Studies 105 Table 2-1. Florida Department of Transportation 95 Express summary matrix.

metrics. The 95 Express is well equipped with detection equipment throughout the corridor, pro- viding it with extremely rich raw data. FDOT’s systems enable it to collect data on vehicle vol- umes and speeds at multiple locations along the facility, rather than at tolling points alone. Working with FTE, FDOT has developed sophisticated software to manage and synthesize the information received from its field equipment in order to set toll rates. Reviewing the data that it receives from the different detection points along the 95 Express, FDOT has witnessed vari- ability in the data reported and has ascertained that the information obtained from certain detec- tors is more accurate than others. Through continued monitoring and analysis, FDOT has learned how to select the best data collected from its detection equipment and then how to process it in order to identify accurate and comprehensive performance monitoring data. FDOT’s ability to do so reflected the fact that the 95 Express needed to be equipped with detec- tion equipment at multiple locations along its entire length. It also reflects FTE’s hands-on expe- rience with ETC systems and the fact that the I-95 corridor was highly congested both before and after the conversion. Together these different factors have encouraged FDOT to explore new ground in monitoring and operating the 95 Express. FDOT’s experience is far different from that of other agencies operating less complex priced facilities, many of which have only one point of access and egress. As other longer and more complex priced facilities are built, their operators would benefit from FDOT’s experience with the 95 Express. Another issue of note mentioned by FDOT staff is the unanticipated level of interest in gen- eral information on the 95 Express and its performance. This can be attributed to issues ranging from FDOT’s outreach efforts, which have raised awareness and interest in the 95 Express, to concerns over congestion levels in Miami, to skepticism regarding the introduction of pricing on I-95. Whatever the genesis of the interest in the 95 Express, FDOT’s comprehensive moni- toring data allows the facility’s performance to speak for itself. Given the strong interest in the facility’s performance data, FDOT staff recommend that a process be put in place for centralized data dissemination so that requests are handled in a coordinated and consistent manner. Pro- cessing raw data prior to its release should also be considered in this process. One last issue is the recognition that with the implementation of the 95 Express, FDOT was successful in increasing the occupancy requirements for free use of the managed lane from HOV2 to HOV3, while limiting eligible HOV3 trips to work-related carpools who must re-register every 6 months. SOV low-emission vehicles are still allowed on the lanes free of charge, but they too must go through an annual registration process. It would be interesting to explore the circum- stances that enabled FDOT to introduce these restrictions, particularly given that other cities implementing HOT conversions of congested HOV lanes—most notably Los Angeles—have avoided the liability of increasing occupancy requirements because such a change was thought to have the potential to generate extreme opposition. FDOT’s experience in this area could be extremely helpful and informative to other urban areas with congested HOV facilities. 106 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

Congestion Pricing Case Studies 107 3. Harris County Toll Road Authority Katy Managed Lanes The Harris County Toll Road Authority (HCTRA) is a toll authority serving the Greater Hous- ton region. HCTRA was established in 1983 with the voter approval of $900 million in bonds to build local toll roads. HCTRA’s annual toll revenues exceeded $440 million in 2009, providing 90 percent of the authority’s income. Jurisdictionally, HCTRA is a function of Harris County. The County, in turn, is governed by four geographically based commissioners representing the county precincts and a County Judge who presides over the County Court. These are the deci- sionmakers to whom HCTRA answers. HCTRA’s toll system covers over 100 route-miles of roadway in the Houston/Harris County area. Its facilities include the 74-mile circumferential Sam Houston Tollway and the 20-mile Hardy Toll Road, both of which feature fixed tolls collected both manually and electronically. HCTRA also operates the Westpark Tollway, which is the first fully electronic toll road in the United States. HCTRA attempted to address the extensive peak-direction congestion on this two-by-two lane facility by implementing congestion pricing on the facility in September 2007. However, the new toll structure quickly encountered a swell of opposition, forcing the County Court to rescind its approval within a matter of days. HCTRA has established the following goals for its toll facilities: • Not superseding toll rate covenants • Maintaining an investment grade rating for HCTRA of at least “A” • Maintaining toll levels commensurate with toll rate policies associated with private toll road operators • Allowing for continued maintenance and orderly improvement of the HCTRA system HCTRA has also been a partner in redeveloping the I-10 Katy Freeway—Houston’s major east- west roadway—together with the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), and the Metro- politan Transportation Authority of Harris County (METRO). This project involved the 5-year reconstruction of a 12-mile section of the Katy Freeway from west of SH 6 to the I-10/I-610 inter- change, building five general-purpose lanes and two variably priced HOT lanes in each direction. HCTRA provided over $237 million toward the financing of the $2.8 billion project and has the right to operate the facility’s HOT lanes until it has recouped its investment. Prior to the reconstruc- tion, the original Katy Freeway, which dated to the 1960s, provided three general-purpose lanes in each direction and a one-lane, reversible flow bus/HOT lane that was available to transit and HOV3 vehicles at no cost and to registered HOV2 vehicles for a fee of $2.00 during peak periods. 3.1. Overview of HCTRA’s Congestion Pricing Program The Katy Managed Lanes are a 12-mile HOT-lane facility providing two travel lanes in each direction in the median of I-10. It opened to tolled operations in April 2009, following a 6-month soft launch for HOVs only in October 2008. There are seven access and egress points to the lanes; five from the I-10 general-purpose lanes and two from dedicated park-and-ride transit hubs. The managed lanes are separated from the general-purpose lanes by flexible “candlestick” barriers and have three tolling points. Tolls are collected each time a vehicle passes below one of them. For motorists traveling the entire length of the corridor, tolls are collected three times. During the peak period—7:00 to 9:00 A.M. eastbound and 5:00 to 7:00 P.M. westbound—toll rates are $4.00 for traveling the entire length of the corridor. This rate is reduced to $2.00 during shoulder periods— 6:00 to 7:00 and 9:00 to 10:00 A.M. eastbound and 4:00 to 5:00 and 7:00 to 8:00 P.M. westbound— and a rate of $1.00 is charged for trips made at any other time. Passenger cars with two or more passengers and motorcycles are exempted from tolls from 5:00 to 11:00 A.M. and from 2:00 to

8:00 P.M., at which time they must pass below tolling points in a dedicated “declaration lane” for vehicle occupancy enforcement periods. At all other times, HOV motorists must pay the dis- counted $1.00 toll for trips on the managed lanes. Commercial vehicles may use the Katy Managed Lanes at any time and incur a fixed toll of $7.00 at each of the facility’s three toll collection points. 3.2. What Is Monitored? The full spectrum of HCTRA’s performance monitoring activities is provided in the accom- panying Facility Performance Monitoring Summary Matrix for the Katy Managed Lanes. The matrix is a comprehensive record of all current, known metrics used to monitor performance on the facility, organized by evaluation category. Provided in the matrix for each metric used are frequency of collection, purpose, a simple indication of importance, and particular characteri- zations of the metric that relate back to agency/facility goals or applications. An expanded ver- sion of the matrix providing sources of information and other notes is included in the Final Report for NCHRP 08-75 which is available online. The matrix is intended to be a visual overview of HCTRA’s complete monitoring effort, easily comparable to other HOT-lane facilities with similar matrix summaries. A more qualitative discussion of how these metrics are applied in practice and which ones are the most significant is provided below. Not all metrics noted in the matrix are discussed here. With its sophisticated tolling systems, HCTRA collects comprehensive data on toll transac- tions. This includes the number of transactions, toll rates charged, time of transaction, direction of travel, and vehicle type. HCTRA does not have a formal program for monitoring other aspects of the performance of the Katy Managed Lanes. HCTRA receives feedback on the facility from the county commissioners and through the Katy Managed Lanes website. HCTRA reports that there have been few complaints since the facility opened. HCTRA reports that its pricing policy was established shortly before the opening of the Katy Managed Lanes. HCTRA adopted a simple toll structure with three rates of $1.00, $2.00, and $4.00 for off-peak, shoulder, and peak periods, respectively. Currently, volumes on the managed lanes are nearing the peak capacity level of 2,200 vehicles per hour per lane at certain times. As a result, HCTRA is analyzing volume data to develop a new schedule of rates that will sustain expected traffic levels for at least 6 months without adjustment. The new rate structure will be modeled after the SR-91 Express Lanes in Orange County, California, which have fixed variable pricing with different rates assigned to different days of the week and hours and direction of travel. HCTRA has not completed any formal analyses to determine how much toll rates would need to increase to cause drivers to stop using the managed lanes. As a result, it will study vol- umes closely after the rates are changed to ascertain what the effect has been. Prior to the opening of the Katy Managed Lanes, HCTRA expected that the facility would lose money. However, monthly revenue has been approximately $550,000; while annual mainte- nance costs amount to only $350,000. Revenue from the Katy Managed Lanes is “coded” and traceable and is not initially pooled with toll proceeds from other HCTRA facilities. This enables HCTRA and its partners to track the extent to which it has been able to recoup its $237.5 mil- lion contribution toward the reconstruction of the Katy Freeway. 3.3. Other Essential Data Gathering Activities Prior to the opening of the Katy Managed Lanes, HCTRA conducted customer satisfaction surveys across its toll system and also held public meetings along the I-10 corridor. These out- reach efforts revealed that there was some resistance to the concept of congestion pricing and 108 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

Congestion Pricing Case Studies 109 confusion on why prices could change during a person’s drive. Initially, in an effort to maximize revenues from the lanes, HCTRA intended to exempt registered HOV3 motorists from tolls and charge all other vehicles for using the facility. However, this issue proved particularly contentious during the public meetings, so HCTRA changed its operational strategy to exempt HOV2 vehi- cles from paying tolls during the highest hours of demand and not require that they register to use the facility. The change in the proposed toll structure also coincided with a change in HCTRA’s management. Prior to the opening of the Katy Managed Lanes, HCTRA staff visited several other operating HOT lanes in person to learn more about them and the different ways in which they operate. HCTRA staff found these visits extremely helpful and informative, and also left them with an understanding that each of the HOT-lane facilities operating in the United States is unique. The HCTRA managed lane team was able to incorporate bits and pieces of strategies and lessons learned from several of the facilities they visited into the operation of the Katy facility. In par- ticular, the SR-91 was influential and led to HCTRA’s decision to used fixed variable pricing rather than dynamic pricing. HCTRA staff have been pleased with the outcome of that decision and stated that their experience from the site visits has encouraged them to opt for simplicity whenever possible. 3.4. Why Performance Evaluation Takes Place and How Performance Monitoring Data Is Used HCTRA performance monitoring activities are modest compared to those of other agencies operating priced toll facilities. The primary purpose of HCTRA monitoring and evaluation work is to ensure that the Katy Managed Lanes do not exceed their designated capacity of 2,200 vehi- cles per hour per lane. While there is often a desire to maintain the status quo while things are working, utilization of the Katy Managed Lanes has been higher than expected in its first year of operation, and during the six-month soft launch, as many as 1,400 HOV motorists used the lanes during the peak hour. HCTRA recognizes that its toll policies will need to change to keep up with growing traffic and is developing a new fixed variably priced toll structure. 3.5. What Additional Performance Metrics or Data Would be Helpful to HCTRA or Other Agencies Considering Congestion Pricing? HCTRA staff are not certain whether performance monitoring guidelines would have been helpful to them had they been available prior to the opening of the Katy Managed Lanes. From their site visits and investigations of other operating HOT lanes, they found that no one facility or location is the same. Some of the most important distinctions in their opinion were the dif- ferent types of operating agencies and back office procedures, as well as the presence or lack of other toll facilities in the region. They believe that determining how a priced facility will operate is facility-specific and needs to be driven by local conditions. Prior to opening the Katy Managed Lanes, HCTRA did not know whether use would be high or low. Although they had not originally intended to open the facility in a phased sequence— first to HOVs only and then later to paying vehicles—the ultimate decision to do so was extremely helpful on several fronts. Most importantly, it provided HCTRA with an excellent understanding of HOV utilization in the corridor, which (as stated earlier at 1,400 vehicles dur- ing the peak hour) was higher than expected, and whether or not any operational issues could be enhanced. The soft launch period also gave the public time to become accustomed to the lanes and for HCTRA to conduct outreach activities. With local elections following the soft opening by 1 month in November 2008, a county judge who was up for election came out in

110 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects Congestion Pricing Case Studies 111 Table 3-1. Harris County Toll Road Authority Katy Managed Lanes summary matrix.

support of the lanes and later assisted HCTRA in developing a television commercial for them. Although they cite the soft launch as “dumb luck” necessitated by delays in implementing toll collection equipment in the corridor, HCTRA staff believe a phased opening might be beneficial to other operators launching new congestion pricing facilities. One area that HCTRA wishes it has been able to improve was streamlining the manage- ment of the variable message signs deployed in the I-10 corridor. HCTRA believes it has devoted an inordinate amount of time to managing its software and functioning of its vari- able message signs. 112 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

4. Minnesota Department of Transportation MnPASS Lanes The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) is responsible for 137,700 miles of roads; 13,000 of which are state highways. County highways and municipal roads make up another 40,000 miles. There are four toll facilities in the state of Minnesota: two non-Interstate toll bridges, which are not operated by MnDOT, and two Interstate HOT lane facilities described in further detail below. Toll revenues represent far less than 1 percent of MnDOT’s total rev- enues of $2.65 billion in 2007.2 However, MnDOT is assessing the possibility of implementing new highway improvements as tolled facilities through its innovative financing program, as well as through expansion of MnPASS lanes. Following several years of study and off-and-on support for congestion pricing, the Minnesota State Legislature passed enabling legislation (160.93, Sec. 7) in 2003 authorizing MnDOT to implement user fees on HOV lanes. The enabling legislation required MnDOT to document the performance of any HOT-lane facilities implemented in the state and established four main goals for congestion pricing: • Maintain travel speeds and level of service for HOVs and carpools • Improve the efficiency of the converted HOV facility • Provide new travel options • Demonstrate the use of dynamic pricing 4.1. Overview of MnDOT’s Congestion Pricing Program MnDOT has developed two operating HOT-lane facilities in Minneapolis. The first is the 11-mile, I-394 HOT-lane facility on the primary travel corridor between downtown Minneapolis and the city’s western suburbs. The facility provides two reversible-flow, barrier-separated HOV lanes on a 3-mile section between I-94 in downtown Minneapolis and Trunk Highway 100 (TH 100), together with one non-barrier-separated lane in each direction between TH 100 and I-494. Originally developed as an HOV system, the I-394 managed lanes were converted to HOT service, opening on May 16, 2005. Single-occupancy vehicles (SOVs) using the MnPASS lanes pay a toll, depending on congestion levels and the distance traveled, with a different rate paid based on whether motorists travel on the reversible section, the diamond lane section, or both. The facil- ity provides inbound (east) service from 6:00 A.M. to 10:00 A.M. and outbound (west) service from 2:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M. MnPASS provides 11 access points (five eastbound and six westbound). With the support of a $133 million Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA) grant awarded by USDOT, MnDOT opened a second HOT-lane facility in September 2009 on I-35W between downtown Minneapolis and the city’s southern suburbs. The 12-mile HOT lane is being opened in two major phases and will be fully operational in fall 2010. The I-35W corridor improvements include the following elements: • Priced dynamic shoulder lanes on I-35W from 46th Street to downtown Minneapolis • Addition of a HOT lane in the Crosstown reconstruction project from 66th Street to 46th Street • Conversion of the HOV lane to HOT lane on I-35W from 66th Street to Burnsville Parkway, similar to the I-394 MnPASS lanes • Construction of additional park-and-ride lots along the I-35W corridor north and south of Minneapolis • Construction of additional dedicated bus lanes in downtown Minneapolis • Partnerships with major employers along the I-35W corridor to promote telecommuting programs • Use of additional Intelligent Transportation Systems technology 2AASHTO Center for Excellence in Project Finance Congestion Pricing Case Studies 113

