MAJOR INVESTMENTS

Definition

major investments are capital projects that have the potential, because of their magnitude or nature to be "region shaping." CDTC adopted a policy regarding major investments in 1995, calling for comprehensive investigation of alternatives (including the "no build") prior to making a commitment to a particular alternative in the regional plan.

In two subjects, the New Visions process identified candidates for major investments in the Capital District over the next 20 years: treatment of Northway congestion through major highway or transit investment; and, implementation of fixed guideway transit facilities. Extensive technical investigation and technical work has addressed these subjects. The New Visions Workbook posed particular questions regarding these major policy choices. Consequently, the original New Visions plan contained recommendations in these two areas.

In the past three years, CDTC participants have pursued further information regarding Northway congestion and fixed guideway options. This allows a refinement of CDTC's policy, but does not lead to any fundamental change to the approach reflected in the original New Visions plan.

Northway Congestion

Description

The Northway is the most congested transportation corridor in the region, when measured against Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) standards of acceptable delay. Forecasts show that it will remain so in the future, with congestion progressively worsening and spreading beyond the peak period. Traffic on the Northway has experienced dramatic growth, with average daily traffic doubling in many locations between 1974 and 1992. The theoretical maximum volume of a three lane expressway is routinely reached or exceeded in the AM peak period on the Northway, and unstable flows and traffic slowdowns are becoming frequent in the AM and PM peak periods. Since the adoption of the New Visions Plan, traffic has continued to growth -- and peak hour orientation has continued to be pronounced -- and routine and incident-related traffic slowdowns have become more common.

By the year 2015, peak period demand on the Northway was expected to increase by over 30 percent from 1996 levels under the trend forecasts. At this level of demand, delay wiould increase dramatically, increasing the peak period driving time for peak Northway trips by significant amounts. For example, in the afternoon peak hour, on a day without unusual incidents, routine congestion along the mainline and at many interchanges will increase the travel time of the trip from the State Office Campus to exit 10 of the Northway from 31 minutes in 1990 to 51 minutes in 2015. Incidents or poor weather conditions will result in even longer delays.

In recent years, steadily-increasing congestion has been observed by even the occasional Northway user. What once was unusual -- traffic slowdowns or tie-ups due to incidents -- is now more commonplace. And like many urban freeways in the United States, traffic slowdowns are quite abrupt. Traffic may move at average speeds in excess of 55 or 60 mph even at volumes that exceed the theoretical capacity of the facility, then suddenly collapse to a near stand-still with the slightest disruption.

In the Northway Study conducted prior to adoption of the original New Visions plan, CDTC and NYSDOT anticipated that peak hour traffic would soon "spread" over a longer period of the day in order to accommodate travel growth. Surprisingly, NYSDOT's data from continuous count locations along the Northway do not yet appear to support that inevitable change. Instead, the peak hour concentration of traffic has been maintained in recent years despite continued traffic growth along the Northway. Some of this has been accomplished by squeezing even greater numbers of vehicles in the peak direction within the peak hour, but a majority has occurred through a substantial increase in reverse commuting in the peak hour. The continued peak hour concentration supports the contention that traffic delays on the Northway are not leading to significant changes in work times or other travel behavior.

In the Northway Study, a number of management and capacity-increasing proposals were put on the table, including transit alternatives. The major capacity-increasing alternatives would have capital costs conservatively estimated at between $70 million and $90 million, not including related interchange and access arterial improvements that might be required by the additional mainline capacity. The major transit alternatives considered would have capital costs between $100 million and $390 million for all aspects of transit construction to serve the corridor.

Options Identified

The Expressway Management task force acted as an advisory committee in the NYSDOT sponsored study of the Northway corridor. The Transit Futures task force also considered the Northway corridor in the development of its fixed guideway alternatives based on market research showing the corridor as promising for increased transit use. The Expressway Management task force developed three major highway alternatives for policy consideration. These alternatives include addition of a fourth "general use" lane in each direction; two reversible median express lanes; and a carpool lane or "high occupancy vehicle" lane. The carpool lane alternative provides higher speeds for those who travel by carpool as well as those who travel by express bus. All three alternatives would include adding highway capacity between Exit 1 and Exit 10 of the Northway. Demand and incident management strategies are necessary, but not sufficient, to address growing congestion. The impacts of these three alternatives are summarized in the Northway Study report and in the New Visions Workbook.

