National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Summary
Page 3
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 1 - Introduction." 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 3
Page 4
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 1 - Introduction." 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 4
Page 5
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 1 - Introduction." 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 5
Page 6
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 1 - Introduction." 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 6
Page 7
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 1 - Introduction." 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 7
Page 8
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 1 - Introduction." 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 8
Page 9
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 1 - Introduction." 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 9
Page 10
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 1 - Introduction." 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 10
Page 11
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 1 - Introduction." 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 11

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.

1.1 Why These Guidelines? Major metropolitan regions across the United States today face various mobility challenges such as deteriorating travel reliability due to increased peak-period congestion, lengthening dura- tions of peak travel periods, and underutilization of existing capacity during off-peak periods. There is growing national momentum within government transportation agencies to use con- gestion pricing—a strategy that combines both physical and operational improvements—as a tool to address these challenges and also generate new revenue sources which can be used to fund transportation improve- ments. In late 2010, there were 11 operating high-occupancy toll (HOT) lane facilities in the United States and a much larger number in different stages of development, including extensive regional networks in some cases. In addition, a small number of toll authorities have introduced variable pricing on existing toll facilities, while some new facilities have begun operations featuring time-of-day pricing. Finally, two major metropolitan areas are considering or have considered the possible implementation of cordon or area pricing schemes. These schemes require motorists to pay a fee to enter a desig- nated urban zone, typically a city center, during congested peak periods. Similar systems are currently operating in Singapore, London, and Stockholm. The use of congestion pricing and congestion management techniques has received further attention with the passage of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) in 2005. This legisla- tion provides state departments of transportation (DOTs) the flexibility to convert existing high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes to HOT operation and also encourages the use of other congestion pricing strategies. Subsequently, the United States Department of Transportation (US DOT) established two one-time initiatives—the Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA) and Congestion Reduction Demonstration (CRD) programs—to demonstrate how a variety of pricing concepts can be used together with other strategies to reduce conges- tion and tap into new sources of revenue. These programs are funding projects combining different forms of congestion 3 C H A P T E R 1 Introduction Key Definitions • Congestion Pricing—the application of variable fees or tolls on roadways to manage available capacity and user demand • Performance Measure or Metric—used inter- changeably, a quantitative or qualitative characterization of a facility or scheme’s opera- tional properties; performance measures inform a performance evaluation • Performance Monitoring—the ongoing, struc- tured process of compiling performance measure data; performance monitoring results can be reported and/or retained for historical purposes; performance monitoring is also required to undertake a performance evaluation • Performance Evaluation—an assessment of a facility or scheme’s operation relative to expecta- tion or a set of prescribed parameters; a per- formance evaluation can be used to make set adjustments to a facility or scheme’s operation (e.g. based on an established algorithm) or used to make operational adjustments based on judg- ment and the weighing of present factors (e.g. costs, benefits, or risks) Note: Because performance monitoring data is a direct input to a performance evaluation, the two terms are occasionally interchanged