Both HOT-lane facilities use dynamic pricing, with the average peak-period fee varying between $1.00 and $4.00, depending on the level of congestion in the MnPASS Express Lanes. Minimum toll rates are $0.25 per segment, but can rise to a cap of $8.00 during periods of peak congestion. Dynamic pricing ensures that traffic in the managed lanes flows at least 50–55 mph. 4.2. What Is Monitored? The full spectrum of MnDOT’s performance monitoring activities is provided in the accom- panying Facility Performance Monitoring Summary Matrix for the I-394 and I-35W MnPASS. The matrix is a comprehensive record of all current, known metrics used to monitor perfor- mance on the facility, organized by evaluation category. Provided in the matrix for each metric used are frequency of collection, purpose, a simple indication of importance, and particular char- acterizations of the metric that relate back to agency/facility goals or applications. An expanded version of the matrix providing sources of information and other notes is included in the Final Report for NCHRP 08-75, which is available on line. The matrix is intended to be a visual overview of MnDOT’s complete monitoring effort, easily comparable to other HOT-lane facilities with similar matrix summaries. A more qualitative discussion of how these metrics are applied in prac- tice and which ones are the most significant is provided below. Not all metrics noted in the matrix are discussed here. MnDOT’s monitoring program for its two MnPASS facilities are identified in reporting requirements expected of Cofiroute, the MnPASS HOT-lane operator. With the recent addition of I-35W MnPASS, MnDOT has also established performance monitoring requirements associ- ated with the state’s UPA grant. In response to the legislative requirement of maintaining traffic service levels on converted HOV lanes using a benchmark of minimum speeds of 50-55 miles per hour at least 95 percent of the time, speed is the most important monitoring metric on HOT-lane facilities in Minnesota. HOT-lane speeds are monitored 24 hours a day by MnDOT’s system operator using a series of loop detectors. Speed data is available to MnDOT electronically at any time and is also summarized in quarterly reports prepared by the system operator. These reports also provide comprehensive information on such parameters as • Traffic volumes, including – Trips by hour – Trips by day of week – Eastbound and westbound trip comparison • Toll revenue statistics • Information on new ETC accounts and transactions • A summary of call activity and other performance indicators for the MnPASS Customer Service Center • Information on the performance of the computer systems and servers used to operate the MnPASS system The measures reported by the system operator were identified by MnDOT’s technical con- sultant at the time the systems operations procurement was prepared and were then negotiated directly with Cofiroute, which was awarded the system operator contract. In addition to these metrics, MnDOT tracks other performance parameters, including crash and enforcement information maintained by the state police. MnDOT also monitors transit rid- ership and carpooling activity and compares trends in these areas on its priced corridors to other non-priced “control” corridors in the Twin Cities region. Utilization data involves field or video counts of vehicles using the corridor, together with assumptions on average occupancy rates for 114 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

Congestion Pricing Case Studies 115 different vehicle types. Although there is no specific measure of reliability in Minnesota, given that acceptable speeds are always maintained and the HOT lanes are always operational, they are perceived by all stakeholders as being reliable. MnDOT has also conducted comprehensive user satisfaction surveys for MnPASS account holders covering a wide range of issues. The surveys were conducted in three waves: (1) starting prior to opening in fall 2004; (2) 6 months after opening in fall 2005; and (3) 1 year after open- ing in spring 2006. The effort involved interviews with a panel of 1,200 individuals who were pre- recruited and participated in telephone and in-person discussions. Over 340 of these individuals participated in all three phases of the survey. The survey effort covered such issues as satisfaction with the following: • HOT-lane concept by income group • All electronic tolling • Traffic speed in the lanes • Dynamic pricing • Safety of merging MnDOT’s survey work indicated that there is widespread support for congestion pricing on the I-394 corridor among people of all incomes and that favorable opinions of the HOT-lane concept and the I-394 facility specifically grew following the implementation of MnPASS. 4.3. Other Essential Data Gathering Activities Prior to deciding to implement congestion pricing on I-394, MnDOT completed numerous feasibility pricing studies both in the Twin Cities region and the I-394 corridor specifically. Through those studies, MnDOT developed different travel demand forecasts and assumptions on how travel behavior would be influenced by variably priced tolls. In addition MnDOT had a good understanding of public perceptions of congestion pricing in the Twin Cities. In addition, while it was converting the I-394 MnPASS lanes, MnDOT established an Imple- mentation Committee composed of legislators, other public officials, and stakeholders to pro- vide feedback and advice on a wide range of technical and policy issues, including • Hours of operation • Transponder technology • Safety and enforcement • Toll rates • Dynamic message signs • Public outreach • Expected revenues • Type of vehicles allowed • Access points/traffic operations In addition, MnDOT held open houses to elicit feedback on the same issues from the public at large. Attendance was not high, but the media was present. MnDOT also met at least twice with all city councils in both corridors prior to implementation so that council members could learn about pricing, provide feedback, and become champions. 4.4. Why Performance Evaluation Takes Place and How Performance Monitoring Data Is Used MnDOT uses the monitoring data it collects on its HOT-lane facilities for various purposes. These are described in further detail below.

Maintaining Speed, Efficiency, and Operational Standards on HOT and General-Purpose Lanes. Arguably, the most important function that MnDOT’s performance data facilitates is ensuring that the HOT lanes meet their travel speed requirements, while maximizing the over- all performance and efficiency of the two priced corridors. During their first year of operation, some important changes were made on the I-394 MnPASS lanes based on the performance data collected by MnDOT. In particular, the algorithm used to set the dynamically priced tolls was modified to be less sensitive to changes in traffic volumes and speeds on the HOT lanes. When it first opened, dynamic toll rates increased rapidly, and these large increases priced many motorists off the HOT lanes, leaving them underused. After a series of adjustments to the algorithm, it remained unchanged for 4 years when a decision was made to adjust it to enhance toll revenues. This was accomplished by lowering toll rates during shoulder periods, a change which resulted in a healthy increase in MnPASS utilization, increasing net toll revenues and allowing more effi- cient use of both the managed and general-purpose lanes. Fulfilling Legislatively Mandated Reporting Requirements. Under the UPA program, state legislation enabling the implementation of the I-35W HOT lanes requires that MnDOT submit annual reports on their performance to the State Legislature. These reports must document whether travel speeds on the HOT lanes have met the requirement of operating at speeds above 50-55 mph at least 95 percent of the time. MnDOT is also required by the legislature to include information on toll revenues collected, safety conditions, and the operational efficiency of the two highway corridors. The metrics for which MnDOT collects monitoring data have been specifi- cally selected to enable the Department to fulfill its reporting requirements. Improving Operational Performance. The performance monitoring and user satisfaction data MnDOT collects enables it to assess the operational performance and safety of the HOT lanes and identify potential adjustments to them. This has included a major operational adjust- ment on the I-394 MnPASS lanes soon after they opened. Rather than operating the westbound HOV lane as a HOT lane in the A.M. peak period as initially intended, MnDOT reversed this pol- icy and made it available as a general-purpose lane in response to initial confusion and severe congestion in the westbound travel direction. Documenting Changes in Travel Behavior. Performance monitoring data documents changes in travel behavior by different user groups, including SOV motorists who pay to use the HOT lanes, carpoolers and transit riders who use the HOT lanes, and HOV violators. MnDOT has also compared conditions in the MnPASS corridors to other “control” corridors in the Twin Cities region in order to determine how transit ridership and carpooling have been influenced by the HOV-to-HOT conversions. Validating the Case for Congestion Pricing. Lastly, the collective data derived from the per- formance monitoring program enables MnDOT to validate all aspects of the performance of the MnPASS lanes to stakeholders to whom it answers. The positive response to the I-394 HOT lanes has been an important factor behind MnDOT’s decision to pursue a HOT conversion on I-35W and consider pricing on other facilities in the state. 4.5. What Additional Performance Metrics or Data Would Be Helpful to MnDOT or Other Agencies Considering Congestion Pricing? The primary metric that MnDOT uses to monitor the performance of its two HOT-lane facil- ities is travel speed. While all pricing projects are different, MnDOT staff believe that it would be helpful to identify other types of metrics used to monitor the performance of priced facilities, such as travel reliability and travel time savings. Having a better knowledge of the relative mea- sures of success helps pricing proponents do a more effective job communicating the purpose and benefits of pricing projects. 116 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

Congestion Pricing Case Studies 117 If MnDOT had time and resources they would increase their outreach activities. One measure not formalized is public perception and user satisfaction. MnDOT surveyed transponder users on the I-394 MnPASS facility in 2006, but that effort did not include HOV or transit users. Transponder users only represent 25 percent of all trips on the MnPASS lanes, leaving MnDOT with an incomplete understanding of user satisfaction. The department would like to conduct more extensive surveys capturing this information, but they do not have the money to do so nor do they sense that there is dissatisfaction in the corridor. MnDOT staff also point out the difficulty they face in assembling meaningful before-and-after data on the I-35 corridor due to the MnPASS improvements being opened on a rolling basis and to travel conditions on the corridor being affected by the construction of the Crosstown recon- struction and the replacement of the Mississippi River crossing near downtown Minneapolis. These factors will result in a substantial time gap between comparable before-and-after conditions.

118 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects Congestion Pricing Case Studies 119 Table 4-1. Minnesota Department of Transportation MnPASS Lanes summary matrix.

5. Orange County Transportation Authority 91 Express Lanes The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) is a multimodal transportation agency serving Orange County, California. It provides countywide bus, paratransit, and Metrolink rail service and implements improvements to freeways and local roads. In addition it operates the United States’ first HOT-lane facility, the 91 Express Lanes, which it purchased in January 2003 for $207.5 million from the California Private Transportation Company (CPTC), the private con- cession company that had built the lanes. The purpose of the change in ownership of the lanes was to remove a controversial clause in the private partner’s concession agreement that prohib- ited local governments from expanding roadway capacity in the congested SR-91 corridor. OCTA was created in 1991 with the consolidation of seven separate transportation agencies. In 2009, it had annual revenues of approximately $391.2 million, $43.7 million of which were gen- erated by tolls on the 91 Express Lanes. OCTA is governed by an 18-member Board of Directors composed of five county supervisors, ten city members, two public members, and the Director of Caltrans District 12 (who is a non-voting member). OCTA uses the revenue generated by the lanes to pay the underlying debt it owes on the facil- ity, as well as the costs of operating and maintaining the lanes. OCTA is required by its bond covenants to maintain a debt coverage ratio of 1.3. Any additional revenues generated by the project are invested in other transportation improvements in the corridor. In addition to meet- ing the debt coverage requirements, OCTA’s primary goal for the 91 Express Lanes is to manage the volume of traffic using the facility at a level that allows for travel speeds of 60-65 mph at all times. In addition to the 91 Express Lanes, there are three other toll facilities operating in Orange County, the San Joaquin Hills, Foothill, and Eastern Transportation Corridors, all of which use different fixed peak and off-peak toll rates for cash and FasTrak ETC transactions. These facilities are operated by the Transportation Corridors Agency of Orange County. 5.1. Overview of OCTA’s Congestion Pricing Program The 91 Express Lanes is a four-lane express toll-lane facility in the median of SR-91, a heavily traveled eight-lane east-west freeway. SR-91 connects the SR-55 near Anaheim with Riverside County. The SR-91’s location is the optimal setting for a HOT lane. The freeway connects rap- idly growing residential areas in Riverside and San Bernardino counties with major employment centers in Orange and Los Angeles counties. The corridor itself traverses a rugged and narrow canyon area and is the only route through it. The SR-91 is one of the most congested freeways in Southern California and carries more than 300,000 vehicles per day. This level is expected to increase to more than 425,000 vehicles per day by 2030. Despite these high demand levels, transit service on the SR-91 is limited, consisting of approximately ten round-trip express bus services. Vanpooling is also limited in the corridor. The HOT facility has no shoulders and is separated from the general-purpose lanes by tubu- lar markers. It provides one single point of access and egress. When it opened to service in 1995, the 91 Express Lanes was the first operating HOT-lane facility in the United States, the first high- way improvement to be built on a public-private partnership basis in California, and the first fully automated toll facility in the world, where all tolls were collected electronically. Tolls on the 91 Express Lanes vary by direction of travel, time of day, and day of week on a fixed schedule. HOV3 motorists are allowed to use the facility free of charge, with the exception of the P.M. peak period from 4:00 to 6:00 P.M. eastbound, when they are required to carry a transponder and pay 50 percent of the established toll. All other users must carry a transponder and pay the variably priced tolls to use the lanes at all times. Trucks are not allowed to use the lanes at any time. 120 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

