New York State Department of Transportation Capital Budget Hearing - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

New York State Department of Transportation

Capital Budget Hearing Transportation 20 Year Needs Assessment (2010 - 2030)

Preliminary Estimate of Multimodal Transportation Infrastructure Preservation & Improvement Needs Presentation by: Astrid C. Glynn, Commissioner

Transportation System’s Importance to New Yorkers

• The circulatory system for the state
• Prerequisite to job creation and economic

competitiveness

• Vital to quality of life, energy conservation, and

environmental protection

• Provides connectivity critical to all other

activities: health care, education, tourism and recreation

Transportation System Serves Important Policy Goals

• Supports New York’s economic growth
• Major role in land use planning
• Central to energy efficiency
• Provides security through readiness and

redundancy

• The foundation for the efficient movement
• f people and goods

A Time for Action

• A new program (2009-2014) under development
• Conditions are deteriorating
• Reversing current trends will take time - must start

now

• Costs to recover will only grow if we wait
• Opportunity provided by next Federal

transportation funding authorization (2009)

Federal Partnership is Essential

• National crisis requires Federal solution
• New Federal Surface Transportation Act is due in 2009
• Opportunity to redefine, revitalize and expand Federal

role

– Interstate system responsibilities – Bridges – Transit projects – Incentives for States that are transit friendly and energy efficient – Historical support should increase, not waver – Federal funding supports nearly half of our current program

• Needs analysis charts the path for Federal advocacy

State of the Transportation System

System Under Stress

• Structural imbalance: funds do not keep pace with

growing inflation and demand

• Aging infrastructure
• Declining conditions
• Increased use
• Inflation undermining buying power of current funding
• Core preservation limits ability to address expansion and

economic needs

• Current Federal and State funding inadequate to reverse

deterioration trends

• Progress of 1980’s and1990’s is over
• A national phenomenon

Impacts on the System

• Future safety
• Return to infrastructure crisis of 1970’s
• More deficient bridges and rough pavements
• Transit assets that fail to support service needs
• Unmet freight and passenger rail demands that

increase highway impacts

• Air service: capacity constraints downstate;

underserved communities upstate

Impacts on the State

• Failure to meet economic growth needs

statewide

• Loss of businesses, jobs, and productivity
• Brain drain
• Waste of scarce and expensive energy

resources

• Environmental degradation
• Quality of life

System Trends and Conditions

System Overview

• Bridges
• Pavement
• Congestion
• Transit
• Freight Rail & Port
• Intercity Passenger Systems
• Investment constraints
• Current Approach

State and Local Highway Bridge Condition Trends

Percent Deficient by Number of Bridges

25 30 35 40 45 50 55 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Data Source: Annual Official Bridge Condition Reports, April 2007 Official Bridge Data Prepared by: NYSDOT, Office of Policy & Performance

Percent Deficient by Number of Bridges

State Bridges Local Bridges

Number of NYS Highway Bridges by Age

Data Source: April 2007 Official Bridge Data Excludes closed bridges

161 425 398 2,030 1,170 2,024 2,893 2,432 1,521 2,190 236 1,821

500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 111 + 101-110 91-100 81-90 71-80 61-70 51-60 41-50 31-40 21-30 11-20 1-10

Age of Bridges (Years) Number of Highway Bridges

Deficient Bridge Wave 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

<3 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.7 3.9 4.1 4.3 4.5 4.7 4.9 5.1 5.3 5.5 5.7 5.9 6.1 6.3 6.5 6.7 6.9

New York State Rating Number of Bridges Local Bridges State Bridges

1450 bridges become deficient in next 5 years 1500 additional bridges become deficient in next 6-10 years

State Pavement Condition Trend

Percent Fair and Poor by Lane-Miles

25 30 35 40 45 50 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Data Source: Annual Pavement Condition Reports Prepared by NYSDOT, Office of Policy & Performance

Percent Fair and Poor by Lane-Miles

State Highway Paving Cycle 5 10 15 20 25 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Year Cycle in Years

GOAL: 12 YEARS

Annual Passenger Hours of Delay per Person

20 40 60 80 100 120 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Year

Annual Passenger Hours of Delay

Commercial Aviation Intercity Passenger Rail Upstate Ports

Interdependency

Motor Freight/ Trucking Local Transit General Aviation Commuter Rail Freight Rail