pricing with transit enhancements, parking strategies, telecommuting, intelligent transportation system (ITS) applications, and operational improvements as tools to reduce congestion. Together they represent a Federal investment of over $700 million. With widespread interest in using congestion pricing to manage congestion and generate new revenue streams, there is a need to document the performance of existing priced facilities. This is particularly important because congestion pricing strategies often face considerable political and public pressures and are not widely known or appreciated by the public at large. Moreover, with a relatively small number of congestion pricing facilities operating in the United States, there is a lack of comprehensive information for developing overall performance evaluation pro- 4 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects An Early Glut of HOV Performance Data Followed by a Dearth When HOV lanes were first being introduced in selected cities, often under the auspices of demonstration proj- ect status, considerable scrutiny was given to the performance of each project. There was keen interest in whether a dedicated lane would successfully induce mode and spatial shifts and meet stated goals. Accord- ingly, data was often collected on users, traffic demand on the corridor and parallel routes, travel times, crash and violation rates, before and after trip characteristics, and a wide range of other factors. Some locales issued initial status reports on a weekly or monthly basis. This investment left practitioners with a rich set of resources from which to later understand what worked and what didn’t. While most demonstrations tracked these mea- sures rigorously, follow-on projects also tracked performance-related safety, air quality, modal shifts, public attitudes, and, in some cases, even land use values in the respective corridor. As these projects proved themselves and became accepted by sponsoring agencies and users, there was less need evidenced in most places to invest as rigorously in performance monitoring. With some regional excep- tions, as findings from performance monitoring informed best practices in designing and operating preferen- tial lanes, standards of practice and guidance emerged. These became accepted at corridor, regional/state, and national levels on such topics as buffer separation width, hours of operation, enforcement area treatment, access and occupancy restrictions, to name a few. Many areas have held to these standards of practice since they are understood by local motorists and participating agencies, and have, by most anecdotal accounts, worked satisfactorily. Accepted HOV practices have inadvertently led to less and less investment in performance monitoring and reporting by respective sponsoring agencies. While many areas continue to monitor basic information related to the number and operation of such HOV projects within their jurisdiction, few have budget resources to reg- ularly track and report on such measures as safety and enforcement, performance by mode, design efficacy, or constituent attitudes. So they are often ill-prepared for sudden inquiries that question whether the lanes are continuing to respond to their stated goals and objectives. Exceptions arise when extraordinary events or pub- lic or political scrutiny require responses to specific questions or changes in operation. In these instances data is collected and evaluated to respond specifically to the issue of an inquiry or design/operational change. In sum- mary, if the HOV lanes are working satisfactorily, only monitoring of a few measures is typically conducted on a regular basis. The advent of pricing on HOV lanes has renewed interest in performance monitoring on at least the first projects in each locale, primarily to gain an understanding of how this new tool works. If history is any indication, lessons learned from these early pricing projects will also set forth commonly accepted practices, which may in turn, result in lessening interest and investment in performance monitoring. Conversely, having a customer/business proposition that requires continuing and real-time management oversight and a revenue stream that can be used to underwrite monitoring activities offers the opportunity to ensure an ongoing commitment to this needed resource.

grams for pricing projects, identifying appropriate performance measures, and implementing public outreach efforts for these projects. Performance monitoring for congestion pricing projects accomplishes three important and interrelated purposes: 1. To ensure that they are functioning as efficiently as possible and make adjustments to oper- ational policies if they are not; 2. To quantify and validate the different benefits these facilities deliver; and 3. To document the successful application of congestion pricing in support of their expanded use. These guidelines are designed to help agencies understand (1) how and when to put evalu- ation and performance measurement programs in place and (2) how to identify and develop appropriate performance measures, collect the necessary data, evaluate performance and adjust management procedures to ensure performance standards are being met, and commu- nicate the results. While these guidelines attempt to identify as broad a range of goals and performance mea- sures as possible, it is also important to recognize that the resources available to transportation agencies to support performance evaluation are often constrained. The guidelines offer recom- mendations on which measures are particularly effective in the management of priced facilities and conveying the effects of congestion pricing projects to the public when funds for more exten- sive monitoring programs are not available. 1.2 Types of Congestion Pricing Congestion pricing projects in operation in the United States and abroad can be categorized into three basic types: 1. Variably priced managed lanes 2. Toll facilities with variable pricing 3. Cordon and area pricing These guidelines provide tailored recommendations on performance monitoring for each of these pricing forms. The following descriptions provide further information on these three types of congestion pricing.1 1.2.1 Variably Priced Managed Lanes Variably priced managed lanes are designated highway lanes operated to provide improved travel conditions to eligible users. The most common form of managed lanes is the HOV lane, which uses vehicle occupancy to meter traffic. In certain cases, tolls may be used as an additional or standalone criterion to meter the flow of traffic on the managed lanes. Following from this, highway facilities with variably priced managed lanes feature “partial facility” pricing, whereby one or more lanes in one or both directions on a roadway facility are priced and operate in con- junction with adjacent, un-priced, general-purpose lane capacity. These facilities take two forms: 1. HOT (or express) lanes, which combine variable pricing for lower occupancy vehicles with free travel for higher occupancy vehicles; and 2. Express Toll Lanes (ETLs), which charge the same variable toll for all vehicles or a variable toll for lower occupancy vehicles with a discounted toll for higher occupancy vehicles. Introduction 5 1Definitions and descriptions have been adapted from the Federal Highway Administration’s Office of Innovative Program Delivery—Road Pricing Revenue website (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/revenue/road_pricing/index.htm).