Because there is only one ingress and egress location on the 91 Express Lanes, toll collection is relatively uncomplicated. Tolls are collected at a single point in the middle of the corridor, where a maintenance and incident response facility is also located. The central location enables OCTA to respond to traffic incidents quickly, which is important because the 91 Express Lanes has no shoulders. The lanes are well maintained and are completely closed once every 3 weeks on Sunday mornings, when they are swept and any missing channelizer markers are replaced and cracks are sealed. 5.2. What Is Monitored? The full spectrum of OCTA’s performance monitoring activities is provided in the accompa- nying Facility Performance Monitoring Summary Matrix for the 91 Express Lanes. The matrix is a comprehensive record of all current, known metrics used to monitor performance on the facility, organized by evaluation category. It also includes earlier monitoring and evaluation work performed by Cal Poly State University that examined the lanes from prior to inception through mid-1999. Provided in the matrix for each metric used are frequency of collection, purpose, a simple indication of importance, and particular characterizations of the metric that relate back to agency/facility goals or applications. An expanded version of the matrix providing sources of information and other notes is included in the Final Report for NCHRP 08-75 which is available on line. The matrix is intended to be a visual overview of OCTA’s complete monitoring effort, easily comparable to other HOT lane facilities with similar matrix summaries. A more qualita- tive discussion of how these metrics are applied in practice and which ones are the most signifi- cant is provided below. Not all metrics noted in the matrix are discussed here. OCTA monitors several different performance parameters on the 91 Express Lanes. The most important of these is the number of vehicles on the facility. Traffic volumes are detected auto- matically for both paying and nonpaying vehicles, together with the time of travel, and tolls collected. This data is collected electronically by Cofiroute, the private-sector firm that oper- ates the 91 Express Lanes as a contractor to OCTA. Traffic and revenue data is available to OCTA in real time and Cofiroute provides OCTA with regular summaries reported for vari- ous timeframes. OCTA monitors safety conditions on the lanes closely. This includes incident data maintained by the California Highway Patrol (CHP), as well as real-time images from cameras located along the length of the facility. OCTA also tracks the number of service patrol trips to assist motorists, together with the response times to reach customers in need. Similarly, OCTA tracks enforcement data on the lanes, which is also reported by the CHP and identifies the types of infringement (toll evasion, vehicle occupancy, speeding, and others). As an agency with a small staff, OCTA relies on contractors to perform many daily services pro- vided to customers on the 91 Express Lanes. These include information on the customer service center, including the number of calls it receives, answer times, and the number of callers that hang up before reaching an agent. Performance data also reviews violation processing, collections of fines, and the amount of returned mail. 5.3. Other Essential Data Gathering Activities Shortly after taking over the ownership and operation of the 91 Express Lanes, OCTA imple- mented a new toll policy. At the time this change was made, OCTA engaged in an aggressive media effort to educate the public about the policy and that increased rates were not tied to revenue generation, but rather to maintain constant speed flows of 60 to 65 mph. Complaints decreased over time, but there was a resurgence, particularly in the press, when the peak toll rate Congestion Pricing Case Studies 121

hit $10.00 in 2007. This level subsided during the economic downturn, but predictably the toll rate reduction did not receive the same level of media coverage. In 2010, peak-period traf- fic levels were rising again, resulting in an eastbound toll rate between 3:00 and 4:00 P.M. on Fridays of $10.25. OCTA’s media relations personnel work with newspapers and others to manage the message and, according to OCTA staff, referring to customer satisfaction surveys, public response is gen- erally favorable because it is understood what is being paid for. Each year OCTA conducts cus- tomer surveys. This work follows the same model established by CPTC, with 400 to 500 customers asked to respond to the same set of questions. In 2007, OCTA decided to administer the survey biennially because the 91 Express Lanes were regarded favorably and the survey effort was per- ceived as expensive. The most recent Customer Satisfaction Survey for the 91 Express Lanes was conducted in Sep- tember 2009. Respondents were selected based on the number of weekly trips they made on the lanes. Interviews were conducted in person and were designed to assess the following six issues: • Changes in utilization patterns among users • Customer satisfaction • Customer expectations and perceptions of OCTA’s management of the lanes • Customer attitudes regarding the benefits of the lanes, toll policies, and customer service • Customer awareness of existing communication programs and their effectiveness The survey found that satisfaction with the lanes has grown, while there has been a modest decrease in the frequency of use due to the current economic climate. Users of all income groups have a positive perception of the Express Lanes. 5.4. Why Performance Evaluation Takes Place and How Performance Monitoring Data Is Used Vehicle volumes are the operative performance metric used to manage the operation of the 91 Express Lanes. While the facility is managed to provide travel speeds of 60-65 mph at all times, speeds are not explicitly measured. Rather, they are inferred from the number of vehicles using the facility. If the number of vehicles across both lanes exceeds 3,200 per hour on any given day in any given direction of travel, then the toll rate for that specific period is increased. Maximum capacity is generally achieved on the lanes in the eastbound direction during the afternoon period between 3:00 and 6:00 to 7:00 P.M. when motorists working in Orange County return to their homes in Riverside County and beyond. The vehicle volume data comes from transaction data rather than loop detectors. The data is collected by Cofiroute and is essentially available in real time and can be summarized in a wide variety of timeframes. Directional traffic volumes of 3,128 vehicles or more are flagged for fur- ther review. Toll rates on the 91 Express Lanes are revisited at the end of each quarter. The vehi- cle volume data for the previous 12 weeks is examined to see if the 3,200 vehicles across both lanes, per hour, per direction benchmark was exceeded. If the average hourly volume for both lanes in any given day, hour, and direction of travel is greater than 3,200 vehicles, then the toll is increased by $0.75, and if the volume exceeds 3,300 vehicles per hour, then the toll is increased by $1.00. If an adjustment is made, the toll rate for that day, direction and hour is frozen for 6 months, and, even if the volume thresholds are exceeded in the following quarter, the toll rate is not changed. This policy is designed to give drivers time to adjust to the new toll rate and take it into account when making their travel decisions. The toll policy described above is articulated in the 91 Express Lanes Procedures Manual and has been in place since 2003. The only aspects that have required adjustment are the mechanics 122 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

of implementing toll decreases, which occurred as volumes on the lanes decreased during the financial crisis. Changes in toll rates are communicated to OCTA’s Board and the public 10 days in advance of implementation. The Board is not involved in the toll adjustment process, which has been an asset with regard to customer relations. OCTA uses the various pieces of data it collects on incident management, violations process- ing, and the customer service center to evaluate the performance of its contractors and take any corrective measures that may be warranted. Lastly, OCTA uses the information gained from its regular customer satisfaction surveys to hone its outreach efforts to its customer base. For example, while the September 2009 survey found that overall satisfaction scores were higher than in previous years and that more respondents indicated that they had no complaints, the results also suggested that the current economic environment is affecting the 91 Express Lanes: “The results indicate that customers are spending less on the 91 Express Lanes, using this toll road less often, and this purchase decision may have become a discretionary item rather than a routine purchase.”3 As a result of this dynamic, the Customer Satisfaction Survey suggests that the downturn in utilization, “. . . may impact how OCTA promotes the 91 Express Lanes, toll charges, and the messages being sent to customers.” In response to this, the firm preparing the report—Insights Worldwide Research—made the following suggestions to OCTA: • Build on the convenience factor of the 91 Express Lanes—this year respondents indicated that convenience is as important to them as free-flowing lanes. Promote the convenience of the lanes and the effect it has on the lives of 91 Express Lanes customers • Promote the fact that OCTA has reduced tolls on the 91 Express Lanes in these hard economic times • Capitalize on the trend toward e-mail and the desire of customers to have access to real-time traffic information on the 91 Express Lanes through text alerts. 5.5. What Additional Performance Metrics or Data Would Be Helpful to OCTA or Other Agencies Considering Congestion Pricing? The 91 Express Lanes was the first operating HOT-lane facility in the United States. As a trail blazer, it opened without the benefit of performance metrics or operational norms from other priced facilities. OCTA inherited the facility and its pricing and operational structures from CPTC, the private concession company that built the 91 Express Lanes. Upon assuming owner- ship, OCTA adapted the toll policy on the 91 Express Lanes to create an adjustment process that was “less political.” The policy was developed internally by OCTA staff with the assistance of con- sultants. At the time there were no other comparable priced facilities with which to make com- parisons. OCTA staff believe that it would have been helpful to understand the policies of other comparable facilities at the time, but this was not possible. OCTA staff believe that it is not worth revisiting toll policies to make minor adjustments, given that such revisiting can raise larger concerns. For example, on the 91 Express Lanes, the after- noon peak encompasses the period from 3:00 to 7:00 P.M., eastbound. However, HOV3 vehicles are only required to pay the half-priced toll from 4:00 to 6:00 P.M. and at other times use the lanes at no cost. Although OCTA recognizes the rationale for extending tolls for HOV3 vehicles to the entire 3:00 to 7:00 P.M. peak period, there has not been much pressure to change this policy, so OCTA has left it as is rather than risk raising unforeseen issues. OCTA staff also stressed the importance of its customer service patrols and quick incident management given that the Congestion Pricing Case Studies 123 3Insights Worldwide Research, 2009 91 Express Lanes Customer Satisfaction Survey, Orange County Transportation Authority, September 2009, p. 17.

124 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects Congestion Pricing Case Studies 125 Table 5-1. Orange County Transportation Authority 91 Express Lanes summary matrix.

91 Express Lanes have no shoulders. Other HOT lanes also tend to have limited shoulders and, when this is the case, quick incident clearance is essential to maintaining reliable conditions on the HOT lanes. One final lesson learned from the 91 Express Lanes is the importance of regular, ongoing cus- tomer satisfaction surveys. The genesis for OCTA’s emphasis on customer satisfaction stems from the fact that the 91 Express Lanes was the first priced highway facility to open in the United States and, with no prior knowledge of how the public would react to congestion pricing, sur- veys were essential. In addition, the 91 Express Lanes was developed by a private concession com- pany which knew firsthand how important customer satisfaction was from its 20-year experi- ence operating toll roads in Europe. As a result of this dynamic, CPTC established the precedent of conducting annual customer satisfaction surveys where 400 to 500 respondents were asked to respond to a set list of questions. Over time, the data compiled from this effort allowed CPTC and later OCTA to track changes in opinion and satisfaction among 91 Express Lane customers and make appropriate adjustments in response. OCTA has continued CPTC’s customer satisfaction survey practices and continues to use the results of its survey efforts to adjust its outreach messages and practices to its customer base. It is important—if not essential—for an agency that charges customers as much as $10.25 to make a 10-mile trip to know how its customers feel about the service it provides. It is also interesting to note that the 2009 survey marks the first biennial publication year. The impetus behind this change is that OCTA does not want its customers to perceive its survey efforts as being excessive or overly expensive. It can also be argued that the change is possible because of the high level of satisfaction with the 91 Express Lanes. Other agencies operating priced facilities should benefit from OCTA’s use of regular customer satisfaction surveys and its ability to standardize their results to facilitate meaningful comparisons and trend analyses. 126 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

Congestion Pricing Case Studies 127 6. San Diego Association of Governments I-15 Express Lanes The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) is the metropolitan planning orga- nization (MPO) for the San Diego County region, which comprises 18 city and county govern- ments. SANDAG serves as the regional decision-making body responsible for transportation planning and development. As part of these duties, SANDAG administers the local half-cent sales tax—TransNet—providing funding for transportation projects. The sales tax was first approved by voters in 1988 and was extended in 2004 for another 40 years. During the program’s 60-year span, it will generate over $17 billion, which will be distributed among highway, transit, and local road projects in approximately equal thirds. In 2009, SANDAG collected over $1.1 billion in rev- enue, approximately 25 percent of which was generated by the TransNet sales tax. There are two operating toll facilities in the San Diego region: the I-15 Express Lanes, the first dynamically priced HOT lanes, and the South Bay Expressway, a 9-mile privately financed toll road with fixed pricing. SANDAG has been a leading innovator in the use of congestion pricing and is dedicating a significant portion of the TransNet highway proceeds to developing a 75- to 80-mile network of managed lanes across four highway corridors identified in MOBILITY 2030, its $42 billion regional transportation plan for San Diego County. San Diego is the first metro- politan area in the United States to establish a long-range transportation plan featuring a regional network of managed lanes as one of its primary strategies to meet future mobility needs. SANDAG’s primary goal in using pricing is to move people and goods more efficiently, rather than raise additional revenue. SANDAG staff characterize HOT lanes as a small piece in the regional plan of congestion relief. Their goal in implementing HOT lanes is to manage the num- ber of vehicle in the lanes and thereby ease congestion in the parallel general-purpose lanes. Addi- tional goals germane to congestion pricing and performance monitoring identified in MOBIL- ITY 2030 include the following: • Minimizing drive-alone travel by making it safer, more convenient, and efficient to carpool, vanpool, ride transit, walk, and bike • Responding to traffic congestion through greater emphasis on the Congestion Management Program • Applying new technologies and management strategies to make travel more reliable, con- venient, and safe, and to reduce recurrent and non-recurrent congestion • Measuring the performance and efficiency of the regional transportation system on a regu- lar basis. As reflected in these goals, SANDAG has an appreciation for the importance of performance measurement. SANDAG’s culture of performance management is also evident in the Conges- tion Management Plans it has developed for all major highway corridors in the region. These plans establish the parameters for expected corridor performance using travel demand model and traffic simulation results and then use actual performance data collected by Caltrans’ Per- formance Monitoring System (PeMS) to verify whether the expected results are being achieved. Through this process, SANDAG is constantly assessing whether or not it is meeting its conges- tion management goals. 6.1. Overview of SANDAG’s Congestion Pricing Program Initially, the I-15 Express Lanes was an 8-mile, reversible, managed-lane facility built as an HOV lane. It was then converted to HOT operation in 1996 because of significant underutiliza- tion as an HOV lane. Capitalizing on the success of the initial conversion and its vision of

developing a regional network of managed lanes, SANDAG is expanding the I-15 Express Lanes to create a four-lane, 20-mile, barrier-separated HOT-lane facility with multiple access and egress points. The expanded express lanes will feature a movable barrier allowing for three travel lanes in the predominant direction of travel during peak periods, as well as direct access to three transit centers with large park-and-ride lots. The expansion is being imple- mented in three phases. The first, which opened to service in spring 2009, is an 8-mile segment immediately north of the original I-15 Express Lanes between SR 56/Ted Williams Parkway and Centre City Parkway in Escondido. The second phase, to extend the lanes north by 6 miles from Centre City Parkway to SR 78, is slated for completion in 2011. The final phase of the proj- ect will involve the retrofit of the original 8-mile segment between SR 56/Ted Williams Parkway and Kearny Mesa. The entire construction of the facility is expected to be completed by 2012 and will operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The I-15 Express Lanes are available at no cost to HOV2 motorists, as well as transit vehicles, motorcyclists, and approved low-emission vehicles, none of which are required to have ETC transponders to use the lanes. SOV motorists must pay to use the Express Lanes, which feature dynamic pricing with toll rates adjusted in 3-minute intervals. Tolls have been distance-based since March 2009, with per-mile fees levied based on entry point. Toll levels are communicated to motorists on variable message signs located upstream of entrances to the I-15 Express Lanes, providing SOV drivers with the information and time they need to decide whether to use the facility. While toll rates vary in real time, the minimum and maximum toll rates are capped at $0.50 and $8.00 per trip, respectively, with a provision for HOV-only operation if less than LOS C conditions on the lanes result even with the maximum allowable toll rate in place. 6.2. What Is Monitored? The full spectrum of SANDAG’s performance monitoring activities is provided in the accom- panying Facility Performance Monitoring Summary Matrix for the I-15 Express Lanes. The matrix is a comprehensive record of all current, known metrics used to monitor performance on the facility, organized by evaluation category. It also includes earlier monitoring and evaluation work performed by San Diego State University from late 1996 through 1999. Provided in the matrix for each metric used are frequency of collection, purpose, a simple indication of impor- tance, and particular characterizations of the metric that relate back to agency/facility goals or applications. An expanded version of the matrix providing sources of information and other notes is included in the Final Report for NCHRP 08-75 which is available on line. The matrix is intended to be a visual overview of SANDAG’s complete monitoring effort, easily comparable to other HOT-lane facilities with similar matrix summaries. A more qualitative discussion of how these metrics are applied in practice and which ones are the most significant is provided below. Not all metrics noted in the matrix are discussed here. SANDAG monitors several different performance parameters on the I-15 Express Lanes. Using data reported automatically by its system operator, TransCore, SANDAG tracks the num- ber of vehicles entering and exiting the I-15 Express Lanes, together with travel speeds, level of service, vehicle density, and the distribution of paid and non-paid trips. SANDAG also monitors revenue data reported by TransCore. All this data can be reported at different time intervals and directions of travel. The parameters described above are used to manage the I-15 Express Lanes and maintain operations at LOS C or better at all times. SANDAG staff stated that by doing so they also deliver consistent travel times on the I-15 Express Lanes. SANDAG stated the term “reliable” tends to be qualitative, because customers’ expectation when driving the road goes beyond travel time. 128 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

