Cost/Benefit Analysis of Converting a Lane for Bus Rapid Transit—Phase II Evaluation and Methodology (2011) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 1-29
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
Yet BRT operating in mixed flow lanes may not be able to achieve the improvement in travel time and reliability necessary to attract significant new ridership. One solution is to convert a mixed flow arterial lane to exclusive BRT use.
|
From page 2... ...
NCHRP Project 20-65, Task 22 is intended to provide transportation agencies with a methodology and a guide for evaluating the potential benefits of converting a mixed-flow lane to exclusive BRT use. The benefits and costs of converting a lane to a BRT lane will depend heavily on how such a project affects traffic speed, delay, and vehicle miles traveled, both in the mixed flow lanes and the BRT lane.
|
From page 3... ...
The construction, operation, and maintenance costs of a project are relatively easier to estimate than the costs of traffic delays during construction or the costs of long-term environmental impacts. The most critical component of a cost/benefit analysis for a BRT project is likely to be the estimation of impacts on vehicle delay and transit ridership.
|
From page 4... ...
For example, transit projects often bring benefits by providing mobility to people with low incomes, disabilities, or with otherwise limited access to transportation options. The benefits to these groups may be as important to consider as travel time savings.
|
From page 5... ...
Benefits/Disbenefits • Change in travel time for drivers, transit users • Change in vehicle operating costs for drivers, fares for transit users • Change in emissions of criteria pollutants and greenhouse gases • Change in crash costs Costs • Capital costs of materials, equipment, infrastructure construction, new buses • Operations and maintenance costs
|
From page 6... ...
Travel cost savings: Savings or increases in travel costs include out-of pocket vehicle operating and ownership costs and are directly related to the change in the number of vehicle miles traveled by auto drivers. Vehicle operating costs include the costs of fuel, oil, maintenance, insurance, and depreciation associated with vehicle wear.
|
From page 7... ...
This is used to estimate the changes in vehicle operating costs for users. Estimates of change in VMT were also used to calculate change in emissions damage costs and crash costs.
|
From page 8... ...
Transit ridership growth rate Auto ridership growth rate Transit ridership elasticity wrt travel time Transit ridership elasticity wrt bus frequency Average wage rates Average vehicle miles traveled (VMT) Vehicle delay, LOS Person delay Average auto speed Vehicle throughput Person throughput Total auto and transit travel demand in a corridor (persons)
|
From page 9... ...
Capital Cost Assumptions Value ($) Notes/Units Lane within existing roadway profile 2,700,000 Cost per lane mile At-grade station with enhancements 30,000 per station New Articulated Vehicles 675,000 average per vehicle On-board fare collection 17,500 average per vehicle Traffic Signal Priority 30,000 per intersection Passenger on-board information 4,000 per vehicle Other (ITS, safety, security systems)
|
From page 10... ...
Since these benefits cannot be captured in this analysis, it is more realistic to assume a zero value for the change in travel time costs rather than a negative value. Auto Operating Costs These costs include ownership costs and were assumed to be 54 cents per mile using figures from the American Automobile Association (AAA 2009)
|
From page 11... ...
. Annual Peak Period Benefits Constant 2009 $ Benefits for transit riders $4,107,426 continuing to use transit Disbenefits for auto drivers −$1,189,190 continuing to drive Savings in crash costs $425,733 Savings in emissions $321,014 damage costs Total Annual Peak Period $3,664,982 (AM and PM)
|
From page 12... ...
In these cases, the number of transit riders is too small to generate travel time benefits sufficient to offset the project costs and the (small) travel time disbenefit experienced by auto drivers.
|
From page 13... ...
Holding all other variables unchanged from the scenario presented in Section 4, these results show that, with a 3% discount rate, the hypothetical BRT project would achieve a positive net benefit if the daily person throughput is 30,000, 40,000, or 50,000. Table 11 shows results for alternative values of BRT average speed.
|
From page 14... ...
The net benefits expected from a BRT project are a function of multiple variables, including the following: • Total corridor person throughput, • Pre-project mode share, • BRT travel time savings, and • Discount rate. There are trade-offs between these variables that affect the estimated net benefits.
|
From page 15... ...
20,000 No 30,000 Yes 40,000 Yes 50,000 Yes Auto-Transit Mode Share Pre-Project3 80%–20% 20,000 No 30,000 Yes 40,000 Yes 85%–15% 20,000 No 30,000 No 40,000 Yes 90%–10% 20,000 No 30,000 No 40,000 No BRT Corridor Length4 5 miles 40,000 Yes 8 miles 40,000 Yes 11 miles 40,000 Yes 14 miles 40,000 Yes 17 miles 40,000 Yes Note 1: At 7% discount rate Note 2: Assumes base case transit speed of 7 mph and auto-transit mode share (pre-project) of 85%–15% Note 3: Assumes average BRT speed of 11 mph Note 4: Assumes average BRT speed of 11 mph and auto-transit mode share (pre-project)
|
From page 16... ...
In the hypothetical example considered in this study, a relatively high person throughput of 40,000 per day is likely to result in positive net benefits, regardless of corridor length. It should be noted that some benefits of a BRT project were not incorporated into this analysis because they are difficult to quantify.
|
From page 17... ...
