LOS ANGELES:CA-60 truck toll lanes 30% bondable

CA-60 in the studied segment carries between 12k and 27k/day heavy trucks (defined as 3 or more axles), these trucks constituting between 5% and 11% of daily vehicles. It is a major route between the port of Los Angeles and many trucking related destinations in the San Gabriel valley, which the segment traverses, and I-15 which is a route out of the LA metro area to the Rocky Mountains, the mid-west and the east coast.

The study used a heavy duty truck (HDT) model developed by the Southern Calif Assoc of Governments (SCAG), but the authors say they had problems with the software and that it produced anomalous results at times. Nevertheless they used the planning organization’s modeling. Its projects for 2020 truck volumes on the overall roadway section varying between 30k and 60k veh/day and between 12% and 21% of total traffic. Peak hour truck volumes currently vary between 1.2k and 2.2k/hr and are projected to grow to between 2.2k and 4k/hr. The peaks are heavily spread and tend to be between the AM and PM peaks of cars.

Capacity is defined as 800 trucks/lane/hr, so for the most part the additional 4 truck lanes are warranted. The modeling suggested roughly half the trucks would be attracted to the new truck toll lanes (TTL), the other half remaining in the freeway lanes. The freeway lanes have many more connections to the local streets, but the consulting team said it had “significant reservations about the validity of these projections,” (p5-9.) It proceeded with them nonetheless. Daily trucks in the TTL in 2020 are put at between 12k and 24k in different parts of the facility.

Present congestion is put at F2 and F3 for 2 to 3 hours with average speeds of 22 to 34mph in different segments. The only planned additions apart from the truck toll lanes are HOV and auxiliary lanes.

As costed, the at-grade segments of the TTL would have them barrier separated from the freeway lanes, and located on the outside. They would typically be 2x3.65m (12') lanes plus a 3m (10') shoulder on each side of the freeway. The freeway itself is assumed to be 2x5 and 2x6 lanes including a pair of HOV lanes the whole length. In the elevated section the TTLs would be on an 24.5m (80') deck on a T-section providing a 1.2m (4') offset from a central median barrier and 3m (10') breakdown shoulder for 4x3.65m (12') travel lanes. For the most part the elevated truckway would be above the center of the freeway set on approx 2.4m (8') square (This is earthquake country!) columns set in the freeway median. One and 2-lane ramps are examined. An overhead clearance of 5.8m (19') and maximum ramp grades of 5% are used but the study makes no provision for greater axle loads, lengths or widths of truck-consists than would be allowed than on the freeway.

The study used standard Caltrans cost data. Structure in the median is priced at $60m/lane-km ($97m/lane-mi.) More conventional construction varies between $1.6m/lane-km ($2.6m/lane-km) and $20m/lane-km ($32m/lane-mi). Additional overall cost including right-of-way for elevated over at-grade construction range between 27% and 110% over 8 sections of the roadway length. The recommended configuration involves two elevated sections I-710 to Vail St and I-605 to Fullerton Rd, that are about 30% of the length or 20km (12mi) total. The elevation adds some $400m to overall cost for the total $4.3b.

Toward the end of the study some urged locating the truck tollway over much of its length along the parallel San Jose Creek. This creek is one of Los Angeles’ many ugly concreted flood channels. With a right-of-way of 20m (70') to 30m (100') it is owned by the county of Los Angeles and mostly traverses commercial and industrial areas. The study said this was a feasible alternative to the freeway location and this proposal should be studied further.

The report says that truck toll lanes are favored by citizens. Studies of accident rates, however, have not demonstrated any safety benefits from segregation. But this has not been attempted anywhere on the scale proposed for CA-60. The report suggests that the use of public funds to support TTLs may well be justified, given public support plus a reduced need to build extra general purpose lanes.

A substantial operating surplus is expected on the TTLs with toll revenues starting at $60m and passing $100m in about 2015. Operating costs are put at just a few million a year. But the debt service on the project based on 6.2% interest is nearly four times the operating surplus, so the project would not work as a private initiative. The report suggests a committee be formed of Caltrans, the Calif Truck Assoc representing users, the local counties and cities and FHWA to decide where to take the project. That might form the basis for a joint powers agency to build and operate the facility.