The major transit alternatives that were considered by the Transit Futures task force for the Northway corridor included light rail in the Northway median or commuter rail on freight rail lines that would draw people away from the Northway. The impacts of these two alternatives are also summarized in the New Visions Workbook and in the Fixed Guideway Transit Investigation and Transit Futures Reports.

If implemented, any of the actions has the potential to significantly affect overall transportation system performance in terms of congestion levels, access to alternative modes, energy consumption, safety measures and the like. Without a high degree of success in other areas of the New Visions plan (site design, demand management, substitution of communication for transportation, etc.), none of the alternatives will fully address the projected congestion. If implemented, any one of them also has the potential to affect the overall system budget significantly.

Public Response

The region's policy regarding addressing Northway congestion was one of the major policy choices posed in CDTC's public outreach effort. While the responses did not provide a consensus on the appropriate action on the Northway, they did provide a broad set of perspectives on the issue that added insight to the technical information generated by CDTC and NYSDOT.

Without repeating the comments of planning boards, business, interested individuals verbatim in this report (see New Visions Phase 3 Results of Public Outreach, July 1996), the following conclusions were drawn from the public response:

1. The importance associated with alleviating commuter traffic congestion was mixed. A majority of people who commented supported addressing the problem, even if it meant raising additional funds. Often, the support for improvement was qualified by a request that those benefiting from the improvement shoulder some or most of the cost of the improvement.

2. There was strong sentiment, however, from even some of those most directly affected that the cost of a major improvement to address commuter traffic is not warranted -- at least in the near future.

3. Response was mixed regarding perceptions of the potential for significant transit investment to serve the corridor effectively. Many saw no possibility for success while others qualified their recommendations for investment in terms of "only if it is transit."

4. There was frequent recognition of the phenomena of widened freeways simply "filling back up" and frequent discussion questioning the desirability of investing scarce resources primarily to allow additional long distance commutes.

Plan of Action

A plan of action for the Northway corridor is outlined below. The plan draws from the broader New Visions principles, vision, goals, strategies and actions. It also draws from the New Visions technical studies and from the responses to the New Visions Workbook questions.

The Northway actions are based on the following conclusions:

1. The Northway corridor is a critical corridor not only to the region but also to the state and the nation, serving vital interstate commerce and recreational traffic. It is the backbone of the Champlain-Hudson International Trade Corridor connecting New York city and the Eastern US with Montreal and Eastern Canada. CDTC commits to working collectively with NYSDOT and all affected parties to determine the most intelligent strategy to maintain adequate operation as part of the nation's Interstate system.

2. Major investment in extensive highway or transit solutions to serve commuter traffic is not warranted in the near term; demand management, incident management and bus transit services are more appropriate to near-term needs. Continued development and expansion of ITS approaches to corridor management are critical to extending the effective time period in which the current physical design of the Northway can function effectively.

3. A high level of success in the broad set of New Visions initiatives, including demand management, urban revitalization, developing more mixed use suburban communities, and incident management programs would have significant benefits on the Northway corridor. They will reduce the need for major investment over the long term.

4. In addition, there is much to be learned in the next few years from experiences with similar issues in other parts of the country. The impacts of the HOV lane on the Long Island Expressway, the High Occupancy/Toll facility in Orange County California, and freeway corridor rail investment in other places can be more intelligently assessed after a few years. The remarkable success of EZ-Pass technology on the New York State Thruway and related facilities raises the possibility of EZ-Pass helping in the effective management of existing or expanded capacity on the Northway. These various pricing strategies and electronic systems are rapidly maturing and will soon help set a long-range policy for the Northway.

5. However, NYSDOT's need for policy direction for near-term projects does not permit an indefinite delay in setting a long-term policy. Both the Airport access projects, such as the Exit 3 or Exit 4 improvements, and Northway bridge reconstruction are accommodating CDTC's existing policy stance on the Northway future.