Congestion Pricing Case Studies 129 Focus groups have shown that I-15 FasTrak customers feel safer and experience a more relaxing, consistent trip using the facility versus the general-purpose lanes. Given that SANDAG is expanding what was an 8-mile, two-lane facility with single points of access and egress to a far more complex facility, it is also expanding its capabilities to monitor con- ditions, through a $9 million I-15 Integrated Corridor Management contract awarded in January 2010. The capabilities and requirements of the new performance monitoring systems were being identified as the research for NCHRP 08-75 was being compiled. One additional capability being implemented as part of this effort is the ability to classify vehicles by type. 6.3. Other Essential Data Gathering Activities SANDAG strives for transparency through an extensive outreach program, including focus groups, public meetings, forums, and pricing discussions. SANDAG’s most recent comprehen- sive customer survey on the I-15 Express Lanes dates from 2001 and involved both quantitative and attitudinal studies. The survey found that customers were “very happy” with the I-15 facility. Given that it has been operating since 1996, FasTrak customers in the San Diego region under- stand the complexities of the pricing algorithm, so there are limited questions and inquiries about it. The survey confirmed that equity was not a concern among I-15 customers and stakeholders and that the issue had been addressed through SANDAG’s public information activities. Subsequent survey work after the opening of the first segment of the expansion has not been done because of the extensive construction activities in the corridor. Nonetheless, positive user satisfaction with the HOT lanes continues to be achieved as evidenced by the lack of complaints received by SANDAG or critical press. At the state level, there is some concern that HOV facil- ities are not used as efficiently as they might be, and SANDAG has fielded questions about the I-15 Express Lanes as a leader after which to model other facilities. SANDAG has also received inquiries regarding the effect of HOT lanes on greenhouse gas reduction and supporting regional transit with regard to the potential expansion of HOT lanes in the Bay Area. As needs arise, SANDAG also assembles focus groups and small targeted surveys to learn more about public opinion on specific performance issues, such as opinions on enforcement technology and violation rates and different account plan options. 6.4. Why Performance Evaluation Takes Place and How Performance Monitoring Data Is Used As this research was being completed, the I-15 Express Lanes was at an important, yet pro- tracted crossroads. The facility has been operating since 1996 and has demonstrated its perfor- mance and utility to the region and local residents are used to it. This overall satisfaction with the I-15 Express Lanes was arguably a contributing factor to the 2004 vote to extend the TransNet sales tax to support the implementation of an aggressive package of transportation improve- ments which were identified and widely publicized before the voting took place, including over 70 miles of new HOT lanes. SANDAG is in the middle of a 5-year construction program to expand the I-15 Express Lanes. Its current focus is on defining the monitoring metrics it will need to have in place in order to manage the expanded facility when it is completed in 2012. In the meantime, the two-lane, reversible lanes continue to operate as they have for the past 14 years, and a new, much more complex segment has opened. At the same time, extensive construction activities in the I-15 cor- ridor continue, affecting the operation of the general-purpose and managed lanes alike. More performance data is available than ever before and is being used by SANDAG to operate a grow- ing facility under dynamic circumstances.

130 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects Congestion Pricing Case Studies 131 Table 6-1. San Diego Association of Governments I-15 Express Lanes summary matrix.

Current performance monitoring activities are used to ensure that policy and business rules are maximizing the facility’s efficiency, i.e., to manage traffic service on the HOT lanes at LOS C or better and document that project revenues are adequate to cover the cost of operating the facility. Using data obtained from ETC equipment and other detection devices installed at tolling points on the lanes, toll rates are set in real time and reflect current traffic conditions detected in 3-minute intervals. Traffic densities are calculated on a zonal basis to determine if congestion is increasing. If so, an algorithm determines if other zones are experiencing congestion and sets the price accordingly to manage the flow of traffic entering the facility using per-mile toll rate adjust- ments. As congestion decreases, the algorithm lowers to attract additional traffic. The maximum and minimum toll parameters that the algorithm uses to maintain LOS C on the express lanes are mandated by policies established by SANDAG’s Board. Meeting the traffic service standard on the original 8-mile facility was straightforward. However, now that SANDAG is operating a 16-mile facility, there are some notable limitations with the toll policies. Even so, SANDAG has found that changing the established rates is not easy. For example, SANDAG’s recent attempt to increase the minimum toll from $0.50 to $1.00 was met with resistance from the public as well as local radio personalities who argued that since the lanes are not a money- making venture it was inappropriate to increase tolls. This dynamic is likely to continue as addi- tional segments of the expanded facility are completed. However, SANDAG will have the benefit of the performance data from its expanded monitoring program to make the case for adjustments to the toll limits. As mentioned earlier, SANDAG also uses focus groups and targeted surveys to study public perception of specific issues and then uses the information gained to inform decisions. In addi- tion, SANDAG will likely complete extensive public opinion surveys following the completion of the expanded I-15 Express Lanes. The region’s positive opinion of the project could help to validate the continued expansion of HOT lanes and congestion pricing in San Diego County. 6.5. What Additional Performance Metrics or Data Would Be Helpful to SANDAG or Other Agencies Considering Congestion Pricing? Enforcement is difficult given that HOV and transit vehicles are not required to be equipped with transponders. Although SANDAG has an anecdotal understanding of the effect of I-15 Express Lanes, in retrospect, staff wishes they had a quantifiable, measurable approach to doc- ument the effect of pricing on such basic issues as traffic levels in the general-purpose lanes and formation of carpools. SANDAG staff observed that the data they have collected on the exist- ing I-15 Express Lanes only enables them to determine the effects of congestion pricing on SOV utilization of the managed lanes. SANDAG’s experience with the expansion of the I-15 from its straightforward original con- figuration to a complex 20-mile facility will be invaluable to other locations considering evolv- ing existing HOT-lane facilities into more complex managed-lane systems. SANDAG staff report that it has been challenging to manage the multiple new exit and entrance points, each of which have different toll implications. They do not know if customers truly understand the price per mile that they pay to use the lanes. Given the space constraints and safety implications, signage conveying toll rates is particularly challenging for a complex facility such as the expanded I-15 Express Lanes. One possible approach for addressing this issue may be to use a matrix approach to display toll rates by exit. The physical creation of many new entrances and exits to the man- aged lanes as a result of the ongoing expansion affects monitoring metrics and procedures. SANDAG is enhancing its monitoring capabilities in order to manage and operate the expanded I-15 Express Lanes to full potential when construction is completed. 132 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

Congestion Pricing Case Studies 133 7. Washington State Department of Transportation SR 167 HOT Lanes The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) operates a total of 764 cen- terline miles of Interstate highway out of a statewide network of 174,430 miles of roads. There are only two toll facilities in Washington State: the Tacoma Narrows Bridge and the SR 167 HOT lanes, which is the subject of this case study. Toll revenues represented approximately 4 percent of WSDOT total revenues of $3.2 billion in 2007, nearly all of which was generated by the Tacoma Narrows Bridge.4 The bridge’s tolls are being used to repay revenue bonds used to finance its construction, a mechanism used many times in the past by Washington State. WSDOT plans to introduce congestion pricing on the SR-520 Evergreen Point Floating Bridge with the support of a $154.5 million UPA grant from USDOT and is also exploring the use of congestion pricing on other major highway facilities in the Puget Sound region. In 2003 the Washington State Transportation Commission directed WSDOT to assess the possible conversion of HOV facilities in the state to HOT-lane operation. WSDOT identified the SR 167 as a suitable pilot project for a HOV-to-HOT conversion because of congested con- ditions in the general-purpose lanes and unused capacity in the HOV lane. Governor Christine Gregoire signed State Highway Bill 1179 which called for a 4-year conversion demonstration. The bill also identified performance data and supporting information to be included in an annual report to the State Legislature documenting the performance of the SR 167 HOT lanes. The bill states that The department shall monitor the state route 167 high-occupancy toll lane pilot project and shall annually report to the transportation commission and the legislature on operations and findings. At a minimum, the department shall provide facility use data and review the impacts on: a. Freeway efficiency and safety; b. Effectiveness for transit; c. Person and vehicle movements by mode; d. Ability to finance improvements and transportation services through tolls; and e. The impacts on all highway users. The department shall analyze aggregate use data and conduct, as needed, separate surveys to assess usage of the facility in relation to geographic, socioeconomic, and demographic information within the corridor in order to ascertain actual and perceived questions of equitable use of the facility. The 4-year demonstration will conclude on May 3, 2012, when the Washington State Legisla- ture will have to act to make the authorization permanent. 7.1. Overview of WSDOT’s Congestion Pricing Program The SR 167 HOT lanes opened to service on May 3, 2008. A single HOT lane runs in each direc- tion of SR 167 between Renton and Auburn in southern Kings County. The northbound lane, approximately 11 miles long, begins at 15th Street SW in Auburn and ends at I-405 in Renton, while the southbound lane, 9 miles long, begins at I-405 and ends at 15th Street NW. The two general-purpose lanes in each direction remain toll free and open to all vehicles. Carpools of two or more people, vanpools, transit vehicles, and motorcycles may use the HOT lanes at no cost, and they may enter the lanes without a transponder. Single-occupant passenger vehicles may pay to use the HOT lanes from 5 A.M. to 7 P.M. daily and must be equipped with a WSDOT “Good To Go!” electronic toll collection (ETC) tag to use the lanes. The SR 167 features dynamic tolling with 4AASHTO Center for Excellence in Project Finance

rates adjusted every 5 minutes based on real-time congestion levels to ensure that traffic in the HOT lane always flows smoothly and that buses and carpools enjoy the same trip as they did prior to the conversion to HOT operation. The HOT lane is separated from the general-purpose lanes by a solid double white line, which is illegal to cross. Access in and out of the HOT lane is restricted to access zones identified by a dashed line. There are six northbound and four south- bound access zones. Prior to the conversion, motorists using the SR 167 HOV had continuous access to the lanes and could enter or exit the lanes at any location. 7.2. What Is Monitored? The full spectrum of WSDOT’s performance monitoring activities is provided in the accom- panying Facility Performance Monitoring Summary Matrix for the SR 167 HOT Lanes. The matrix is a comprehensive record of all current, known metrics used to monitor performance on the facility, organized by evaluation category. Provided in the matrix for each metric used are frequency of collection, purpose, a simple indication of importance, and particular characteri- zations of the metric that relate back to agency/facility goals or applications. An expanded ver- sion of the matrix providing sources of information and other notes is included in the Final Report for NCHRP 08-75 which is available on line. The matrix is intended to be a visual overview of WSDOT’s complete monitoring effort, easily comparable to other HOT-lane facil- ities with similar matrix summaries. A more qualitative discussion of how these metrics are applied in practice and which ones are the most significant is provided below. Not all metrics noted in the matrix are discussed here. WSDOT collects a comprehensive set of monitoring parameters for the SR 167 HOT-lane facility. These include automated data on traffic volumes and speeds in both the managed and general-purpose lanes collected by loop detectors. WSDOT tracks volume and speed data in multiple timeframes and compares conditions in the general-purpose and managed lanes, as well as the peak and non-peak direction of traffic. In addition to the data it collects from loop detec- tors in the corridor, WSDOT receives comprehensive data on toll transactions reported in a stan- dard format by its toll operator. This includes information on the number of toll transactions, toll rates, and revenue, which are reported by time-of-day and direction of travel. This informa- tion can be aggregated or broken down into intervals as small as 5 minutes. The SR 167 HOT lane enabling authorization requires that average travel speeds during peak hours (7:00–8:00 A.M. and 4:00–5:00 P.M.) of at least 45 mph are maintained at least 90 percent of the time. Monitoring data from the first year of operation demonstrates that the facility exceeds this requirement, meeting the speed threshold 99.2 percent of the time. WSDOT also uses end-to-end travel times as a measure of reliability. For example, it measured that the north- bound peak-hour (7:00–8:00 A.M.) travel time in the HOT lane was 11 minutes on average. Its data indicates that the 95th percentile travel time was also 11 minutes. This means that motorists traveling northbound during the peak hour will experience an 11-minute travel time 95 percent of the time. The southbound lane demonstrated similar travel reliability, with an average travel time of 8 minutes, for which the 95th percentile travel time is also 8 minutes. WSDOT makes a compelling case for the reliability of the HOT lane by comparing travel met- rics to those on the general-purpose lanes, where the average weekday northbound peak-hour travel time was 19 minutes, with a 95th percentile travel time of 26 minutes, and a southbound peak-hour travel time of 12 minutes, with a 95th percentile travel time of 19 minutes. WSDOT also tracks travel-time savings between the managed and general-purpose lanes, which were found to be, on average, 8 minutes northbound in the A.M. peak and 4 minutes southbound in the P.M. peak. 134 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

In addition to traffic operations data, WSDOT also tracks the overall number of tolled trips made on the SR 167 HOT lanes. This information is generated by the automated toll collection system operated by WSDOT’s toll vendor, Electronic Transaction Consultants (ETCC). Paid trips are broken down by time, day, and direction of travel, as well as toll rate. WSDOT also tracks toll revenue, which it generally reports as a monthly total. WSDOT often presents revenue data together with operational costs for the SR 167 facility, which include monitoring, shared main- tenance, enforcement, transaction processing, emergency response, customer service, and traf- fic management center and tolling operations. As of early 2010, average monthly operational costs for the SR 167 were approximately $97,600 and exceeded average monthly revenues of $32,700 by a factor of three. However, WSDOT has anticipated that over the 4-year pilot, over- all expenses would be covered by toll revenues and is projecting that revenues will begin to exceed expenses in early 2011. Nonetheless, as discussed later in this report, the objective of the SR 167 HOT-lane project is congestion reduction rather than revenue generation. WSDOT also tracks information provided by other agencies. This includes transit perform- ance data of travel times and ridership levels provided by Sound Transit, which operates two bus routes on the corridor, as well as the South Sounder commuter rail service. Sound Transit con- firms that travel times for its bus service did not change after the HOT conversion and that tran- sit ridership has actually increased 8.4 percent since the opening of the HOT lanes. WSDOT also tracks enforcement and safety data maintained by the Washington State Patrol. This includes information on occupancy and toll violations, as well as information on crashes and instances where roadside assistance of any kind is provided, together with response times. It should be noted that the WSP has maintained an increased presence in the corridor since the conversion, a factor which needs to be considered when making before-and-after comparisons. WSDOT also monitors conditions on the SR 167 at its Traffic Management Center using remote control cameras and data collected from traffic speed and volume sensors. This information is dis- played on a dashboard showing multiple tracking metrics, including traffic volumes, lane speeds, and toll rates. If any anomalies are seen, Traffic Management Center staff coordinate with the WSDOT Maintenance. Lastly, WSDOT also uses the Good To Go! Customer Service Center data- base to compile additional information on motorists paying to use the lanes, including residential zip codes and trips by vehicle make. 7.3. Other Essential Data Gathering Activities WSDOT’s performance monitoring program for the SR 167 HOT lanes has also included dif- ferent survey efforts to track various parameters. Some of this work was completed prior to the opening of the HOT lanes and some was completed following the conversion. In January 2007, WSDOT completed a study of social, economic, and environmental justice for the SR 167 HOT-lane conversion to review effects the project might have on communities along the corridor and the fairness and equity of the project. The study captured the findings of WSDOT’s comprehensive outreach efforts associated with the conversion, including opinion surveys, open houses, and public outreach events. The study found that the conversion would provide drivers of all income levels with a new option to make faster and more reliable trips and that a cash payment program option for toll accounts would enhance access to the system for low-income drivers. In January 2009, WSDOT conducted two focus group sessions designed to complete earlier work the Department began in 2006. The earlier work, which involved six focus group sessions, gauged initial perceptions of the SR 167 HOT lanes and compared responses by low-income and typical drivers, as well as service employees or those who were self-employed. The January 2009 Congestion Pricing Case Studies 135