As with toll facilities with variable pricing, variable toll rates can be fixed or dynamic. The use of variably priced managed lanes is exclusive to the United States. Nearly all— 11 facilities operational as of late 2010—are HOT lanes, converted from HOV lanes. Exceptions include the 91 Express Lanes in Orange County, California, which were constructed in the cor- ridor’s median as a privately developed expansion project and operate as ETL in the eastbound direction weekdays between 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. Also, portions of the UPA-grant funded I-35W HOT lanes in Minneapolis, which combine HOV lane conversion with corridor widening and shoulder lane conversion. Common goals of these facilities include providing a reliable alternative to frequently congested general purpose lane capacity along a corridor. The fixed variable or dynamically variable pricing schedule is designed to maintain a certain level of service, flow rate, or travel time, removing the uncertainty and variability in travel on the un-priced lanes. Often, other goals for these facilities are a desire not to degrade certain levels of safety or create inequities in availability to users, such as those with lower incomes who may be less able to pay the toll charged. Finally, revenue to help pay for maintenance and operations or maintain a certain debt coverage ratio is often a consider- ation, but is typically secondary to maximizing system efficiency and reliability. 1.2.2 Toll Facilities with Variable Pricing Toll facilities with variable pricing involve “full facility” pricing, where all lanes of a facility are tolled at variably priced rates in response to time of day and travel demand. Toll facilities with variable pricing can involve new or existing highways, bridges, and tunnel crossings. Toll facili- ties may involve the introduction of a variably priced toll structure on legacy facilities that pre- viously featured fixed toll rates, or the use of variably priced toll rates on new facilities. Toll rates on these facilities vary by time of day or congestion level such that peak-period travel is more expensive than off-peak travel, encouraging some motorists to move their trips to off-peak periods or use other travel modes, such as transit. In this manner, the duration of peak-period con- gestion is reduced or eliminated, increasing the reliability of a user’s trip and allowing for more effi- cient use of system capacity from a time-of-day and physical (lane-mile) standpoint. Variable toll rates can be fixed on a particular schedule or vary dynamically based on real-time traffic condi- tions. Electronic toll collection (ETC) is critical to these systems’ efficient operation. In the United States, toll facilities with variable pricing include the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey’s bridge and tunnel crossings between New Jersey and New York City; the New Jersey Turnpike; the Midpoint and Cape Coral Bridges in Lee County, FL; and the San Joaquin and Foothill/Eastern toll roads in Orange County, CA, operated by transportation corridor agen- cies. Outside the United States, the 407 ETR in Toronto, Canada, uses variable pricing. Other facilities include Autoroute A1 from Lille to Paris that charges a peak toll on Sunday afternoons, the Harbour Bridge in Sydney, and toll roads in Japan on a pilot basis. Because these facilities operate as “traditional” toll facilities—i.e., tolls are collected to support their operation, main- tenance, and possible expansion—revenue generation often remains the primary goal. On a sec- ondary basis, reducing congestion, increasing reliability, and encouraging off-peak or alternate mode (e.g., public transit) travel are also goals of these facilities. 1.2.3 Cordon and Area Pricing Cordon and area pricing is a strategy designed to mitigate traffic congestion in dense urban environments—generally city centers and the corridors providing access to them—by charging vehicles during peak periods, either each time they pass a set boundary (cordon) or once during a set period (e.g., 24 hours) as they enter (or travel within) a specified zone (area). In addition, a wide range of other charging options exist for both these schemes, including varying charges 6 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects

