Congestion Mitigation Strategies: Modifications to the City’s plan New York City Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission December 17, 2007.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Overview of a Timely Publication. Transportations importance has been recognized since colonial times National defense Economic vitality Quality of life.
Advertisements

Beltline Highway ITS – Ramp Metering Project ODOT Planners Meeting April 25, 2012.
June ITE Western District Conference Don Samdahl, P.E., PTP Julie Morgan, AICP The New Transportation Planning Paradigm.
International Symposium on Road Pricing 2003 Evaluation of Singapore’s Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) System ( present) A P G Menon MSI Global.
Employer-Paid Parking: A Matching Grant Employers pay for parking at work if the employee is willing to pay for driving to work Commuters who don’t drive.
Getting Started with Congestion Pricing A Workshop for Local Partners Federal Highway Administration Office of Operations.
GREATER NEW YORK A GREENER White Papers on Congestion Mitigation Strategies New York City Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission November 20, 2007.
Congestion Mitigation Strategies: Alternatives to the City’s plan New York City Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission December 10, 2007.
GREATER NEW YORK A GREENER Travel Demand Modeling for analysis of Congestion Mitigation policies October 24, 2007.
NEW YORK CITY TRAFFIC CONGESTION MITIGATION COMMISSION NYSDOT Comments on New York City Traffic Congestion Mitigation Plan Bob Zerrillo, Director, Office.
Tysons 1 Operational Analysis of Dulles Toll Road Ramps to Tysons Board Transportation Committee Meeting September 17, 2013 Seyed Nabavi Fairfax County.
PARKING COMMISSION. CITY PARKING SYSTEM SPACE COUNT BY FACILITY.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2003 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Chapter 10 The Role of Costs in Pricing Decisions.
GE541 Economic Geography of Transport October 30th.
CONGESTION PRICING Traffic Solution or Tax Scheme?
AMDOCS > CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE SYSTEMS INNOVATION Information Security Level 2 – Sensitive© 2011 – Proprietary and Confidential Information of Amdocs 1 Yield.
Jeffrey F. Paniati Associate Administrator for Operations Federal Highway Administration Department of Transportation Enabling Congestion Pricing in the.
Congestion Mitigation: Options for Evaluation New York City Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission January 10, 2008.
Rural Waste Collection Options Department of Budget and Management 01/21/2014.
A Very Big Experiment Congestion Charging in London Peter Jones Transport Studies Group University of Westminster.
The London Congestion Charge. Facts Traffic speed in central London had fallen more that 20% since the 1960s (14.2 mph to 10mph) I n 1998 drivers in inner.
Program Update Baltimore MPO November 25, Internal Draft AGENDA  Program Overview  Alternatives Development  Stakeholder and Public Outreach.
Tolling and Congestion Pricing Patrick DeCorla-Souza Office of Innovative Program Delivery Federal Highway Administration Presentation to Transportation.
Seminar 23rd November 2001 Other Policies: Demand Management & Highway Investment Professor Marcial Echenique.
Oversight Team Meeting December 11, INTRODUCTIONS (15 MINUTES) Name and affiliation Purpose of meeting/ review agenda Edits to September’s Oversight.
TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference Houston, Texas May 2009 Ann Arbor Transportation Plan Update-- Connecting the Land Use & Transportation.
On Target Group Coaching
TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference Incorporating Pricing Strategies US Department of Transportation Incorporating.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to presented by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. TRB Applications Conference – Freight Committee May 7, 2013.
Funding Your Journey Florida Transportation Economics 101 Presenter’s Name Organization.
Presentation to the Sustainable Prosperity Conference
The Oregon Road User Fee Concept and Pilot Program Presented to National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission Washington DC September.