focus groups helped WSDOT learn how the operation of the new HOT lanes was affecting drivers in general, specifically low-income drivers. The focus groups explored the following issues: • Acceptance of the lanes as a congestion-management tool • Use of and access to the HOT lanes • Potential obstacles to HOT-lane use and the magnitude of those obstacles • Equity issues related to access, mode use, opportunity, income and geography, and difference in perceptions and responses between people in low-income groups and others • Difference in perceptions and responses to the lanes by people who have transponders and those who do not In May 2009, an online survey was sent to 22,000 Good To Go! account holders who had a valid e-mail address and had driven the SR 167 HOT lanes at least once. Some 3,000 responded. The intent of the survey was to gain information on the age and income profiles of drivers paying to use the lanes and determine whether it was consistent with the findings from WSDOT’s earlier 2005 Baseline Survey Report. The 2009 user survey addressed issues ranging from general satis- faction, to opinions on the extension of the demonstration, access treatments, and the shields that HOV motorists with Good To Go! Tags use in their vehicle to avoid being charged for their trips. 7.4. Why Performance Evaluation Takes Place and How Performance Monitoring Data Is Used WSDOT uses the monitoring data it collects on the SR 167 HOT lanes for various purposes. These are described in further detail below. Maintaining Traffic Service and Speed Levels on the HOT Lanes. As described earlier, WSDOT uses dynamic tolling on the SR 167, where toll levels are adjusted every 5 minutes in order to maintain traffic service and speed levels on the HOT lanes using real-time information on travel conditions in the corridor. The algorithm used to calculate toll rates on the SR 167 HOT lanes is proprietary to WSDOT’s system operator, ETCC, and relies on real-time information on speeds, traffic volumes, and the distribution of non-paying HOV and tolled SOV vehicles on the facility. The algorithm—which some industry sources believe is the most sophisticated in use today in the United States—also takes into account monthly incidents on the lanes.5 Each of these factors is governed by coefficients that can be adjusted to alter their influence on the toll rate. The algorithm adjusts toll rates based on volumes and speed data, together with the rates at which volumes and speeds were changing. The toll rate is adjusted in 5-minute intervals and is driven by changes between the number of new vehicles actually entering the facility and the num- ber of vehicles predicted by the algorithm. Toll rates can vary between a low of $0.50 and a high of $9.00. If conditions on the SR 167 exceed the $9.00 maximum toll, the facility reverts to HOV- only operation. During its first year of operation, the average toll rate on the SR 167 was $0.96, and following the adjustments to the dynamic-pricing algorithm, the highest toll paid to use the lanes was $2.25, which occurred in April 2009. Fulfilling Legislatively Mandated Reporting Requirements. State legislation enabling the 4-year HOT demonstration on the SR 167 requires that WSDOT provide an annual report to the Washington Transportation Commission and the State Legislature on the operations of the facility. WSDOT is required to provide data on the use of the HOT lanes and review effects on 136 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects 5This approach is different from the dynamic pricing system used by MnDOT on the I-35W and I-394 MnPASS lanes, which uses a look-up table that has established toll rates based on speeds and volumes.

efficiency and safety in the corridor, transit effectiveness, vehicle and person movements by mode, and equity issues. WSDOT is also required to provide financial data that demonstrates to what extent project proceeds are able to support other transportation services and improvements. The metrics used by WSDOT to document the performance of the SR 167 HOT-lane demonstra- tion have been selected to enable the Department’s ability to fulfill these reporting requirements. WSDOT prepared 6- and 8-month performance summary reports, in addition to its First Annual Performance Summary for the SR 167 HOT lanes. All these documents are available to the public on WSDOT’s SR 167 website, together with other technical reports, at the following location: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Tolling/SR167HotLanes/publications.htm Improving Operational Performance. The performance monitoring and user satisfaction data WSDOT collects enables it to assess the operational performance and safety of the HOT lanes and identify potential adjustments to them. As mentioned earlier, there are two challeng- ing situations that WSDOT has had to address with the SR 167 conversion: access to the facility and providing transponder shields to HOV motorists who have Good To Go! tags in their vehi- cles for use on the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. As a result of its survey work and focus group sessions, WSDOT has provided additional sig- nage with information on the location of upcoming access and egress points to and from the HOT lanes. The purpose of this change was to address confusion over these locations, exacer- bated by HOV users being accustomed to having continuous access in or out of the lanes at any point prior to the conversion. In addition, WSDOT’s outreach efforts have focused on the effectiveness and ease of use of the tag shields. WSDOT officials had to take into account the timing of the new Tacoma Nar- rows Bridge opening which occurred in July 2007, just 10 months before the activation of the SR 167 HOT conversion. Because the new bridge is tolled, nearly all regular bridge users have obtained Good to Go! transponders. For example, there is a 96-percent penetration rate of transponder users in the Gig Harbor zip code—a city just adjacent to the entrance to the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. However, when the SR 167 conversion took place, no HOV users who had obtained a transponder for use on the bridge had the transponder shield required to avoid being tolled on the HOT lane. This situation introduced a significant outreach challenge for the SR 167 conversion. Documenting Changes in Travel Behavior and Traffic Conditions. The performance mon- itoring data documents changes in travel behavior by different user groups and the resulting changes in operational and congestion conditions on the SR 167 corridor. The improvements in congestion levels on the SR 167 as a result of the conversion are dramatic. WSDOT’s before- and-after monitoring data during the A.M. and P.M. peak periods for 2007 and 2009 documents a 21.5-percent increase in average speeds on the general-purpose lanes and an 11-percent increase in average volumes. Speeds also increased 6 percent on the HOT lanes, which also saw a 4-percent increase in northbound volumes during the A.M. peak and stable volumes south- bound during the P.M. peak. However, because SR 167 provides two general-purpose lanes and one HOT lane in each direction, it would be anticipated that a volume lane movement from the general-purpose lanes to the HOT lanes would immediately result in increased speeds in the general-purpose lanes. Validating the Case for Congestion Pricing. Lastly, the collective data derived from the performance monitoring program enables WSDOT to validate the performance of the SR 167 HOT lanes to its stakeholders. This will be essential for the decision whether to extend the operation of the SR 167 lanes beyond the demonstration period’s May 2012 expiration. It will also be essential to WSDOT’s plans to introduce congestion pricing on the SR 520 Evergreen Point Floating Bridge, and possibly the I-90 Lake Washington crossing. Congestion Pricing Case Studies 137

138 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects Congestion Pricing Case Studies 139 Table 7-1. Washington State Department of Transportation SR 167 HOT Lanes summary matrix.

7.5. What Additional Performance Metrics or Data Would Be Helpful to WSDOT or Other Agencies Considering Congestion Pricing? WSDOT has a well-established culture of collecting comprehensive performance monitoring data, and the SR 167 HOT-lane facility is no exception. While WSDOT officials had access to comprehensive real-time traffic data derived from an extensive network of loop detectors and are accustomed to conducting before-and-after analysis for new improvements, they found it challenging to identify the right combination of performance metrics that would make a com- pelling case for congestion pricing’s use. WSDOT officials believed that they were on their own to identify the best set of metrics to justify the need for and to track the performance of conges- tion pricing in the state. They also found that they lacked standard data on priced facilities in other locations for comparison with their own state. As a result of these gaps, WSDOT officials helped to initiate the effort to undertake the research performed in NCHRP 08-75 and hope that the findings of the study will help fill this void. One particular challenge cited by WSDOT officials has been identifying appropriate measures of travel reliability on the SR 167 corridor. While WSDOT has done an effective job of commu- nicating improvements in travel speeds and throughput as a result of the conversion, it remains to be seen whether its reliability metric of the 95th percentile end-to-end travel time carries the same impact. Communicating the meaning of the 95th percentile travel time metric to the pub- lic is also challenging. Another major challenge that WSDOT has faced with the SR 167 demonstration is that the intent of the conversion was not to generate revenue but to manage the operation of its existing infrastructure to improve traffic service, travel speeds, and the overall efficiency of the SR 167 corridor. Even so, the enabling legislation for the SR 167 demonstration requires WSDOT to report on the “ability to finance improvements and transportation services through tolls [col- lected on the SR 167 HOT lanes].” The reality is that the SR 167 HOT lanes operate at a deficit. Operating costs exceed average monthly toll proceeds of approximately $32,700 by a factor of three. This may cause elected officials and the public to question the rationale behind the con- version. However, the reality is that for a modest investment of $60,000 per month, or $720,000 per year, WSDOT has bought a 21.5-percent increase in average peak-period speeds on the con- gested general-purpose lanes and an 11-percent increase in average volumes. This leaves WSDOT with the challenge of communicating what the cost of implementing physical enhance- ments to SR 167 would have to have been to achieve the same congestion reduction effect as the HOV-to-HOT conversion. 140 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

8. Ontario Ministry of Transportation Highway 407 Express Toll Route The Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO) is responsible for maintaining the trans- portation infrastructure of Canada’s largest province. The MTO establishes transportation pol- icy in Ontario and operates with a great deal of freedom from the central government. The MTO’s budget in fiscal year 2004 was approximately CAN $1.6 billion and it maintains a provin- cial highway network of approximately 16,525 centerline kilometers (10,268 miles), of which approximately 1,767 kilometers (1,097 miles) are 400-series highways built to standards similar to that of the United States Interstate Highway System. 8.1. Overview of MTO’s Congestion Pricing Program Ontario Highway 407—known as 407 Express Toll Route or “407 ETR”—forms a 108-kilometer (67-mile) bypass through the northern flank of greater Toronto, relieving traffic on Highway 401 and Queen Elizabeth Way. It is Ontario’s only toll highway and was the first highway to use elec- tronic toll collection exclusively for its entire length. Planning for the 407 dates back to the 1950s, but the actual implementation of the roadway was very slow. In the early 1990s, the MTO con- sidered implementing the original 69-kilometer segment as a public-private partnership, but pub- lic borrowing costs were favorable leading the MTO to complete the project under a design-build procurement. However, MTO did outsource the operation of the highway, which was completed just as transponder technology became widely available. The facility was operated toll-free for the first 6 months, after which electronic tolls were charged to all motorists using a combination of transponder and character recognition video technology. From the inception of tolling on the facility, there was a differential in price for peak and off-peak travel, as well as among different vehicle classes. While the 407 ETR was intended to act as a relief for other major east-west highways, the facility quickly generated its own additional traffic, has been heavily used since its inception, and operates at capacity during peak periods. A downturn in the economy in the late 1990s led the Government of Ontario to privatize the facility, allowing it to recoup a one-time fee of CAN $3 billion, which helped to balance the provincial budget. In 1997, the MTO awarded a 99-year concession to operate and expand the 407 ETR to Highway 407 International, Inc., a concession company composed of Cintra Infraestructuras S.A., Intoll, and SNC-Lavalin. Fol- lowing the privatization, the concession company extended the facility 40 kilometers to the west and 15 kilometers to the east, at a cost of approximately CAN $500 million. In addition, Highway 407 International, Inc., also invested an additional CAN $500 million on widening portions of the original 69-kilometer segment and enhancing the facility’s electronic toll col- lection systems. 141 Toll Facilities with Variable Pricing

142 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects The 407 ETR toll structure varies by distance traveled, time-of-day, mode of payment, and overall congestion level of the segments traveled. The 407 ETR charges peak toll rates from 6:00 to 10:00 A.M. and 3:00 to 7:00 P.M. on weekdays. As of 2010, a peak-period rate of CAN 21.35¢ per kilometer is charged for travel on “regular-zone” sections of the facility, while a slightly lower rate of CAN 21.10¢ per kilometer is charged on “light-zone peak” sections. An off-peak rate of CAN 18.35¢ is charged at all other times on all segments of the facility. Motorists without a transponder are charged a video toll fee of CAN $3.60 for each trip made on the 407 ETR, regard- less of the time of travel, and both transponder and non-transponder vehicles must pay other fixed fees of CAN 40¢ per transaction and CAN $2.50 per month. ETC holders must also pay an annual transponder lease fee of CAN $21.50. The distinction between peak and off-peak toll rates was initiated by MTO on opening High- way 407, and Highway 407 International, Inc., retained this precedent when it took over the operation of the facility. MTO has examined the possibility of HOV-to-HOT conversions on other highway facilities in Ontario, but concluded that there was no business case for such conversions because of limited off-peak demand and the costs of implementing and enforcing HOT lanes. 8.2. What Is Monitored? The full spectrum of the MTO’s performance monitoring activities is provided in the accom- panying Facility Performance Monitoring Summary Matrix. The matrix is a comprehensive record of all current, known metrics used to monitor performance on the Port Authority cross- ings, organized by evaluation category. Provided in the matrix for each metric used are frequency of collection, purpose, a simple indication of importance, and particular characterizations of the metric that relate back to agency/facility goals or applications. An expanded version of the matrix providing sources of information and other notes is included in the Final Report for NCHRP 08-75 which is available online. The matrix is intended to be a visual overview of the MTO’s complete monitoring effort, easily comparable to other fully variable-priced facilities with similar matrix summaries. A more qualitative discussion of how these metrics are applied in practice and which ones are the most significant is provided below. Not all metrics noted in the matrix are discussed here. The concessionaire’s monitoring requirements are identified in the Concession and Ground Lease Agreement (GLA) allowing it to operate the 407 ETR. The concessionaire is required to provide quarterly Traffic Characteristics Reports to MTO within 20 days of the close of each quarter. These include forecasts of anticipated traffic volumes by vehicle type for the next 3-month period, traffic volume forecasts for the next year, and actual traffic counts for the past 3-month period. In addition, the concessionaire is required to make real-time traf- fic data reports available to MTO for purposes of the Freeway Traffic Management System of the Province of Ontario. The traffic data is reviewed and verified by an independent auditor. MTO also performs some pre-programmed common-sense tests on the volume data to cross- check the results with other data sources it maintains. Similarly, the concessionaire is obligated to provide quarterly Incident Management Reports. These include the following information on all traffic incidents on the 407 ETR: • Type of incident (bodily injury, death, property damage) • Classification of incident (road-related, barrier hit, right-of-way, other) • Number of incidents by type and classification • Number of claims and revenue received by type and classification of incident • Cost to correct incidents by type and classification The concessionaire is also required to submit Environmental Incident Reports to MTO within 7 business days reporting any discharge, dumping, or spilling of hazardous substances on the

Congestion Pricing Case Studies 143 407 ETR, together with the location and time of the incident, description of the damage involved, listing of the agencies involved, and description of any remedial actions taken. The GLA also contains provisions for checking highway design parameters such as shoulder grade, super-elevation, friction, sightlines, and lane width, as well as other metrics related to safety, including the clear zone beyond the edge of the roadway and the flattening of slopes along the shoulder. Safety metrics indicate that the roadway is more than twice as safe as other Ontario highways. Standards of maintenance have evolved with the changing government trend toward outsourcing and privatization. Newer metrics pertain to illumination, signage, and construction and are audited 10 to 12 times per year. The Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) is responsible for enforcing the 407 ETR and contracted at cost. They maintain their own enforcement data, per their own internal established procedures. 8.3. Other Essential Data Gathering Activities Highway 407 International, Inc., was tasked with improving customer service on assuming the operation of the 407 ETR. It employs approximately 60 customer service representatives. MTO staff report that the level of customer complaints has decreased over time. 8.4. Why Performance Evaluation Takes Place and How Performance Monitoring Data Is Used The primary purpose for MTO’s performance monitoring on the 407 ETR is to maintain the Province’s Freeway Traffic Management System and verify that Highway 407 International, Inc.’s performance meets the standards established in the GLA. There are no established performance thresholds for peak and off-peak periods, nor are toll rates changed in response to congestion on the facility. Toll rates remain at the discretion of the concession company, although certain traf- fic thresholds must be met in order to justify a change in rates. MTO has the right to assess severe penalties if toll rates are changed without the corresponding threshold having been met. 8.5. What Additional Performance Metrics or Data Would Be Helpful to MTO or Other Agencies Considering Congestion Pricing? MTO had no additional comments to offer on performance monitoring issues.