by time-of-day, by vehicle, and by entry point. The charge can be fixed on a particular schedule or vary dynamically based on real-time traffic conditions. The application of cordon or area pricing has occurred only internationally to date. The three most extensive uses (based on geographic extent and population served) are in London, England; Stockholm, Sweden; and Singapore. Common goals are to reduce congestion within urban centers often limited by finite roadway capacity, to improve access to urban destinations (cen- tral business districts, commercial establishments, cultural and civic institutions, etc.), to encourage the use of alternate forms of transportation (especially public transit), and to improve natural and urban environments (quality of life). 1.3 Context for Congestion Pricing Projects and Their Evaluation Evaluation and performance measurement programs for congestion pricing projects are most effective when their development extends across the overall planning, implementation, and operation lifecycle of the projects they assess. In an ideal scenario, this approach happens naturally: a congestion pricing project is identified, planned, and executed along an uninter- rupted timeline, with consistent agency sponsorship, such that the project’s goals and objec- tives are clear throughout the process and a consistent approach to measuring and evaluating the project’s outcomes can be applied to assess its ability to meet them. However, more often evaluation and performance measurement programs for congestion pricing projects are dis- crete efforts, especially if there has been a break in time between the planning and design and construction phases of the implementation process, or if these activities were completed by different agencies or teams. The relationship between project implementation and performance evaluation and measure- ment is shown in Figure 1-1. As with other types of transportation improvements, the imple- mentation of a congestion pricing project involves the following major phases: • Planning • Design and construction • Operations Introduction 7 Figure 1-1. Performance evaluation and measurement context and activities throughout the project development process.

Each of these phases is underpinned by an ongoing public involvement process to obtain input and feedback (from local stakeholder groups) which is used to shape the transportation project that emerges from the process. The public involvement process also enhances awareness, edu- cation, and marketing/promotion for the project. The following discussions provide further information on the different steps and the overall context involved in formulating and imple- menting evaluation and performance measurement programs for congestion pricing projects. 1.3.1 Planning Studies and the Development of Preliminary Evaluation and Performance Measures The first step in the implementation of a congestion pricing project is the completion of plan- ning studies that result in either a pricing project being advanced into design and construction or a decision not to continue. The planning process is essentially a decision-making framework through which regional goals are established and different improvement options are assessed for their ability to meet those needs.2 Ideally, it should include a preliminary identification of performance measures that demonstrate the extent to which the project meets its goals and addresses public and other stakeholder concerns. More often, however, planning studies for capacity expansion and operational enhancements, including congestion pricing projects, extend over several years and focus on need and feasibility, and less on ultimate execution. Other issues including securing funding and approvals for the project and the possible need to gain local or state legislative authority and/or Federal agreements to collect tolls, add further time and com- plexity to the planning process. As the transition to construction occurs, circumstances may have changed since the initial planning study—agency, institutional (legal, regulatory), or stakeholder priorities may have shifted—often making it more appropriate to wait until implementation is imminent to finalize the details of the evaluation program. 1.3.2 Project Design and Construction and the Review or Development of Evaluation and Performance Measures Although the development of performance measures and an evaluation program to assess them may not have been considered during the planning process, these needs become more critical during project design and construction. Comprehensive baseline data documenting conditions prior to the opening of the congestion pricing facility is essential to determine the incremental effects of pricing once it becomes operational. At the very least, as a project enters its design and construction phase, its goals should be con- firmed in conjunction with either the refinement of selected preliminary performance measures from the planning process or the development of an initial set (see the following section). If resources allow, it is helpful to use the public consultation process already established for the project to confirm regional goals and obtain an understanding of public and other stakeholder attitudes toward the pricing project and any subsequent issues that may have arisen since the completion of the planning process. Public involvement at this stage should educate the public on the project’s purpose and benefits to make the case for its implementation. Specific perfor- mance measures can be identified that would best communicate the realization of these benefits and confirm that the project is meeting its intended goals. Performance evaluation programs will also need to include specific measures that may be leg- islatively mandated and any others that the project sponsor may have committed to during the 8 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects 2 Volume 1 of NCHRP Project 08-57, Improved Framework and Tools for Highway Pricing Decisions, provides extensive analysis and case studies illuminating decision-making frameworks for tolling and pricing projects.