In keeping with these conclusions, the Northway actions are:

Pursue Demand Management and Park-and-Ride Seriously

Congestion management principles call for full implementation of demand management prior to, or as part of, any major congestion-relieving investment. Strategies and actions listed elsewhere in the New Visions plan include continued development of park-and-ride lots in the Northway corridor, full implementation of employer-based demand management and continued support and development of transit service in the Northway corridor.

Events in recent years have not been especially encouraging in this area. Employer-based demand management is achieving only a small fraction of its potential and transit service in the corridor has witnessed ridership declines in response to State employment reductions / dispersals and necessary fare increases. Concentrated effort by all parties to capitalize on the potential of demand management and park-and-ride is essential.

Develop ITS Capabilities

The Northway corridor is serving as a pilot area for initial incident management programs in the Capital District, and as a core facility to the region's Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) program. Incident detection and response, traveler information and improvements to alternate routes (through scheduled actions such as construction of permanent overhead variable message signs and congestion mitigation on the Rexford Bridge and planned improvements such as remote signal operation of signals along US 9) will help address growing travel demand in coming years. It will also help define the maximum potential role for ITS strategies in addressing long-term needs in the corridor.

Examine Impacts of Actions in Similar Corridors Elsewhere

Many metropolitan areas are grappling with similar issues to those affecting the Northway. Some have pursued traditional highway widenings. Many (such as in the Long Island Expressway corridor) have opted for High Occupancy Vehicle lanes. A few have pursued rail construction. Variable tolling with HOV discounts is a new approach, with the CR 91 corridor in Orange County, California being a pioneer. The New York State Thruway Authority has analyzed congestion pricing and variable tolls to determine its merit for the Tappan Zee Bridge. CDTC will work with NYSDOT and others in coming years to assess the success of real-world actions in other parts of the country, before construction of any major improvement in the Capital District. From the experience of others, new insights and policy guidance for the Northway corridor may emerge in the next few years.

Complete an Analysis of Physical Implications of Corridor Alternatives

CDTC's 2000-01 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) budgets $100,000 in planning funds for a sketch analysis of the physical requirements of various long-range alternatives. Adding express or toll lanes to the Northway is expected to require a new Mohawk River structure; further information is needed on the land consumption and pavement and bridge requirements of new interchange connections, flyovers and the like. Similarly, any high-scale transit alternative within the Northway right-of-way can be expected to have significant land and access demands for ramps, stations and park-and-ride lots. The scheduled study will give CDTC a much clearer perspective on the physical requirements of a range of alternatives -- before any effort is made to examine their potential benefit in accommodating travel. This will allow CDTC to enter any Major Investment Study with "eyes widen open" regarding the scale of construction impacts of the "build" alternatives.

Conduct a Major Investment Study

The importance of the Northway corridor to the nation's Interstate System is recognized by CDTC, and working to assure its long-term effectiveness is a priority for CDTC. In order to assure its effectiveness, CDTC and NYSDOT will conduct a Major Investment Study (MIS) to thoroughly examine long-range alternatives. In order for NYSDOT to advance projects within the Northway corridor for construction over the next five to ten years, these projects are being designed so as not to preclude long-range construction options to address mainline congestion issues. By doing so, the Capital District avoids the danger of choosing a long-range alternative for the corridor prematurely.

Within the twenty-one year horizon of the New Visions plan, however, a definitive course of action must be selected -- even if the course is to add no physical capacity to the corridor. While CDTC is not currently advancing a Major Investment Study (MIS) for the corridor, the appropriate time to launch such an effort will be within the next five years. By 2005, most (if not all) airport area projects will have been completed; the Thruway Authority will have ten years of experience with EZ-Pass and electronic tolling will be pervasive throughout the toll systems of the Eastern US; state policy on critical capacity questions regarding the Tappan Zee bridge and Cross-Westchester Expressway will be set; the commuter rail demonstration will be complete and the maximum potential of ITS to manage Northway will be understood. In addition, CDTC's exploratory work in the New Visions 2030 effort regarding potential changes in travel behavior due to shifts in demographics and economic process will also be complete. At that time, a MIS effort with the objective of choosing a long-range strategy for the Northway will be timely and necessary.