144 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects Congestion Pricing Case Studies 145 Table 8-1. Ontario Ministry of Transportation Highway 407 Express Toll Route summary matrix.

9. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Congestion Pricing Program The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (Port Authority) was established in 1921 as the first interstate agency created under Article I, Section 10, of the U.S. Constitution. The Port Author- ity has the power to construct and operate seaports, airports, and interstate bridge and tunnel cross- ings in a 1,500–square-mile “Port District” in New York City and New Jersey. Together the Port Authority’s six toll crossings accommodated over 240 million vehicle trips in 2009, making it one of the largest toll operators in the United States. Its toll facilities include the George Washington Bridge, which is the most heavily traveled bridge crossing in the United States. The Port Authority is a self-supporting agency with the power to levy tolls and fees associ- ated with the use of the facilities it operates. It receives no tax revenues and has no taxing powers of its own. The Port Authority relies on the revenues generated by the facilities and services it operates to cover operational costs and to back the bonds it issues to finance cap- ital projects. In 2008, toll revenue from these facilities generated $991 million out of the Port Authority’s net income of $3.5 billion. The agency’s other revenue sources include rent, aviation and port fees, and transit fares. The process of adjusting toll rates requires political support and involves gaining approvals from the Port Authority’s Board; it is also subject to veto by the governors of New York and New Jersey. When contemplating such a change, the Port Authority establishes an overall rev- enue target it seeks to raise in order to meet the agency’s operating and capital investment plans. Agency staff has had the flexibility to assess alternative approaches to reach the revenue target, while addressing other policy and mobility objectives. It is within these carefully scripted param- eters that the Port Authority has been successful in implementing a toll structure with rates that vary by time of day and method of payment. 9.1. Overview of the Port Authority’s Congestion Pricing Program The Port Authority introduced congestion pricing on the four bridges and two toll tunnels connecting New Jersey with New York City in March of 2001. At that time, the Port Authority had just announced a capital investment plan totaling more than $14 billion in capital projects over the coming 10 years. The prime objective of the toll change was to raise the revenue required to support the regional investment plan. However, by introducing discounts for traveling in off- peak periods and for using electronic toll collection (ETC) payment rather than cash, the new structure also provided an important opportunity to achieve additional traffic management and congestion reduction objectives. These included • Encouraging temporal shifts in crossing trips to less-congested off-peak travel periods • Increasing the use of electronic toll collection • Encouraging the use of mass transit and carpooling • Creating incentives for commercial traffic to travel during the least congested overnight period • Eliminating high-frequency commuter discounts • Simplifying operations by making toll rates and policies easier to communicate and tolls them- selves easier to collect Prior to 2001, eastbound round-trip toll rates on all Port Authority crossings were $4.00 for passenger vehicles, $4.00 per axle for trucks, and $3.00 for motorcycles and buses. (Port Author- ity tolls are collected in a single direction at tolling points in the New York-bound direction at all six crossings.) These rates were reduced by 10 percent for ETC users and additional discounts were available to frequent travelers on any of the three bridges connecting Staten Island and New Jersey. 146 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

The new 2001 toll structure introduced the following changes: 1. It established a $6.00 toll rate for cash transactions at all times, while providing $1.00 dis- counts to ETC users during peak periods and $2.00 discounts for ETC customers at all other times. The peak toll rates were in effect from 6:00 to 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 to 7:00 P.M. on weekdays, as well as on weekends from 12:00 noon until 8:00 P.M. 2. For trucks, it provided a $1.00 per axle discount during the midday and evening hours, as well as a 42-percent reduction of $2.50 per axle during the weekday overnight period between midnight and 6:00 A.M. The Port Authority modified its toll regime again in March 2008, with the primary goal of rev- enue generation to support capital improvements. The new toll schedule also strengthened the agency’s commitment to congestion pricing by removing the $1.00 peak-period discount for ETC users and charging all automobiles an $8.00 toll during peak periods. Cash tolls remain at $8.00 for passenger cars at all times of the day, while ETC users receive a $2.00 discount in off-peak periods. Additional discount programs are also available for registered carpool and low-emission vehicles using ETC. Truck toll rates continue to provide modest discounts during midday and evening off-peak periods and deep reductions in overnight tolls. The elimination of the peak-period discount for ETC customers established a policy of charging the highest toll rates during the most congested travel periods, regardless of payment method. The change also created a greater peak vs. off-peak price differential (i.e., $2.00) making the price signal for tem- poral travel shifts more compelling. 9.2. What Is Monitored? The full spectrum of the Port Authority’s performance monitoring activities is provided in the accompanying Facility Performance Monitoring Summary Matrix. The matrix is a comprehen- sive record of all current, known metrics used to monitor performance on the Port Authority crossings, organized by evaluation category. It also includes earlier FHWA-sponsored evalua- tion work performed by a three-university team published in 2005 looking at the 2000–2004 period. Provided in the matrix for each metric used are frequency of collection, purpose, a sim- ple indication of importance, and particular characterizations of the metric that relate back to agency/facility goals or applications. An expanded version of the matrix providing sources of information and other notes is included in the Final Report for NCHRP 08-75 which is available on line. The matrix is intended to be a visual overview of the Port Authority’s com- plete monitoring effort, easily comparable to other fully variable-priced facilities with similar matrix summaries. A more qualitative discussion of how these metrics are applied in practice and which ones are the most significant is provided below. Not all metrics noted in the matrix are discussed here. Given the innovative nature of the new toll structure and the multiple goals behind it, the Port Authority has implemented a comprehensive program to monitor its performance and under- stand its effects on regional mobility patterns. As a mature toll operator, the Port Authority had already developed standard metrics to monitor the performance of its toll facilities. These are the basic pieces of information that any major toll operator needs to know in order to make informed decisions about its ongoing operations. The most fundamental of these is revenue generation, which is tracked closely and compared with the estimates generated by the agency’s sophisticated and well-calibrated traffic and revenue forecasting tools. Toll-revenue generation is directly related to traffic activity levels. As part of its standard accounting and business proce- dures, the Port Authority tracks the overall number of toll transactions for each of its crossings by vehicle class, time of day, and payment method. This detailed and historical time series data has enabled the Port Authority to study what effects the introduction of congestion pricing had on Congestion Pricing Case Studies 147

travel patterns for motorists using its crossings and heightened its focus on variations in the time of day of travel by vehicle type and toll facility. In addition to the transaction data generated by its ETC and manual toll collection systems, the Port Authority conducts regular westbound counts of traffic at all its bridges and tunnels. These counts include vehicle classifications by approach, origin-destination information based on registration data and the general travelshed the crossing serves, and vehicle occupancy. The introduction of congestion pricing has not changed the metrics included in the Port Authority’s manual traffic counts. In addition to the revenue, transaction, and traffic volume measures described above, the Port Authority also tracks queue lengths and wait times at each of its toll plazas three times per year. This is accomplished using a combination of aerial photographs, travel time runs in test vehi- cles, and information generated by the regional TRANSMIT (TRANSCOM’s System for Man- aging Incidents & Traffic), a system which uses ETC readers and E-ZPass transponders as anonymous vehicle probes to provide link travel times and road speeds to roadway operators in the New York-New Jersey region. The Port Authority also tracks safety on its toll facilities and toll plazas. They look at cur- rent and historical crash data and track the progress of operational and physical changes to reduce crashes at the crossings and their approaches. The Port Authority also tracks the over- all use of ETC versus cash tolls and the location of trucks and buses using the crossings. The interplay of the placement of ETC and cash booths, the number of large vehicles traversing the toll plazas, and the method of payment used by trucks and buses all have a bearing on safety at the toll plazas. The Port Authority also has a well-established ongoing program to monitor customer satis- faction at its crossings. The agency employs a biennial customer satisfaction survey designed to track multiple standard measures over time. While not targeted to toll policy per se, these sur- veys do address bridge and tunnel operations, signing and communication, safety and security, and overall facility appearance as critical measures that help evaluate the relationships between capital and operating improvements and customer satisfaction and align future investments with areas most important to customer satisfaction. In addition, the Port Authority conducts focus groups and stated preference surveys from time to time, usually in association with spe- cific projects or improvements. While the information gathered may not be specifically targeted to congestion pricing, the results often help shape the policy and mobility agenda supported through the toll pricing structure. While the Port Authority’s outreach efforts have confirmed that users support the use of varying toll pricing by time of day, motorists have reacted more positively to messages of toll discounts rather than peak prices. One shortcoming of the Port Authority’s current toll system is there is no driver feedback from E-ZPass electronic toll cus- tomers about the price paid at any point of time, limiting the ability to reinforce the price sig- nals at the time of the transaction. 9.3. Other Essential Data Gathering Activities In addition to these monitoring activities, the Port Authority conducted essential data gath- ering activities prior to implementing its congestion pricing program, which greatly facilitated the ability to advance the program. In the mid-1990s, the Port Authority conducted stated pref- erence survey research to understand how motorist behavior would change as a result of time- of-day pricing. The resulting price elasticities were then incorporated into traffic and revenue forecasting tools that the Port Authority used to assess the possible implementation of conges- tion pricing at the interstate crossings. This same research was also used to estimate ETC partic- 148 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

ipation rates.6 The stated preference surveys cannot be classified as monitoring activities. How- ever, they were essential to the Port Authority’s ability to model the effects of congestion pricing on toll revenues and traffic patterns. Absent this key capability, it would not have been possible for the Port Authority to demonstrate the revenue implications of time-of-day tolling or con- vince other transportation operators and stakeholders that traffic diversions would be manage- able. These tools were essential in garnering the political and public support needed to gain the approval of the Port Authority Board and the governors of two states to implement congestion pricing on its toll crossings. The Port Authority also launched an aggressive public outreach campaign prior to the initial implementation of congestion pricing in 2001. Port Authority officials met with elected officials, editorial boards, other toll agencies, departments of transportation, community groups, and known opponents of congestion pricing to elicit their opinions on different aspects of the pro- posed program. The outreach effort provided an opportunity to educate stakeholders on the rationale for using congestion pricing, the anticipated results of doing so, and the mechanics of how the system would operate. This survey work enabled the Port Authority to document public perceptions on congestion pricing prior to its implementation on the New York-New Jersey cross- ings. It also enabled the agency to develop a better understanding of the concerns of different stakeholder groups and reflect those concerns in the different decisions that needed to be made regarding how the new pricing system would function. 9.4. Why Performance Evaluation Takes Place and How Performance Monitoring Data Is Used The Port Authority has implemented a comprehensive effort to monitor the performance of its toll facilities following the implementation of congestion pricing. The process serves various important needs. • Documenting Toll Revenues and Financial Objectives Performance data allowed the agency to document revenue generation following the imple- mentation of the new congestion pricing toll regimes in both 2001 and 2008. This information was also essential for accounting and financial planning purposes and providing information on the agency’s financial performance to bondholders. • Improving Traffic and Revenue Forecasting Capabilities The performance monitoring data allows the Port Authority to identify variations in traffic and toll revenue collections from its forecasts and then use that information to improve the accuracy of its traffic and revenue forecasting tools. • Improving Operational Performance The performance monitoring data enables the Port Authority to assess the operational per- formance and safety of its toll plazas and crossings and identify potential adjustments to improve performance in these areas. • Documenting Changes in Travel Behavior The performance monitoring data documents changes in travel patterns and behavior by dif- ferent user groups and allows stakeholders to understand the effects of time-of-day pricing and other toll-related policies on regional traffic and congestion. This information has been essential to informing ongoing decisions on toll and congestion management policies, includ- ing the refinements to the Port Authority’s congestion pricing program implemented in 2008. Congestion Pricing Case Studies 149 6Mark Murriello and Danny Jiji, “The Value Pricing Toll Program at the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey: Rev- enue for Transportation Investment and Incentives for Traffic Management,” Transportation Research Board 2004 Annual Proceedings.

150 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects Congestion Pricing Case Studies 151 Table 9-1. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey congestion pricing program summary matrix.