approval process. Such commitments may be made to obtain stakeholder buy-in and increase support for the project. Examples might include commitments to monitor transit travel times to indicate improve- ments or absence of degradation in service or a commitment to measure effects on low-income users for those concerned with economic equity. By addressing these obli- gations, credibility and confidence in proj- ect execution is built. Overall, performance measures selected to build the case for pub- lic acceptance, respond to stakeholder input, and meet legislative requirements are those that will validate the project. The other primary function of perfor- mance measurement is to manage facility or pricing scheme operations. It is critical to identify performance measures that will provide a reliable and consistent means to manage a facility’s ongoing operations and define when changes in operation are nec- essary. For example, performance measures for operations often derive directly from the facility’s toll policy. Thresholds for toll adjustments are informed by assessing ongoing performance measure data, such as hourly traffic volumes or travel times between selected route points. Changes in facility policies (such as vehicle occupancy requirements or the specification of peak- period operation) may also arise as a result of a performance evaluation program. Facility operations also require that equipment and service providers meet established performance standards. Such standards would be likely to include the accuracy of ETC transactions and billings, the opening of new ETC accounts, wait times and overall satisfaction with services provided by a customer call center, and incident response times. Performance measures to assess whether these standards will be met should also be identified and specified at this stage. Finally, as part of the design phase, all equipment needed to collect performance measurement data should be identified, fol- lowed by the preparation of either detailed specifications or designs. Equipment used Introduction 9 The Challenges of Determining Before-and-After Effects Amid Ongoing Construction Due to the constraints of completing construction work within active highway rights-of-way, construction periods for large HOT lane proj- ects can extend for periods of several years, with the new improve- ments brought on-line on a rolling basis as they are completed. Simi- larly, other unrelated construction projects in the corridor or adjacent areas before or after the completion of the HOT lane could also skew traffic data and other performance parameters. Both situations com- plicate the ability of project sponsors to obtain useful before-and- after benchmarking data needed to assess the performance of these projects in terms of traffic operations and user perception. When this is the case, sponsors may have to wait several years to gain a com- plete understanding of the effects of congestion pricing in their regions. The following findings from the Miami, Minneapolis, and San Diego project profiles presented in the appendix provide further detail on how ongoing construction activity has affected performance monitoring in three of the seven managed lane projects assessed in NCHRP Project 08-75. • Miami: One recurring challenge with the opening of the 95 Express was tracking the performance of a facility that was being opened in phases, which meant that monitoring would begin when the facility was only partly opened and still undergoing impacts from ongoing construction. • Minneapolis: Assembling meaningful before-and-after data on the I-35W corridor was complicated by the fact that the MnPASS improvements opened on a rolling basis and that they were affected by ongoing project construction and the replacement of the Mississippi River crossing near downtown Minneapolis. These factors resulted in a substantial time gap between comparable before-and-after conditions. • San Diego: The San Diego Association of Governments’ (SANDAG) expansion of the I-15 Express Lanes is being completed over a 5-year period. As these guidelines are being written the 8-mile, reversible-flow, two-lane segment continues to operate as it has for the past 14 years, and a new much more complex five-lane segment has opened to the north. At the same time, extensive construction activities in the I-15 corridor continue, affecting the operation of the general purpose and managed lanes alike. Together these conditions have led to a lull in normal perform- ance monitoring activities in the I-15 corridor while SANDAG addresses constantly changing maintenance of traffic issues during the construction period and gears up for full operations of the completed facility. Similarly, subsequent survey work after the opening of the first segment of the expansion has been postponed because of the extensive construction activities in the corridor. However, no one has questioned whether the facility is providing benefit to the region.