Central London Congestion Charging David Hutchinson GREATER LONDON AUTHORITY International Union of Air Pollution Prevention and Environmental Protection.
Methodology for the Use of Regional Planning Models to Assess Impact of Various Congestion Pricing Strategies Sub-network Extraction A sub-network focusing.
2030 Mobility Plan City of Jacksonville Planning and Development Department January 2011.
Transit Service for FY12 Presentation to Board of County Commissioners August 9, 2011.
1 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REVIEW Balancing Transit Service with Travel Demand and Available Resources.
Urban Road Pricing: US DOT Congestion Initiative and Urban Partnerships 14 th World Congress on ITS IBEC Special Session October 10, 2007 Beijing Exhibition.
Jeffrey F. Paniati Associate Administrator for Operations Federal Highway Administration US Department of Transportation Looking Forward to a High Performance.
Congestion Pricing in New York City Why It Failed. How It Can Succeed. By Charles Komanoff Nurture Nature Foundation New York City South China University.
1 Mississippi River Bridge An Analysis of Alternatives Expert Panel Review Sharon Greene & Associates.
TRB Transportation Applications Conference Congestion-Free Freeways US Department of Transportation Establishing a Metropolitan.
Convergence of Transportation Policy and RFID Enabler of Future Transportation Policy Chris Body Mark IV Vice President, Business Development.
Managed Lanes CE 550: Advanced Highway Design Damion Pregitzer.
Department of Transportation AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE OF A MOBILE LICENSE PLATE READING SYSTEM FROM SENTRY CONTROL SYSTEMS, INC. October 22, 2012 City Council.
Civil and Environmental Engineering 1 Norway’s toll rings: Full scale implementations of urban pricing Dr. Terje Tretvik - SINTEF, Norway IMPRINT-EUROPE.
Banking the Poor Getting Finance 2008 Thailand Launch The World Bank November 2008.
Social Costs P Q S (mc) d msc Congestion Charges.
W. Suchorzewski, WUT, th November 2005 REVENUE Revenue Use from Transport Pricing 5FP – DGTREN Urban case studies – Warsaw Warsaw.
US DOT Congestion Initiative Urban Partnership Agreements I-95 Corridor Coalition EPS Summit September 19, 2007 Boston, Massachusetts Jeffrey F. Paniati.
B A Y A R E A T O L L A U T H O R I T Y 1 Toll Increase Recommendation for the State-owned Bay Area Bridges BATA Oversight Committee January 13, 2010.
EMTA FINANCIAL MATTERS Closing accounts 2013 – Key facts - Net result of € -43, EMTA reserves amounts to less than €100, All members are.
Liberating road users: Options for progress. Liberating road users at ADC 2 September 24, 2010 How are road users constrained? Governments determine 
IFTA Annual Business Meeting Virginia Beach, VA August 17, 2011 Federal Highway Administration.
Park Burlington | Downtown Parking & Transportation Plan Downtown Parking & Transportation Plan Public Forum November 3, 2015.
I-680 Value Pricing: A HOT Lane Demonstration Project of “Smart Carpool Lanes” Sponsor: Alameda County Congestion Management Agency 2003 Sponsor: Alameda.
FY08 PARKING PERMIT FEE PROPOSAL November 20, 2006.
Darrin Roth American Trucking Associations, Inc. INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ROAD PRICING.
Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 1 (of 37) Solving the SR-520 Problem prepared for UTRAN prepared by INSTEP.
Financial Accounting Chapter 6. Reporting and Interpreting Sales Revenue, Receivables, and Cash.
1 520 Tolling Implementation Committee Cascadia Center for Regional Development Beyond Oil Conference Thursday, September 4, 2008 Richard Ford, Commissioner.
Transportation Revenue Sources Presentation to the Discovery Institute October 6, 2004 Amy Arnis Deputy Director Strategic Planning and Programming Washington.
Transportation Management and Policy Spring Colloquium.
Solving the SR-520 Problem © 2005 Chaisy, Hurvitz, Jiang, Jun, ShinnersSlide 1 (of 31) Solving the SR-520 Problem prepared for UTRAN prepared by INSTEP.
City of Kodiak Harbor Rates. Harbor Rate Study Recommendations from Northern Economics – Option 1 ▫ 18.5% increase and increase based on Producer Price.
CRR Deration and NPRR821 WMS 09/06/2017.
21st Century Transportation Committee Finance Subcommittee
All-Electronic Tolling
The Ladybird ( th Street NW)
Stockton City Council December 6, 2007 Land Use Diagram Changes
Presentation transcript:

Congestion Mitigation Strategies: Modifications to the City’s plan New York City Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission December 17, 2007

Overview of presentation and research

Objectives  Important to return the Commission's focus to strategies that directly affect motorists' movements into the CP zone  This presentation is offered to promote the Commission's understanding of choices available using the City's plan as a base as the Commission takes up the decision of what to recommend to achieve the goals of the City's Plan  Important to return the Commission's focus to strategies that directly affect motorists' movements into the CP zone  This presentation is offered to promote the Commission's understanding of choices available using the City's plan as a base as the Commission takes up the decision of what to recommend to achieve the goals of the City's Plan

The Dials to Turn  Northern boundary of CP zone  86 th St  60 th St  Trip types  Staying in the zone  Through trips on FDR and Rt. 9A  2-way (inbound and outbound)  1-way (inbound only)  The rate charged  Amount charged: Toll offset or LPR Surcharge  Flat vs. variable time of day  12 hour or 24 hour  Type of Charge  Fee (once a day)  Toll (recurring)  Northern boundary of CP zone  86 th St  60 th St  Trip types  Staying in the zone  Through trips on FDR and Rt. 9A  2-way (inbound and outbound)  1-way (inbound only)  The rate charged  Amount charged: Toll offset or LPR Surcharge  Flat vs. variable time of day  12 hour or 24 hour  Type of Charge  Fee (once a day)  Toll (recurring)

Analytic process Adjustment of Charge Factors Northern boundary of CP Zone Trip types to be charged The rate charged Type of charge Change in Impact on Drivers Fewer trips Lower VMT Trips via different routes Change in Financial Outcomes Capital Costs Gross Revenue Operating Costs Net Revenue Change in Mobility Outcomes Change in VMT Impacts to highway network Impacts to transit network

City’s Plan  6.7% VMT reduction  $224m capital cost  $649m gross revenue (annual)  $229m operating costs  $420m net revenue  6.7% VMT reduction  $224m capital cost  $649m gross revenue (annual)  $229m operating costs  $420m net revenue

 6.2% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Smaller VMT reduction: 0.5%  Lower capital cost: -$5m  Lower net revenues: -$33m  6.2% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Smaller VMT reduction: 0.5%  Lower capital cost: -$5m  Lower net revenues: -$33m 1. Move northern boundary to 60 St

2. Eliminate intrazonal charge  5.9% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Smaller VMT reduction: 0.3%  Lower capital cost: -$94m  Higher net revenues: +$25m  5.9% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Smaller VMT reduction: 0.3%  Lower capital cost: -$94m  Higher net revenues: +$25m

3. Charge thru trips using periphery  6.1% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Larger VMT reduction: 0.2%  Lower capital cost: -$52m  Higher net revenues: +$27m  6.1% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Larger VMT reduction: 0.2%  Lower capital cost: -$52m  Higher net revenues: +$27m

 6.0% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Smaller VMT reduction: 0.1%  Same capital cost  Lower net revenues: +$3m  6.0% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Smaller VMT reduction: 0.1%  Same capital cost  Lower net revenues: +$3m 4. Charge in-bound trips only

 6.8% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Larger VMT reduction: 0.8%  Same capital cost  Higher net revenues: +$28m  6.8% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Larger VMT reduction: 0.8%  Same capital cost  Higher net revenues: +$28m 4a. In-bound only with variable fee

 8.2% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Larger VMT reduction: 1.4%  Same capital cost  Higher net revenues: +$55m  8.2% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Larger VMT reduction: 1.4%  Same capital cost  Higher net revenues: +$55m 4b. In-bound only with variable fee – 24 hours

 8.3% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Larger VMT reduction: 2.2%  Same capital cost  Higher net revenues: +$176m  8.3% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Larger VMT reduction: 2.2%  Same capital cost  Higher net revenues: +$176m 5. Eliminate or reduce toll offset

 6.3% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Larger VMT reduction: 0.2%  Same capital cost:  Higher net revenues: +$16m  6.3% VMT reduction  Impact of this change:  Larger VMT reduction: 0.2%  Same capital cost:  Higher net revenues: +$16m 6. $1 surcharge for License Plate Recognition customers (non-E-ZPass)

Toll options  Applied to untolled bridges and avenues  Per trip toll instead of daily fee – pay every time you cross  No credit or offset for PA or MTA tolls  May be 24/7/365  Applied to untolled bridges and avenues  Per trip toll instead of daily fee – pay every time you cross  No credit or offset for PA or MTA tolls  May be 24/7/365

 5.6% VMT reduction  $62m capital cost  $570m gross revenue (annual)  $39m operating costs  $531m net revenue  5.6% VMT reduction  $62m capital cost  $570m gross revenue (annual)  $39m operating costs  $531m net revenue Alternative: East River bridge tolls

 13.4% VMT reduction  $72m capital cost  $1,155m gross revenue (annual)  $96m operating costs  $1,059m net revenue  13.4% VMT reduction  $72m capital cost  $1,155m gross revenue (annual)  $96m operating costs  $1,059m net revenue Cordon toll