Adopt and Implement Recommendations of the MIS, Including Financial Plans

Upon completion of the MIS, CDTC will adopt recommendations for action in the Northway corridor as an update to its New Visions Regional Transportation Plan. The actions will then be considered for inclusion in Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).

It is anticipated that any major investment in the corridor (widenings, HOV or toll lanes, rail transit) will constitute an action that goes beyond the cost of actions included in the New Vision plan budget. Consequently, the MIS and CDTC's adoption will include the financial plan for actions. Financial resources will be provided either through new fund sources (such as through a toll facility), adjusting the budget to make room for the actions (and thereby reducing the budget for other actions). A combination of the two approaches may be required.

Short-range: Initiate the examination of the physical requirements of alternatives within six months of plan adoption, and complete it within twelve months from initiation. Emphasize bus service, demand management and ITS actions to manage the corridor over the next ten years. Monitor urban freeway and electronic toll actions elsewhere. Undertake a MIS within five years to provide definitive guidance and a budget plan for appropriate long-range actions.

Transit

Description

At the time of the original New Visions plan adoption, CDTC asserted that public transit in the Capital District was at a crossroads. Overall transit use was declining due to changing demographics and suburbanization, while STAR system usage continues to increase. Communities look for increased levels of transit service in order to connect people with jobs, yet levels of continued governmental support were uncertain. For example, Congress cut levels of federal operating assistance to CDTA by 40% for 1996 yet the state budget restored a portion of this funding.

During the original New Visions effort, CDTC's task forces reaffirmed a belief that transit plays a vital role in the life of the metropolitan area. Transit provides travel options, assures essential mobility, contributes to congestion management and energy savings, and supports efficient land use patterns. A series of strategies recommended in the New Visions plan has been refined and pursued by CDTA. The actions have enhanced the effectiveness of transit in meeting these multiple objectives. The overall financial impact of the basic strategies has been modest and has been accomplished with a modest enhancement of public transit resources while obtaining modest operating efficiencies to allow a more significant service improvement. Great strides have been made by CDTA since the New Visions adoption to implement the plan's recommendations. Among them have been expansion of shuttle services, a redesign of core routes, creation of a human service agency brokerage, provision of an entirely low-floor full size bus fleet, pursuit of transit priority signal treatment and automatic vehicle location technology, and significant station and shelter improvements.

Beyond reaffirming transit's role in the region, the orginal New Visions effort also explored whether a rail transit service or other forms of "fixed guideway" transit investment would provide noticeably greater benefits to the region than bus-in-mixed-traffic transit can. Obviously, if financing for modest bus improvements constitutes a challenge financially then the benefits of an expensive transit initiative would need to be compelling before any financial commitment to such a major investment is possible.

Potential Opportunities

Regarding fixed guideway options, the Transit Futures Task Force worked with consultant assistance from Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc. to examine fixed guideway options for the Capital District. The examination concluded by listing four feasible fixed guideway applications:

1. light rail transit or busway service along NY 5 between downtown Albany and downtown Schenectady (as a land use strategy);

2. express Northway LRT or busway service (as a congestion mitigation strategy);

3. local LRT or automated guideway connector in the urban core (as an economic development strategy); and

4. commuter rail service using existing rail lines (as a congestion mitigation and older urban area reinvestment strategy).

Each serves a very different purpose from the others and shows the potential role of fixed guideway transit in the Capital District. These are depicted in Figure 1 and described more fully in the Fixed Guideway Transit Investigation Summary Report, Transit Futures Report and the New Visions Workbook.

Figure 1: Fixed Guideway Alternatives

The task force's examination of fixed guideway options included consideration of costs -- which would be quite substantial and go well beyond the New Visions plan's budget -- and benefits in a very comprehensive manner. The task force recognized that a lot of further study would be required if any of the options prior to making a commitment to implement a major transit investment of any kind.

Public Response in the Original New Visions Effort

The question of perceived value of the identified benefits, costs and risks of fixed guideway options was posed in the New Visions Workbook. Responses provided the following insight:

1. Of those responding, a large majority agreed that transit's benefits are sufficiently high that the Capital District should consider additional funding.

2. A similar number agreed that further investigation of fixed guideway options is warranted both in general and specifically for the Northway corridor.