Transit

• Integral part of a balanced transportation system
• Support for transit helps preserve and enhance:

– Personal mobility – Economic sustainability – Mitigation of traffic congestion/enhanced efficiency of highway network – Energy independence and improved air quality – Emergency preparedness

• System performance depends on mix of investment

decisions by the federal, state and local governments and the private sector

• Strong role of the Federal government and favorable

Federal transportation policies in future authorization bill are critical to meeting needs

• Energy Independence and Improved Air Quality

– As a result of the State’s extensive support for public transportation, New York uses the least energy per capita for transportation purposes (2/3 national average) – For every passenger mile traveled, transit is twice as energy efficient as private automobiles – Transit reduces fuel consumption in the New York by 1.3 billion gallons annually – Transit in NY keeps the following pollutants out of the air-and our lungs-each year:

• 94 million lbs. of carbon monoxide
• 14 million lbs. of hydrocarbons and
• 1.5 million lbs. of soot and particulate matter

Transit

Have exceeded useful life

Transit Systems other than the MTA 2007 Fleet Profile 50 100 150 200 250 300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Age of Vehicles

(Based on Federal Standard of 12-Years)

Number of Buses

Will exceed useful life in next 5 years

Freight Rail & Port System Conditions

• Private rail investment not keeping pace with demand
• Investment levels not keeping pace w / demand
• Projected 50% to 100% growth in freight rail demand
• ver next 30 years
• Smaller railroads lack infrastructure to handle today’s

heavier rail cars and growth in freight volumes

• Industries need access to the rail network through

sidings, yards, & transload facilities

• Upstate ports lack ability to handle larger ships, heavier

loads & new commodities

Trends in Rail Traffic

• Rail ton-miles continue to grow while the rail network

continues to shrink

To Rutland To Boston To Toronto To Chicago Penn Station To Rutland

Empire Corridor

— Stations  Amtrak Owned — Proposed Stations

Adirondack 403(b) Corridor

— Stations

Corridor Extensions

Buffalo - Exchange Poughkeepsie Syracuse Albany - Rensselaer Schenectady Plattsburgh Saratoga Rochester To Montreal Niagara Falls Hudson Rhinecliff Lyons Dunkirk Rome Utica Buffalo - Depew

ETHAN ALLEN LAKE SHORE LIMITED LAKE SHORE LIMITED (Extension to Boston) NORTHEAST CORRIDOR (Boston-NYC-Washington)

Ridership FY 2006 Empire: 1,216,400 Adirondack: 94,021 Lake Shore: 148,800 Total 1,459,221 Freight Use – Trains Daily Buffalo to Albany: 60-70 Metro Area NYC to Albany: 6-10 Adirondack: 8

New York Shared Rail Corridors – Freight and Passenger

Intercity Passenger Systems - Rail

• Significant track and equipment upgrades

needed to support growing intercity passenger rail demand

• On time performance is low
• Infrequent and unreliable service
• Lacks predictable dedicated federal funding
• Federal authorization of Amtrak overdue

Passenger Rail System Conditions

Amtrak OTP 2002-2007

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0%

FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07

Year % Trains On Time

Adirondack Empire Ethan Allen Lake Shore Limited Mapleleaf

Intercity Passenger Systems- Aviation

• Major upstate airports lack Federal aid for

terminals and hangers

• Nine upstate commercial airports with minimal

service

• Serious congestion downstate (JFK and

LaGuardia)

• Stewart may provide opportunity to support

growth

• Congestion in NY has major impact on national

air system

O ntari o Pe nnsylvania Vermo n t New Je r se y N Ma ssachuse tts C

• nne

cti cut LAKE ONT AR IO LAKE ERIE AT LANT IC OC EAN L

• n

g I s l a n d S

• u

n d

Suffolk Essex Erie Lewis

• St. Lawrence

Wayne Franklin Jefferson Hamilton Ulster Steuben Monroe Oswego Oneida Herkimer Clinton Delaware Otsego Niagara Warren Sullivan Chautauqua Allegany Cayuga Orange Cattaraugus Orleans Saratoga Broome Dutchess Tioga Greene Chenango Ontario Fulton Onondaga Madison Albany Washington Yates Columbia Wyoming Schoharie Livingston Rensselaer Nassau Genesee Cortland Seneca Tompkins Chemung Westchester Schuyler Montgomery Putnam Queens Rockland Schenectady Bronx New York