• Validating the Case for Congestion Pricing Lastly, the collective data derived from the performance monitoring program enables the Port Authority to validate all aspects of the performance of the congestion pricing program—from revenue generation to congestion management and safety—for the different decisionmakers, communities, and stakeholders affected by it. Performance validation has been essential in garnering support for the ongoing operation of congestion pricing on the Port Authority’s toll facilities. 9.5. What Additional Performance Metrics or Data Would Be Helpful to Agencies Considering Congestion Pricing? Port Authority staff believe that guidance on quantifying and measuring traffic and conges- tion reduction benefits would be helpful, particularly for commercial traffic which represents a key constituency group. Given that the vast majority of performance measurement efforts in the United States have involved HOT lanes, which are generally not available for use by trucks and most commercial vehicles, there is very little data available on the response of commercial traf- fic to congestion pricing and effective metrics for measuring it. Guidance on the performance measures for pricing would be useful in moving beyond the consideration of congestion pricing on managed lanes to the use of congestion pricing on much more heavily traveled toll facilities where truck volumes have a fundamental effect on overall congestion and system performance. The Port Authority is also beginning to work on an approach to measure travel-time reliabil- ity, focusing on the variability of travel times. Part of the challenge of measuring travel-time reli- ability is that the amount of time motorists spend on Port Authority crossings represents only a small portion of the overall length of the trips made. This is a common challenge for many agen- cies operating priced facilities. The Port Authority has also found that as a result of the combination of electronic toll col- lection and variably priced tolls, motorists often are not aware of the exact price they pay to make trips on the Port Authority’s toll facilities. Toll levels are not communicated to ETC users at the time the actual transaction is made. In addition, motorists’ awareness of actual toll rates is further blurred by the complex network of toll facilities in the greater New York-New Jersey region and the many different discount programs available by the different toll agencies. This dynamic presents a communication challenge and also has a direct effect on the results of con- gestion pricing, given that the ability of motorists to modify decisions on their choice of route, mode, and time of travel are based on their knowledge of tolls they pay and the cost implica- tions of changing their travel behavior. 152 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

10. Central London Congestion Charging Greater London (or London) is a vast urban region comprising the City of London and 32 London boroughs. It has a population of about 7.5 million. Central London refers to the innermost part of London characterized by high density and land values, though with varying, unofficial boundaries that generally contain significant central government offices, primary financial and business services, and cultural institutions. The Greater London Authority (GLA) Act, passed by Parliament in 1999, sought to return cen- tral governorship to London’s 33 boroughs, not had since the abolition of the Greater London Council in 1986. The GLA Act established the Greater London Authority, comprising the London Assembly and a Mayor of London. The London Assembly is an elected body that scrutinizes the Mayor’s activities and has the power to amend the Mayor’s budget. The GLA Act also established Transport for London (TfL), an executive agency under the Mayor’s purview responsible for buses, the major road network, traffic control, the Docklands Light Rail, and, later, the London Under- ground. Finally, the GLA also authorized TfL to “. . . establish and operate schemes for imposing charges in respect of the keeping or use of motor vehicles on roads in its area” (Greater London Authority Act 1999, Part IV, Chapter XV). Following the GLA’s enactment, Ken Livingston became the first directly elected Mayor of London in May 2000. One of his campaign platforms was to improve congestion and the condi- tion of the transportation system in London. At the same time, in preparation for the Mayoral elections, the Government Office for London established a working group—the ROad Charg- ing Options for London (ROCOL) Working Group—to investigate how the newly granted road user charging powers might be applied in practice. They developed a plan for an “area licensing scheme” for central London controlled through the use of a camera-based number-recognition system to monitor vehicle license plates. A congestion charge could then be assessed on vehicles that crossed a set boundary. They believed the system could be in place by September 2003. Mayor Livingston acted quickly on his campaign promise and the work of ROCOL. While seeking to capitalize on the new revenue source, the charging system would provide for reinvest- ment in an improved transportation system. He adopted the charging strategy in his official Transport Strategy in late 2000 and set in motion the steps taken to ultimately put the system in place in February 2003. 10.1. Overview of Central London Congestion Charging Congestion charging was instituted in Central London in February 2003 for the 8-square-mile central business district inside the Inner Ring Road (a linked collection of major roads that sur- round the centermost part of London), containing the entire City of London, the financial dis- 153 Cordon and Area Pricing

trict, and the West End. The flat rate, per-day charge is levied to enter the Congestion Charge Zone weekdays from 7 AM to 6 PM.7 The rate was initially set at £5 and was increased to £8 in July 2005. Private vehicles entering the zone must pay the charge on the day of travel, or the next day for £10, online, through text message, on the phone, or at certain stores. Certain vehicles including taxis, London licensed private hire vehicles, motorcycles, and buses, are exempt from the charge. Other categories of vehicle users can register for discounts, including a 90-percent discount for residents inside the zone and a 100-percent discount for eligible persons with dis- abilities and alternative fuel vehicles. A system of cameras located along the cordon is equipped with Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) technology. License plate numbers are captured and compared with a data- base of payees. Some plates not recognized by the cameras require manual checking. Those that enter the zone without paying trigger a penalty notice to be sent to the vehicle’s registered owner, identified from a Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency database. Given the success of the original central zone, and again following though on a (re)election campaign promise to examine possible extensions of congestion charging, Mayor Livingstone acted on TfL studies indicating the greatest benefits of extending the zone would come from a western extension. Planning and infrastructure implementation took place throughout 2005 and 2006. The Western Extension charging commenced in February 2007, effectively doubling the charging zone to include Westminster and Kensington and Chelsea. An uncharged through-route bisects the two zones. Overall, the goals of the congestion charging program, as outlined in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy, have been to • Reduce congestion • Make radical improvements to bus services • Improve journey time reliability for car users • Make the distribution of goods and services more efficient In addition, a reduction in traffic was expected to lead to a reduction in emissions, and net revenue would be available for reinvestment in London’s transportation network. Revenue from the congestion charging program was approximately £268 million in fiscal year 2007–08, with operational costs of about £131 million, resulting in net revenues of £137 million. Net revenues since inception through fiscal year 2007–08 have roughly totaled £440 million. By law, these revenues have been and continue to be reinvested in measures outlined in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy. Since its implementation in 2003, this reinvestment has substantially com- prised bus network improvements at roughly 80 percent of net revenues. Other investments have included road and bridge reconstruction, road safety projects, infrastructure improvements for pedestrians and bicyclists, and transportation technology to improve the environment. Several proposed changes to the charging program have recently been proposed and are under evaluation. The primary proposal initiated by Mayor Boris Johnson, elected in 2008, is the review and removal of the Western Extension. Concerns exist over effects on the local economy and the zone’s residents, despite measurable reductions in traffic, increased use of alternative transporta- tion modes, and improvements to the environment. Other proposed changes include a rate increase to £9 and the implementation of an automated payment system, whereby drivers can register with a debit or credit card and not have to remember to pay the charge on the day of travel. The rate to use the old method of payment would increase to £10, and payment on the day after travel would increase to £12. 7The original hours of charging were from 7 AM to 6:30 PM. After the implementation of the Western Extension, the charging hours were changed to 7 AM to 6 PM, applied to both zones. 154 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

Congestion Pricing Case Studies 155 10.2. What Is Monitored? The full spectrum of performance monitoring activities for London’s congestion charging is provided in the accompanying Facility Performance Monitoring Summary Matrix. The matrix is a comprehensive record of all current, known metrics used to monitor performance on the facility, organized by evaluation category. Provided in the matrix for each metric used are fre- quency of collection, purpose, and particular characterizations of the metric that relate back to agency/facility goals or applications. An expanded version of the matrix providing sources of information and other notes is included in the Final Report for NCHRP 08-75 which is available on line. The matrix is intended to be a visual overview of London’s complete monitoring effort, easily comparable to other cordon or area priced facilities with similar matrix summaries. A comprehensive 5-year monitoring program was put into place by TfL to assess the effects of the charging scheme. The 5-year program resulted in the publication of six annual reports from 2003 to 2008, each progressively building on one another, with the fifth in 2007 introducing additional monitoring of the effects of the Western Extension, as well as a one-time benefit-cost analysis. The program was designed to assess key traffic, transport, business, economic, social, and environmen- tal impacts of the scheme by consolidating information from over 100 specially designed surveys and studies, while making use of existing surveys and data sources. Sources included • Data generated from traffic management and scheme operation functions • Moving car observer surveys • The use of monitoring and enforcement cameras • A wide range of traffic counts across various areas, sites, screenlines, and cordons • Various counts of buses and bus passengers, plus data from other public transport providers • Trip diaries, a wide range of travel surveys, as well as data from parking providers, the Public Carriage Office (taxi licensing), and the London Accident Analysis Unit (part of TfL) • Business surveys, economic case study work, plus data on a range of key environmental indicators The purpose of the 5-year monitoring program was to provide much of the information that enabled the Mayor and other interested parties to assess the effects and implications of conges- tion charging and whether or not adjustments to the scheme should be considered. Baseline con- ditions were measured before the charging scheme was put into place. The work was managed by a team of permanent TfL staff, with independent contractors undertaking most of the main data collection elements. The individual metrics and their specifics are provided in the Facility Performance Monitor- ing Summary Matrix, along with those that constitute the ongoing monitoring effort by TfL. Since the official conclusion of the 5-year program, TfL continues to monitor the congestion charging scheme and has published the results in its newly introduced Travel in London annual report on the city’s transportation network. Report 2, published in 2010, states that during 2008 and 2009, TfL has “continued core elements of traffic and congestion monitoring in relation to the scheme.” 10.3. Why Performance Evaluation Takes Place and How Performance Monitoring Data Is Used The main purpose of performance evaluation was to assess the effects of the scheme and make necessary changes to its operation. Several principles guided the performance monitoring program: • Monitoring should robustly detect and characterize the main expected effects of congestion charging. • Monitoring should enable unexpected or unanticipated effects to be determined.

• Monitoring should seek to understand as well as measure. • Monitoring should aim to meet the legitimate needs of all stakeholders for information. • Monitoring should provide Best Value. Changes to the congestion charge must be made to its Scheme Order, the legal framework behind the charge, that contains the definitions of what the charge is, where it applies, details on discounts and exemptions from the scheme, penalty charges, refunds, etc. Scheme Orders are made under the powers established in the GLA Act. Changes to the Scheme Order occur through a procedure known as a Variation Order, of which many have been proposed and instituted since the charge’s inception, altering and improving the scheme based on the results of monitoring, including those to operations, the payment structure, the charge itself (e.g., when increased from £5 to £8), the implementation of the Western Extension, and others. Each Variation Order is subject to public consultation before the Mayor considers TfL’s response to the representations received and decides whether to confirm the change (with or without modifications) and make it part of the Scheme Order. Monitoring then continues to evaluate the effects of these changes after they are put into place. TfL continued the core elements of traffic and congestion monitoring in relation to the scheme in 2008 and 2009. New traffic level and congestion data has allowed TfL to study the relationships between traffic volumes and road network performance in Central London in detail and derive fundamental relationships which provide a better understanding of the factors behind recent trends in Central London road network performance. 10.4. Other Data Gathering Activities Beyond the comprehensive monitoring program and ongoing efforts of TfL, several other evaluations of the original congestion charge have taken place. However, as these were not part of the official monitoring of the program by its operating agency, TfL, they are not included in the Facility Performance Monitoring Summary Matrix. Prior to the implementation of congestion charging, the London Assembly recommended eight criteria on which to judge London’s congestion charge. London’s congestion charge • Must deliver a real and sustained reduction in congestion • Must not have an adverse impact on the areas outside the charging zone • Must not disadvantage Londoners (particularly low-income groups) • Must deliver a real improvement to bus journeys in London • Should not have an adverse effect on London’s economy or services • Should not have an adverse effect on London’s environment • Should not penalize “innocent” drivers • Should deliver net revenue to fund transport initiatives A report published in February 2004 evaluated the extent to which each criterion had been met 10 months into the scheme’s implementation through results from a focus group, TfL data, and various surveys. Through mostly qualitative discussions, the report summarized the following: • Impacts on congestion within central London and outside the charging zone • Impacts on Londoners, especially low-income groups • Effects on public transportation, especially buses • Impacts on the economy and the environment • Remarks on customer service and enforcement • Net revenue to fund transportation initiatives The report concluded with recommendations for further monitoring and policy consider- ations for TfL. Although the report makes multiple mentions of future monitoring by the 156 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

Congestion Pricing Case Studies 157 London Assembly, no further reports specifically on the congestion charge monitoring have been published. Another monitoring effort, commissioned in 2002 by the Association of London Government (ALG)—renamed the London Councils in October 2006, was performed by Ove Arup & Part- ners. The London Councils is a local government association comprising representatives from the 32 London Boroughs and the City of London, as well as the police authority and fire brigade. This review by the London Councils was intended to act as an independent audit of the conges- tion charging scheme, as TfL’s ability to carry out the scheme’s primary performance monitor- ing was thought to potentially become influenced by its administration and collection of the charge. Five study elements were selected as a focus of the monitoring program, and data was gath- ered and analyzed before and after the scheme’s implementation in 2002 and 2003, respectively: • An independent assessment of the impact of the congestion charging scheme on traffic levels inside and immediately outside the zone • An independent assessment of any traffic diversion to parallel routes around the charging zone • An examination of the impacts of the scheme on parking usage and revenue in and around the congestion charging zone • An examination of the effect of the scheme on parking around stations in outer London • An examination of bus occupancy levels following the introduction of the scheme Evaluation measures and performance metrics incorporated in this effort included traffic lev- els measured in vehicle kilometers traveled inside and outside the zone, along the cordon, and diverted to parallel routes around the zone. Parking activity inside and outside the zone and on street near rail stations as measured by counts, parking charge revenue, the number and cost of resident permits, and violation and enforcement data were also tracked. Finally, bus occupancy and measures of overcrowding were manually counted using videotape.

158 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects Congestion Pricing Case Studies 159 Table 10-1. Central London congestion charging summary matrix.

11. Singapore Electronic Road Pricing Singapore’s Land Transport Authority (LTA) is a statutory board under the Ministry of Trans- port with responsibility over the country’s roads and public transportation systems, including heavy and light rail, buses, and taxis. LTA was formed in 1995, consolidating four prior public- sector entities: the Registry of Vehicles, the Mass Rapid Transit Corporation, the Roads & Trans- portation Division of the Public Works Department, and the Land Transport Division of the then Ministry of Communications. Singapore is a city state of approximately 4.7 million people living in an area of 269 square miles— roughly 3.5 times the size of Washington DC—making it the second most densely populated country in the world. Historically, roadway traffic congestion has been a significant issue for the country, especially on routes to and within the CBD located along the middle of its southern coast. LTA’s stated objectives are to • Deliver a land transport network that is integrated, efficient, cost-effective, and sustainable to meet the nation’s needs • Plan, develop, and manage Singapore’s land transport system to support a quality environ- ment while making optimal use of transport measures and safeguarding the well-being of the traveling public • Develop and implement policies to encourage commuters to choose the most appropriate transportation mode This last objective characterizes LTA’s management of the road network, as it seeks to opti- mize use of its relatively finite road capacity while establishing policies that strongly encourage consideration of public transportation. LTA has set a target of making 70 percent of all morning peak-hour trips on public transport by 2020. Examples of policies that aggressively manage auto- mobile use and allow for at least equal consideration of alternative modes include a vehicle quota system, significant ownership and registration fees, and a hybrid congestion pricing scheme— the Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) system. 11.1. Overview of Singapore’s Congestion Pricing Singapore’s Electronic Road Pricing system is a combination of area and cordon pricing that controls access into Singapore’s CBD and along major access routes. The genesis of the ERP sys- tem dates to 1975 with the introduction of a manual area (radial cordon) pricing scheme for the CBD called the Area Licensing System (ALS). To enter the CBD’s established Restricted Zone (RZ), an area license (coupon) had to be purchased and displayed, which was manually verified at check points. The original RZ for the ALS was determined through manual observation. In the mid-1990s, cordons along three major expressways leading into the RZ—the Road Pricing System (RPS)—were progressively introduced to complement the ALS. In September 1998, the manual ALS and RPS were replaced by the current Electronic Road Pricing system, retaining each system’s cordons. The ERP system uses overhead gantries and antennae to communicate with devices installed in users’ vehicles (In-vehicle Units) that use reusable credit card-like stored-value smartcards to deduct an appropriate ERP charge. The ERP charge is generally levied for entry into the RZ weekdays between 7:30 AM and 8:00 PM. Also, inside a major shopping district in the RZ, the charge is levied on weekdays and Saturdays from noon to 8:00 PM. Along major expressways and arterials approaching the RZ, the charge is gen- erally levied weekdays from 7:30 to 9:30 AM. Overall, the charge varies by vehicle type (passen- ger car/taxi, motorcycle, and heavy and very heavy goods vehicles), by gantry, and per 1⁄2-hour on a fixed schedule with adjustments possible every 3 months to maintain smooth traffic flow. 160 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