3. Strong cautions were voiced by many about the cost, inflexibility and weak demand for rail transit in the region.

At the public meetings held in the four counties in January of 1996, more support for transit -- both improvements to existing bus service and support for more aggressive consideration of rail options - was heard.

Follow-up Public Response

More recently, media coverage of the upcoming commuter rail demonstration has generated largely positive support for pursuit of commuter rail. Similarly, public outreach in the NY 5 Land Use and Transportation Concepts Study has documented support for high-scale transit investment.

Additionally, in 2000, the New York State Association of MPOs authorized a survey of public opinion statewide regarding support for various transportation goals. In this survey, over 80% of the respondents in the Capital District's sample group reported that expanding bus or rail service is "important" or "very important".

This high level of interest confirms CDTC's and CDTC's members' actions to explore substantial transit investments.

Plan of Action

In keeping with the technical analysis, public response and the nature and budget for other actions, the plan of action for major investments in fixed guideway transit is as follows:

Continue to Pursue Near-Term Efforts to Maximize Transit's Effectiveness

The New Visions plan calls for significant realignment of the region's transit system to meet the demands of the 21st century. These include extensive demand management and employer involvement in transit services, carpooling, telecommuting and work schedule adjustments. They also include further use of private service delivery, more flexible labor rules and a revised mix of fixed route and feeder services. The actions also include "land-side" improvements to pedestrian connections, waiting areas and ITS-based traveler information systems.

These actions are being implemented by CDTA and others and must be continued, and success monitored, as a precursor to any major transit investment.

Monitor Technology Developments and Applications Elsewhere

Transit technology is changing rapidly. Self-propelled diesel commuter vehicles, some with a life-cycle per-seat cost similar to that for a bus, are available today that were not available during CDTC's Fixed Guideway Transit Investigation. Automated Guideway and Personal Rapid Transit (AGT, PRT) systems were set aside in CDTC's study because of cost. Yet, many new applications are being advanced worldwide. Even in CDTC's back yard, a firm is seeking resources to develop a low-cost AGT system. The experience from these may allow CDTC to reconsider this technology in the future.

CDTC will monitor the development of technology and the success of new services elsewhere for insight into Capital District applicability.

Conduct the Commuter Rail Demonstration Program

In the original New Visions plan, CDTC cited that, "should low-risk opportunities arise to test services such as commuter rail in the Capital District, CDTC will work with CDTA, NYSDOT and others to aggressively pursue them." Such an opportunity presented itself in 1998 with Congressman Solomon's efforts to secure federal funds in TEA-21 for a commuter rail demo. True to the New Visions plan, CDTC, CDTA, NYSDOT and others have worked aggressively to make this opportunity a reality. CDTA volunteered to serve as lead agency and has worked hard to sort out a service design with the railroads and affected communities. Additional funds are required to allow the demo to proceed, but CDTC and CDTA are hopeful that a meaningful "field test" of commuter rail will help refine CDTC's previous estimates of market potential and capital requirements for a potential permanent system.

Pursue the NY 5 Land Use and Transportation Concept

The transit actions listed in the New Visions plan include service redesign and redevelopment of CDTA's primary transit corridor -- NY 5 between downtown Albany and Schenectady. Actions include greater use of feeder services focussing on explicit transfer stations, pursuit of preferential signal treatment for buses, improved pedestrian connections and site design, and various ITS traveler information services along the corridor. This commits CDTA to implementing "best bus" service in this corridor.

Consideration of a more intensive transit investment in the corridor depends on the potential for more dense development in the corridor. In accordance with the original New Visions plan, CDTC has carried out the examination of land use options and development potential in the NY 5 corridor. The study has explored the interest in and feasibility of developing the NY 5 corridor in ways that generate transit development hubs and produce a sufficient market to warrant fixed guideway transit consideration in the corridor.