La Guardia Watertown Int'l Ogdensburg Int'l Plattsburgh Int'l Westchester County Adirondack Regional Albany International Stewart International Syracuse Hancock Int'l Chautauqua Co/Jamestown Elmira/Corning Greater Rochester Int'l Ithaca-Tompkins Buffalo-Niagara International Binghamton Regional Massena Int'l L I Mac Arthur John F Kennedy Int'l

Richmond

New York State Commercial Airports

Federally Subsidized Scheduled Service

Jamestown Massena Ogdensburg Plattsburgh Saranac Lake Watertown

Reduced Scheduled Service

Binghamton Elmira-Corning Ithaca-Tompkins

Commercial Airports – Scheduled Service

Buffalo-Niagara Rochester Syracuse Albany Newburgh(Stewart) Westchester NYC(JFK/LGA) Long Island

Source: US DOT

Downstate Airport Congestion JFK On-Time Flights in June, 2003 - 2007

20 40 60 80 100 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Year Percent on Time Arrival Departure

Source: US DOT

Current Investment Constraints

• Federal aid structural deficit and end point
• Failure of 2000 Bond Act
• Transit operators have deferred capital needs
• Rail network has downsized for profitability

leaving little or no excess capacity - lack of Federal investment

• Inflation is reducing buying power

Finance Plan Construction Dollars Lost to Inflation 2005-2010

$1.8 $1.6 $1.5 $1.5 $1.5 $0.3 $0.5 $0.6 $0.8 $- $0.5 $1.0 $1.5 $2.0 $2.5 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010

in billions On & Off System $$ Lost to Inflation

Original Value of Lettings $10.2 billion Dollars Lost -2.2 billion (22% LOST) Construction - After Inflation $8.0 billion

Based on FHWA BPI Average Growth (2002 to 2006)

$1.8 $1.9 $2.0 $2.1 $2.3

Current Approach

• Focused on:

– Safety first – Demand maintenance – Restoration of most critical facilities

• Approach often precludes:

– Cost-effective preventive maintenance – More long-lasting comprehensive treatments – Ability to focus resources on important economic, energy-saving, or community enhancing projects – Timely funding of projects on secondary facilities

New Policies and Strategies

To Improve the State of the Transportation System

A New Policy Framework

• Build a transportation system that supports New

York’s economic competitiveness

• Invest in strategies that create value and are

most cost-effective over the long run

• Ensure that land use is a factor in transportation

planning

• Improve the energy efficiency of our

transportation system

• Create a balanced network that provides both

redundancy and choice for the efficient movement of people and goods

A New Strategy

• Reverse current condition trends
• Identify realistic and measurable goals for each

system

• Make choices consistent with policies
• Assure value through timely project delivery
• Attain adequate, predictable, and reliable

investment levels for all modes

• Ensure long-term system safety and security
• Preserve and expand existing systems through

balanced investments in maintenance, capital, and operations

Investment Needs Analysis

A Multimodal View

Methodology

• Assess existing infrastructure condition
• Assess transportation needs
• All major transportation modes
• Include illustrative major projects
• Assessment period 2010 – 2030
• Presented in 2007 dollars

Principles for Investment

• Balanced approach – modes & facilities
• Targeted growth to spur economy

– City by City strategy – Major projects

• Preservation of assets and services

– Includes normal replacement costs – Overcomes the current backlog of past deferred maintenance – Pavements and bridges includes operations funding to maintain system at an acceptable level – Public transit (exclusive of the MTA) includes capital only – Freight rail, water port, and aviation includes capital only – Passenger rail includes current Amtrak subsidies

Bridge Investment Goals

• State and local highway bridges

– Excludes authority bridges

• Investment principles

– Eliminate critically deficient bridges – Return to the conditions that we achieved after the investment programs of the 1980’s and early 1990’s – Increase preventative maintenance – Improve project delivery methods – Make targeted enhancements