The financial analysis was based on three classes of trucks with rates for the lighter 50% and 75% of the rate for 18-wheelers. Revenue peaked at flat rate tolls at 70c/mile for heavy trucks, but at this rate 70% stay in the free lanes. 50% are attracted at a toll rate of just under 40c/mile, but at this rate the revenues only support about $1.0b versus $1.16b at the 70c toll.

The report proposes a staging of the project, with the eastern portions (furthest from LA) the most urgent, apart from a short 5km (3mi) section I-710 to Vail. The first section to be done would be the most easterly I-125 to Vail, 9.4km (5.9mi) of elevated at a cost of $410m.

It suggests that further study be done of toll express lanes open to all vehicles and that these should be compared with the truck-only toll lanes. (p23) The study was led by Kaku Associates in association with Cambrudge Systematics, Texas Transp Inst, HDR Engineering, Myra Frank & Assoc, and Arellano Assoc. (Contact Naresh Amatya SCAG 213-236-1885 amatya@scag.ca.gov)

COMMENT: Truck toll lanes seem likely to generate substantial revenues in competition with free roads if they offer not only time savings but other productivity enhancements such as permitting use of larger consists including longer heavier doubles and triples and higher speed limits. Studies for the I-69 NAFTA corridor found that the benefits of higher design speed for trucks, gentler ramps and curves and heavier pavement and bridging for longer, heavier combination-vehicles greatly outweighed the costs.

The CA-60 study should have examined this, but was artificially limited to looking at time-savings alone. Various telematic technologies such as automatic lane keeping, in-vehicle signing, headway control and safe-stop-on-the-shoulder could be built into the TTLs and might add extra value to them. The modeling may need to be redone after the problems with the SCAG model are fixed.

Truccivia Italia Fantastica

The SCAG report devotes the best part of a page early on to an interesting “exclusive separate truck facility” in Italy on what it calls the Bologna-Firenze (Florence) Freeway. It says (p2-15) this is a separate roadway from the existing all-vehicles motorway that is reserved for heavy vehicles: “This exclusive facility which is a 53km (33-mi) section from Barberino del Mugello to Sasso Marconi was designed with features to reflect the characteristics of trucks and area terrain. The design features include: no sharp curves or undulations that limit sight distance; maximum grade of 2%; peak elevation of 490m, and extensive use of tunnels and bridges to traverse the mountainous terrain. 80% of the truck facility is tunnels and bridges with one tunnel that is 8km.”

Trouble is: it ain’t there. Don’t exist. Not even any plans for it. SCAG’s guys screwed up.

First up, there is no such thing as a freeway Bologna-Firenze through the Appennine mountains. The only high standard road Bologna-Firenze is the A1 toll road or autostrade operated by the investor-owned Autostrade Spa. (Freeways in Italy are confined to the immediate environs of Rome and to a few tax-subsidized southern roads.) Second, it is a regular mixed traffic toll motorway, and there is no separate truck facility whatever.

This is ascertained by a review of Autostrade’s annual report and a phone call to their PR dept in Rome (39 6 3906 4363).

They say there was indeed such a trucks-only roadway scheme Bolgna-Firenze proposed in the early 1980s, as described by the SCAG report, but it never got beyond the proposal stage. Too expensive and too controversial.

Autostrade is just now beginning the first major upgrade of the original 2x2-lane A1 pike Bologna-Firenze after many years of arguments and discussion. It consists of in essence, third-laning of the existing mountain motorway and some widened and new tunnels and bridges. (See report following.) But nothing exclusive for trucks.

SCAG’s report highlights the dangers of a “literature review.” Apparently their consultant dug up an old conference paper about the proposed truckway scheme, and assumed it had been implemented, when it hadn’t. Some basic training in journalim could spare these consultants this kind of embarrassment!