As the technical evaluation and public involvement played out in the corridor study, a "preferred future" clearly emerged. The preferred future combines new streetscapes, improved site design, mixed use developments, better pedestrian and bike accommodations, ITS and transit improvements. The evaluation and public reaction has led CDTC’s Study Advisory Committee to envision Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) as the appropriate high-end transit system in the corridor. BRT can actually produce a higher level of service and faster speeds than light rail can on this physically-constrained corridor. BRT in the NY5 corridor would include transit priority signal treatment, extensive real-time electronic schedule information, advanced-design shelters and stations (with consideration of off-line fare payment), use of articulated buses, creation of multiple transfer nodes with connecting shuttle service, and dedicated lanes where possible. The BRT system could possibly lead to an eventual LRT implementation, but the physical constraints in the corridor point more to eventual augmentation of BRT features including partial guided busway implementation and/or BRT expansion in other corridors.

The plan of action to implement the BRT improvements would be to see the BRT improvements as an integral component of the overall NY 5 corridor concept. Full implementation requires highway reconstruction and redesign over time along the 16-mile corridor to incorporate many of the concept's features. Certain features, such as utility undergrounding, boulevard construction in limited areas, and BRT lanes and stations can be implemented along with road reconstruction or could be advanced separately. The full implementation budget provides for the vast majority of the funds needed for implementation of the concept; supplemental funding would be necessary particularly for utility and boulevard pieces and to cover every segment of the corridor. Supplemental funding would also be required to speed up the implementation from the steady, incremental pace provided in both the steady-state and full implementation budgets.

The NY 5 Land Use and Transportation Concept financial plan summary is as follows:

1. Full Implementation Budget for Highway Rehabilitation, Reconstruction and Redesign -- share to NY 5 corridor: $75 M

2. Full Implementation Budget for Transit Infrastructure -- approximate NY 5 BRT share (2/3 of region's budget): $21 M

3. Full Implementation Budget for ITS Infrastructure -- NY 5 and BRT share (current TIP project plus portion of future investment): $15 M

4. Full Implementation Budget for Economic Development / Community Compatibility Projects -- approximate NY 5 share: $10 M

5. Other Resources Not Included in Full Implementation Budget -- needed for utility work, boulevard creation and completion of reconstruction and redesign of entire 16-mile length within 21 years: $82 M

Pursue the balance of a MIS for the NY 5 Corridor if Warranted

The Fixed Guideway Transit Investigation and the New Visions outreach covered many aspects of a Major Investment Study (MIS). In many ways, work performed to date can be considered phase one of a MIS. For the NY 5 corridor, the land use examination can be considered phase two.

In the original New Visions plan, CDTC indicated that "phase three" of a NY 5 corridor MIS would be carried out if the land use investigation (and success with other transit initiatives and experience elsewhere) indicated that a major transit investment in that corridor may be feasible. The MIS would have refined the examination of the full range of options (including the best bus), examine corollary highway impacts and environmental and community impacts more fully, and produce recommendations for action.

After conducting the NY 5 Land Use and Transportation Concept Study, CDTC believes that pursuit of BRT, highway redesign and site and access redesign is called for without a MIS. The physical challenges faced in trying to "shoe-horn" an LRT system onto the constrained NY 5 corridor has been sufficiently documented in the NY 5 concept study to avoid the need for a full-fledged MIS to choose between BRT and LRT.

The concept study also determined that management actions will be sufficient to accommodate vehicular traffic in the corridor at congestion levels about equivalent to today's. Public response to the NY 5 newsletter's question, "Would you be willing to accept traffic levels and congestion levels comparable to today's if we could improve transit, safety, pedestrian and bike accommodations and landscaping?" was overwhelmingly positive.

As a result, no MIS for the NY 5 corridor appears necessary.

Incorporate Major Transit Investment Considerations into the Northway Corridor Study

As noted in the discussion of major investments in the Northway corridor, transit options will be examined in the conduct of a Northway MIS. These options include commuter rail along existing rail lines, dedicated bus lanes, or light rail within the Northway right-of-way. These options include commuter rail along existing rail lines, dedicated bus lanes, or light rail within the Northway right-of-way.

Adopt and Pursue the Recommendations of the MIS

Upon completion of the Northway MIS, CDTC will adopt recommendations for action in the Northway corridor as a refinement to its New Visions Regional Transportation Plan. The actions will then be considered for inclusion in Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).

The MIS and CDTC's adoption will commit to a financial plan for actions. Financial resources will be provided either through new fund sources, adjusting the budget to make room for the actions (and thereby reducing the budget for other actions), or through a combination of the two approaches.