• Benefit and cost categories are mostly common across models. Benefits typically include direct user benefits in the form of travel time savings, accident cost savings (safety benefits)
|
From page 18... ...
Data Requirements For highway projects, data required are highway design and traffic data including the number of general purpose and HOV lanes, estimated speed, length of highway segment, average daily traffic, and accident data for facility. For transit projects, data required are annual person trips, average travel time, annual passenger miles, percent trips occurring during peak periods, transit accident reduction, and the percent of trips occurring on a parallel highway Format and Year Microsoft Excel spreadsheet format; 2004 Timeframe of Evaluation 20-year project life cycle Relevance to Project Objective • Many input requirements related to new pavement construction can be reduced for the case of converting an existing lane for transit.
|
From page 19... ...
Cost and Benefit Categories Considered Transportation system user benefits including travel time savings, reduced highway congestion, reduced automobile costs (fuel, insurance, maintenance, depreciation, and parking) , and taxi expenses; social benefits including reduced air and noise emissions, roadway wear, and transportation system administration; and transit agency benefits including reductions in operating and maintenance costs.
|
From page 20... ...
Format and Year Proprietary software; 1996. Timeframe of Evaluation Multi-year analysis using Net Present Values Relevance to Project Objective • Not relevant because the model evaluates only highway project alternatives and does not consider transit investments; however it can provide guidance on sources for economic parameters and methodology Cost and Benefit Categories Considered Travel time savings; vehicle operating cost reductions; accident-cost reductions; and reduction in emissions of HC, NOX, and CO (emissions reduction benefits optional)
|
From page 21... ...
Detailed outputs from travel demand models including in-vehicle travel time, out-of-vehicle travel time, fuel costs, non-fuel operating costs, out-of-pocket costs, and internal accident costs are thus required as inputs into STEAM. Inputs include detailed regional network tables, trip tables, and travel time matrices for the Base Case and the Improvement Case.
|
From page 22... ...
Relevance to Project Objective • Relevant because the model considers all modes and can evaluate packages of transportation actions involving transit and highway modes together. Cost and Benefit Categories Considered Benefits: User benefits including travel time savings, safety benefits and operating cost savings; external benefits including energy savings, emissions savings, and public vehicle operating cost savings.
|
From page 23... ...
Cost and Benefit Categories Considered Travel time savings, vehicle operating cost savings, safety benefits, environmental benefits, project construction costs, and induced travel impacts. Noteworthy Features and Usable Parameters • Web tool that is available to users in the most updated version for free.
|
From page 24... ...
The impacts estimated include costs of implementation, induced travel demand, benefits including trip time and outof-pocket cost changes such as fares, parking fees and tolls, other highway user costs such as accident costs, revenue transfers due to tolls, fares or parking fees, changes in fuel consumption and changes in emissions. Data Requirements The model requires as inputs travel demand estimates by mode for each alternative, including travel times, mode shares, occupancies, trip costs, trip lengths, and other information.
|
From page 25... ...
Average wage rate of transit riders $26.29 constant 2009 $ per hour; converted from original figure of $21.1 in 2000$ from source Average wage rate of auto drivers $26.29 constant 2009 $ per hour Pre-Project Mode Shares Autos 85% Bus 15% Average Vehicle Occupancy Auto 1.2 Transit (60 ft articulated) 80 Source: TCRP 118 Annual Ridership Growth Rate Auto 2% Transit 2% Elasticities Transit ridership w.r.t travel time -0.6 Transit ridership w.r.t bus headway (frequency)
|
From page 26... ...
Auto 390 380 Auto VHT savings 9.5 Daily person miles traveled Auto 10,200 9,267 Change in auto daily person miles 933 Daily person hours traveled Auto 468 456 Change in auto daily person hours 11 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS Traffic volume during peak hours, in peak direction Auto 1,700 1,544 Travel Demand (Person throughput) during peak hours, in peak direction Auto drivers and riders 2,040 1,853 ` Transit riders 360 547 Auto users diverted to BRT 187 Increase in transit ridership due to decreased travel time 79 BRT ALTERNATIVENO BUILD -- 3 LANES MIXED FLOW 2 LANES, MIXED FLOW 1 LANE, BRT 26
|
From page 27... ...
Auto drivers Auto operating costs 0.54 $ per vehicle mile AAA, 2009 -- excluding ownership costs (15.42 cents/mile) ; 54 cents/mile with ownership costs at 15,000 miles per year Auto operating costs per passenger mile 0.45 $ per passenger mile Tolls 0 $ Value of in-vehicle travel time 13.14 $/hour Assumes 50% of wage rate, TCRP 78, p.
|
From page 28... ...
397-401(from FHWA source) $18 $/passenger mile Daily peak crash cost savings, over 6 peak hours $107 $166,583 in $2009 TOTAL ANNUAL PEAK PERIOD BENEFIT $2,329,146 Benefit per existing rider $6,470 Daily savings in crash costs from auto trips diverted to BRT Annual savings in crash costs from auto trips diverted to BRT Average 2005 emission rates for light duty vehicles VOCs (HCs)
|
From page 29... ...
Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 These digests are issued in order to increase awareness of research results emanating from projects in the Cooperative Research Programs (CRP)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.