The “85th percentile” criterion is applied in making this adjustment, whereby 85 percent of road- way users perceive improved conditions (LOS/speed) following the adjustment. The authority explained publicly prior to the introduction of the ERP system that they would attempt to maintain revenue neutrality with the ERP charge. As evidence, annual revenues have remained relatively flat since the introduction of the ERP system in 1998. Revenue from the ERP system, itself, is not directly reinvested into the transportation system. It is remitted to the Ministry of Finance and placed in the country’s general coffer for subsequent disbursement among all government services according to need. It is noted that the public is accustomed to the pricing scheme and does not require direct evidence of reinvestment into transportation for continued acceptance. 11.2. What Is Monitored? The ERP program is administered by the Land Transport Authority. Performance monitor- ing documentation from the authority is not publicly available, but the performance monitor- ing criteria are communicated publicly. The full spectrum of LTA’s performance evaluation is summarized in the accompanying Facility Performance Monitoring Summary Matrix. The matrix is a comprehensive record of all current, known metrics used to monitor performance on the facility, organized by evaluation category. Provided in the matrix for each metric used are frequency of collection, purpose, a simple indication of importance, and particular characteriza- tions of the metric that relate back to agency/facility goals or applications. An expanded version of the matrix providing sources of information and other notes is included in the Final Report for NCHRP 08-75 which is available on line. The matrix is intended to be a visual overview of LTA’s complete monitoring effort, easily comparable to other cordon- or area-priced facilities with sim- ilar matrix summaries. A more qualitative discussion of how these metrics are applied in practice and which ones are the most significant is provided below. Not all metrics noted in the matrix are discussed here. The underlying performance characteristics of the ERP system that are measured and tracked carefully by LTA include an array of standard traffic theory and traffic engineering metrics/techniques specifically focused on the speed of traffic. For example, speed-flow analy- ses are performed for all travel routes (expressways, major arterials, and minor arterials) to examine congestion levels relative to target LOS. Performance measurement data is taken from five sources. An integrated data processing platform handles each of the inputs and allows for data collation and storage for analysis. 1. A fleet of roughly 7,000 taxis, equipped with GPS, and acting as floating cars—proxies—for the speeds of all roadway users 2. ERP gantries capable of measuring point speeds 3. Expressway traffic cameras (currently under expansion to arterials) located on average 500 meters apart that collectively can compute mean-space speeds 4. Loop detectors 5. Onsite origin-destination surveys Aside from traffic theory applications and critical speed-flow and mean-space speed calcula- tions, other higher level metrics are monitored and tracked for use by senior management within LTA and the Ministry of Transport. These include time to travel from benchmark locations throughout Singapore (this applies to public transport as well as roadways), system availability, and the quantification of delay into economic loss. Environmental effects and safety are not directly monitored, as these aspects are thought to correlate positively with the successful application of the ERP program and congestion reduction. Finally, when communicating system performance and Congestion Pricing Case Studies 161

162 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects Congestion Pricing Case Studies 163 Table 11-1. Singapore Electronic Road Pricing summary matrix.

policy decisions with the public, traffic speed is used as a simple, easy-to-comprehend metric with which to characterize system operation, rather than presenting the full detail of traffic theory computations. 11.3. Other Essential Data Gathering Activities Customer input is solicited from periodic survey work and taken into account during ERP’s pricing policy review. LTA staff report that public acceptance is moderate—the benefits of hav- ing the system in place generally outweigh the negative reaction to paying the charge. It was noted that the most challenging public policy issue with pricing is public acceptability, i.e., to pay for something that was previously “free,” which continues to occur with the periodic expansion of cor- dons. Hence, numerous public communications programs are necessary to keep the motoring public informed. 11.4. Why Performance Evaluation Takes Place and How Performance Monitoring Data Is Used The primary function of performance evaluation is to maintain uncongested conditions within the RZ and the routes feeding into it by continually monitoring collected traffic data. For- merly, an optimal range of speeds was assigned to specific road types, and, if monitored perfor- mance below this set speed envelope was observed, a pricing policy correction could be initiated. However, it was found that not all roadway users perceived these speed ranges as correlative with satisfactory service for the price paid. Consequently in 2008, the criterion was changed to the “85th percentile” measurement as described previously. Currently, ERP’s pricing policy is reviewed on a 3-month cycle taking into account the wealth of collected data and computed traffic engineering metrics based on speeds. This review dura- tion is considered optimal to allow time for traffic patterns to readjust—passing through a tran- sient period and accounting for altered driver behavior. A formal process is followed to make an adjustment to the ERP charge schedule. Approvals are required from the Minister of Transport, and the new rates are formalized through appropriate legal documents or law. In addition to adjustments to the ERP rate schedule, outward expansion of the area cordons defining the RZ and the cordons along major expressways and arterials may be deemed neces- sary, requiring additional gantries. Travel demand modeling identifies future potential cordon locations, which are monitored closely for expansion consideration. The process for cordon expansion is more involved than ERP rate adjustments and can necessitate a parliamentary-level decision. Early communication to the public is used to make it aware of potential future gantry installations, but implementation occurs only when deemed absolutely necessary. Overall, the number of gantries has roughly doubled since the introduction of ERP in 1998 as vehicle popu- lation increased over the last 12 years. 164 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

Congestion Pricing Case Studies 165 12. Stockholm Congestion Tax The City of Stockholm (or Stockholm Municipality) is one of 26 municipalities in the County of Stockholm. The county is home to about 2 million of Sweden’s 9.3 million inhabitants and is also referred to as Greater Stockholm—the city’s overall metropolitan region. The municipality itself has a population of about 830,000. Including the urbanized, surrounding 10 municipalities, the population is about 1.25 million. To reduce congestion in Stockholm and improve the urban and natural environment, a con- gestion tax (Trängselskatt) is levied for vehicular travel into the city center. Administration and collection of the tax is the responsibility of the Traffic Registry Department within the Swedish Transport Agency, which oversees the country’s rail, air, sea, and road transportation systems. Until January 2009, it was operated by the Swedish Road Administration when that agency was dissolved into the Swedish Transport Agency. The City of Stockholm Traffic Administration and County Council-owned Greater Stockholm Public Transport (SL) contribute to the congestion tax’s ongoing monitoring and evaluation. 12.1. Overview of Stockholm’s Congestion Tax Stockholm’s permanent congestion tax went into effect on August 1, 2007. A variable charge is levied to enter the 13.8-square-mile city center on weekdays between 6:30 AM and 6:30 PM. A charge of 10, 15, or 20 kroner varies on a fixed schedule with peak and shoulder periods cost- ing more. There is also a maximum daily charge of 60 kroner. Some vehicle exemptions apply and no charge is levied on public holidays or during the month of July. Control points along the city center cordon use a system of cameras, laser detectors, and antennae to automatically record vehicle license plates as they pass below gantries. A monthly bill is generated and sent to the registered owner. The charges are tax deductible for private indi- viduals traveling between home and work and for all business users. Prior to the permanent implementation of the congestion tax, a trial period was held from January 3 to July 31, 2006 (The Stockholm Trial). The decision to implement the trial dates to action by the Stockholm City Council in June 2003. This was followed by passage of a law by the Swedish Parliament, the Riksdag, enabling a congestion tax/environmental charge to be levied in Stockholm until July 31, 2006 (Swedish Code of Statutes SFS 2004:629). The decision to begin the trial period on January 3, 2006, was set in April of the previous year. Along with implementing the congestion tax on a trial basis, the Stockholm Trial expanded public transit service and park-and-ride sites within the city and county. Specific goals of the trial included • A 10- to 15-percent reduction in the number of vehicles that entered the central city during morning and afternoon rush hours • Improved access on the busiest roads in Stockholm • Reduced emissions of CO2, NOx, and particulates in central city air • Better street-level environment as perceived by people in the central city During the Stockholm Trial, the Swedish government commissioned a Congestion Charge Secretariat to plan, coordinate, communicate, and evaluate the trial. The Congestion Charge Sec- retariat prepared and executed a comprehensive evaluation program to assess the extent of goal achievement and the effects of the Stockholm Trial. Contributions to creating the evaluation program came from the former Swedish Road Administration, the County Office of Regional Planning and Urban Transportation, SL, and various research institutes, private consultants, and city administrations.

The end of the trial period was followed in September 2006 by referenda held in 15 Stockholm County municipalities (those in the urban region as well as four others) in which they voted on whether or not to implement the charge permanently. Only the City of Stockholm voted in favor of the permanent charge, but the ruling national government prior to the September election date (Social Democrats) had stated that they would act only on the results of the City of Stock- holm’s referendum. The opposition party (Alliance for Sweden) had stated that they would con- sider the referenda of other municipalities as well if they came to power. The Alliance for Swe- den won a majority in that election, but prior to the formation of a government, party leaders announced on October 1 that the congestion tax would be implemented permanently. The tax was approved by Parliament in June 2007 and reintroduced on August 1. In 2008, revenue from the congestion tax was approximately 850 million kroner, including from the tax, administrative and late payment fees, and enforcement revenues. Operational costs amounted to about 393 million kroner, although this included several one-time charges. Esti- mated operational costs in 2010 and beyond are approximately 250 million kroner. Net revenues from the permanent charge (estimated to be 600 million kroner per year starting in 2010) have been reinvested in the Stockholm region’s road network, unlike during the trial period when net revenues were invested in improved public transportation. 12.2. What Is Monitored? The full spectrum of performance monitoring activities for Stockholm’s congestion tax is provided in the accompanying Facility Performance Monitoring Summary Matrix. The matrix is a comprehensive record of all current, known metrics used to monitor performance on the facility, organized by evaluation category. Provided in the matrix for each metric used are fre- quency of collection, purpose, a simple indication of importance, and particular characteriza- tions of the metric that relate back to agency/facility goals or applications. An expanded version of the matrix providing sources of information and other notes is included in the Final Report for NCHRP 08-75 which is available on line. The matrix is intended to be a visual overview of Stockholm’s complete monitoring effort, easily comparable to other cordon or area priced facil- ities with similar matrix summaries. During its 7-month duration, a comprehensive monitoring program for the Stockholm Trial was carried out by the Congestion Charge Secretariat. A significant number of performance metrics were selected for a before-and-after evaluation with respect to the trial’s stated goals— congestion reduction, improved natural environment, and improved perceived city environment. The accompanying matrix indicates the full extent of these metrics. Those metrics that were mon- itored as part of the Stockholm Trial are indicated with an “X” in the box labeled “Before & After” under the “When” column, and “Stockholm Trials 12/06” is indicated in the column, referring to the final report on the trial’s monitoring published 5 months after its conclusion. Significant measures of traffic to determine the trial’s effect on congestion levels included vehicle volumes entering the central city through the priced cordon, travel times, and delays along major routes into the city center. Estimations of reductions in CO2, NOx, and particulates were important indicators of improved air quality and the natural environment. Finally, com- prehensive surveys helped inform the qualitative (and generally difficult to measure) perceived improvement on the urban environment. Questions asked in these surveys generally focused on quality-of-life impacts such as mode-specific transportation access, traffic conditions, air qual- ity, and safety and security. Additional metrics tracked throughout the trial period included total vehicle kilometers traveled (inside the cordon and along approach roads), mode share, bicycle and pedestrian counts, transit ridership and service, road safety, and various indicators of pub- lic perception. 166 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

Congestion Pricing Case Studies 167 Since the implementation of the permanent congestion tax in August 2007, the City of Stock- holm Traffic Administration has published periodic reports on performance monitoring, repre- senting the most current performance evaluation of the congestion charge. However, the report- ing itself and the metrics monitored have been uneven and not as focused as the formal program in place for the 7-month trial period in 2006. Initial reports published shortly after the imple- mentation of the permanent charge largely tracked the same metrics as those during the trial and concluded that the permanent charge’s effects on congestion had been very similar. Current monitoring of the permanent congestion tax includes metrics indicated in the matrix with an “X” in the box labeled “Ongoing” under the “When” column. The most current report from the Traffic Administration (September 2009) summarizes the collection of ongoing met- rics and an overview of the congestion tax from 2005–2008. Traffic volumes, travel times, and delay continue to be tracked, indicating a reduction in traffic slightly less than during the trial, but still to be considered significant. The report notes a significant increase in the number of exempt vehicles entering the charge zone (28 percent of the total), especially because of alterna- tive fuel vehicles, although this exemption expires in 2012. Air quality and emissions, including CO2, continue to be tracked and indicate improvements in the city’s natural environment. Pub- lic transportation ridership and service performance is monitored and continues to show improvement with the permanent charge in place. Public perceptions and business impacts are also tracked and are generally favorable. Finally, revenue, as described previously, is reported. 12.3. Why Performance Evaluation Takes Place and How Performance Monitoring Data Is Used The comprehensive monitoring program during the 7-month trial period was critical to val- idating the success of the congestion charge and communicating its effects and benefits to stake- holders and the public. Instituting the congestion charge on a temporary basis and putting in place a rigorous program that made it possible to understand what worked well and what could be improved was a tactical decision that met with great success. Overall, the final report on the trial period concluded the congestion tax’s goals were met, with an even greater-than-expected reduction in congestion, improved levels of CO2 and particulates, and an improved city environ- ment, at least with respect to those changes that could be measured and quantified. Measurable and documented improvements that were apparent to the public contributed to the success of the referendum in the City of Stockholm, which in turn convinced the Swedish Parliament to institute the congestion tax on a permanent basis. Currently, the City of Stockholm Traffic Administration reporting on traffic and the conges- tion tax notes that “it is becoming increasingly difficult to isolate the effects of the congestion tax both from other permanent and temporary changes in the traffic system, and from external fac- tors.” This view helps explain the comparatively uneven monitoring and reporting since the inception of the permanent charge. The report goes on to state that long-term monitoring of the city’s entire transportation system is essential to optimizing its use and minimizing impacts on the climate in the face of rising population and demand for travel. However, the report also states that “in this context the continued monitoring of the congestion tax as a distinct element of the traffic system is increasingly less relevant” and that future monitoring should occur coopera- tively at the regional level, accurately taking into account secondary effects and the intertwined nature of a multimodal transportation system.

168 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects Congestion Pricing Case Studies 169 Table 12-1. Stockholm congestion tax summary matrix.

Next: Abbreviations used without definitions in TRB publications »
Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 694: Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects is designed to help transportation agencies select or develop measures to evaluate congestion-pricing projects; collect the necessary data; track performance; and communicate the results to decision makers, users, and the general public.

A companion document to NCHRP Report 694 was published as NCHRP Web-Only Document 174: Performance Measurement and Evaluation of Tolling and Congestion Pricing Projects, which provides an overview of the purpose, scope, and methodology, and a complete compilation of the work products that were used to develop NCHRP Report 694.

The PDF of this report has some information not supplied in the original print version. Be advised that inclusion of this information has affected the layout of Appendix A and may affect printing.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!