for performance monitoring purposes could include loop detectors, automated toll collection systems, and still and video cameras. Whether a performance measure’s intended purpose is to validate the project or manage its operation (or both), it should also be structured to use any previously compiled data or statis- tics on facility performance and its users’ behavior and attitudes. Making the case for achieving project goals and benefits can be enhanced by comparisons to past performance data and prior (likely worsening) trends. Growing peak-period traffic volumes or travel times and attendant effects on economic or environmental impacts are good examples of these types of data. The col- lection of similar data once the pricing project is operational would be most useful if it can be compared on an even basis with past collected results. After the preliminary performance measures have been reviewed or revised or an initial set compiled for the first time, it is essential to establish pre-existing baseline conditions prior to opening of the new congestion pricing project. The baseline conditions will provide the reference point for documenting changes in the facility’s performance. They will likely require the ongoing collection of objective data such as traffic param- eters (e.g., volumes, speeds, and vehicle occupancies), transit utilization, safety statistics, and others. It is also expected that one-time, specially designed surveys will be required to collect subjective data, such as public perceptions. Ideally, baseline data collection should extend for one full year prior to the opening of the congestion pricing facility so that recurring patterns are well documented and the quantity of data is robust enough to make comparisons with those col- lected after operations begin. External factors, such as other construction projects, economic trends, and even weather events may skew the baseline data. Additional baseline collec- tion time, data, or the use of a control corridor/facility/region may be necessary. These factors can greatly affect the previously made strategic decisions regarding agreed on project goals. Accordingly, spe- cific performance measures included in a performance evalua- tion program would be best selected at least 18 months prior to project construction completion so that the measurement of adequate baseline data can be accommodated and carried out. Consideration must be given to making these baseline measure- ments during construction and the potential phased schedule for opening the project to operations. Protocols for ongoing performance measure reporting should also be agreed on prior to the opening of the congestion pricing facility. 1.3.3 Performance Measurement and Evaluation during Project Operation When a congestion pricing project goes into operation, project sponsors should anticipate that local stakeholders, elected officials, and the media will want performance data to 10 Evaluation and Performance Measurement of Congestion Pricing Projects The Unanticipated Benefits of a “Soft” Opening in Houston While travel demand modeling output provides a reasonable estimate of utilization levels for HOT lanes, there is always some uncertainty regarding actual utilization prior to opening. Before opening the new 12-mile, four-lane Katy Freeway Managed Lanes, its operator, the Harris County Toll Road Authority (HCTRA), did not know what the overall utilization levels would be. While HCTRA’s initial intent was to open the facility simultaneously to HOV and paying SOV motorists, as a result of delays in completing the ETC installation for the reconstructed HOT lanes, the facility was opened in a phased sequence—first to HOVs only and then later to paying vehicles. In retrospect HCTRA found that this decision was extremely helpful on a number of fronts. Most importantly, it provided the Authority with an excellent understanding of HOV utilization in the corridor, which was higher than expected at 1,400 vehicles during the peak hour, and the opportunity to determine whether 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 one month in November 2008, a county judge who was up for election came out in support of the lanes and later assisted HCTRA in the development of television commercials for the new facility. While they cite the soft launch as “dumb luck” necessitated by delays in imple- menting toll collection equipment in the corridor, HCTRA staff believe a phased opening might be beneficial to other operators launching new con- gestion pricing facilities.

be available almost immediately. Making this data available provides project sponsors with the opportunity to demonstrate their responsiveness and gain the confidence of the congestion pric- ing project’s stakeholders. Managing expectations is equally important, since many project set- tings may be targeted for longer-term benefits not readily seen on opening day. Moreover, it pro- vides the opportunity to share quantifiable project performance data that validates the benefits of the project and demonstrates how its performance is meeting its goals, as well as any specific community concerns that may have arisen during the implementation process. Although relatively few performance measures will be used to manage the ongoing operation of the pricing facility, these measures will be critical to the success of the project, especially at the beginning of its service life. The monitoring process will have to determine whether critical thresh- olds identified by supporting sponsors at the federal, state, or local levels are being met. These may include peak-period travel speeds or hourly vehicle volume thresholds, public support, safety, modal changes, compliance/violation rates, financial and revenue performance, and a host of other locally significant measures. If critical thresholds are not being met, operating requirements such as price levels or occupancy requirements will need to be adjusted until system performance meets the required benchmarks. In terms of data used to validate the project, project sponsors should also anticipate generat- ing regular monthly or weekly reports driven by electronically collected data on an ongoing basis, as well as press releases, individual milestone reports on the completion of major user survey efforts, or annual or biannual reports—which may also be a legislative requirement. There are also ongoing public involvement opportunities for information reporting during the operation of the congestion pricing facility. Stakeholders and the public are anxious to learn of the performance evaluation findings given their involvement in developing goals during the planning and/or design and construction phases. Information reporting should target these and other newer interests if the project is demonstrating success. For example, the outcome of an air quality measure can be highlighted at a local meeting of the Sierra Club or an outcome of enforcement elements can be highlighted through law enforcement channels. Project sponsors should continue performance reporting to all existing stakeholder groups with whom they have interacted during the implementation of the congestion pricing project, as well as to any newly identified stakeholders. One ultimate measure of success is to have built support for the con- tinued or expanded use of congestion pricing through a project’s performance evaluation and measurement. Introduction 11

Next: Chapter 2 - Methodology »
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!