• 20 year investment needs

– State bridges: $17.4 billion – Local bridges: $13.2 billion

State Highway Bridge Condition Forecast

20 25 30 35 40 45 50 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 2019 2024 2029 Year Percent Deficient by Number of Bridges Historical Trend Investment Level Current Program

Local Highway Bridge Condition Forecast

25 30 35 40 45 50 55 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 2019 2024 2029 Year Percent Deficient by Number of Bridges Historical Trend Investment Level Current Program

Pavement Investment Goals

• State highway pavements

– Excludes Thruway and most local roads

• Investment Principles

– Reverse trend in deficient pavement – Return to the conditions that we achieved after the investment programs of the 1980’s and early 1990’s – Maintain overall higher condition level on high volume roads, NHS, and trade corridors – Restore 12 year paving cycle – Approach the Federal goal for pavement smoothness

• 20 year investment needs

– State pavements: $40.0 billion – Selected local roads: $3.9 billion

State Pavement Condition Forecast

Approach Federal Ride Quality Goal 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 2019 2024 2029 Year Percent Fair and Poor by Lane-Miles Historical Trend Investment Level Current Program

Other Highway Assets Investment Goals

• Drainage and culverts
• Traffic control devices
• Guide rail
• Pedestrian
• Bicycle
• ADA compliance
• Rest areas
• Fleet and facilities
• Petroleum bulk storage
• 20 year investment needs: $21.6 billion

Transit Investment Goals

• Systems other than the MTA

– Excludes MTA, NYCT Bus and Subway, and MTA Commuter Railroads

• Investment principles

– Replace buses at Federally rated useful life – Return support facilities/major facility components (doors, lifts, HVAC, roofs) to a state-of-good-repair – Maintain/modernize transit-related equipment (shelters, communication and fare collection systems and ITS) – Achieve clean-fuel and emissions standards – Expand fleet to accommodate increased ridership

• 20 year investment needs

– Transit Buses/Facilities/Equipment - $6.5 billion

Transit

Transit Fleet Condition Forecast (Average Age)*

5 6 7 8 9 10 1996 2001 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 Years Average Fleet Age (years)

Historical Trend Investment Level Current Program

*12-Year Federally-Rated Life Cycle

Freight Rail, Passenger Rail and Port Goals

• Freight and Passenger Facilities

– Includes current Amtrak operating subsidies – Includes freight needs on privately and MTA owned rights of way – Excludes PANYNJ and private ports

• Investment Principles:

– Maintain state-of-good-repair for safe and reliable operations – Meet capacity needs for projected growth in freight – Accommodate changes in rail car size and weight – Provide environmental and fuel savings benefits – Reduce highway congestion and maintenance needs – Improve on time performance for Amtrak and increase ridership – Provides economic development opportunities

• 20 year investment need: $5.2 billion

Aviation Investment Goals

• Commercial and general aviation airports only

(excludes PANYNJ airports)

• Based on FAA approved plans
• Preservation of airport assets

–Runways and navigational equipment –Terminals and hangars

• Facility enhancements

–Safety and security –Service improvements

• 20 year investment needs: $4.3 billion

Local Capital Aid Investment Goals

• Capital grant programs for localities
• Investment Principles

– Local bridge status is well known – State performs bridge inspections – Needs for local bridges are aligned with strategies for State-

• wned bridges and included in our bridge needs assessment

– Partnership needed with MPOs and local governments to fully assess highway needs – Traditional aid programs are important and these investment levels have been incorporated into our assessment

• CHIPS
• Marchiselli
• Special investment programs
• 20 Year Investment Needs: $8.6 billion

Illustrative Major Projects

• Tappan Zee Bridge / I-287 Corridor
• Gowanus (I-278)
• Northern Tier Expressway
• Intercity Passenger Rail
• Completion of I-86 Corridor
• Completion of Route 219 Corridor
• Kosciuszko Bridge (I-278)
• Peace Bridge
• 20 year needs: $50.0 billion (estimate)

20 Year Transportation Capital Needs

(2007 $ in billions)

Asset Class / Program Area Investment Level

State Highway Bridges 17.4 $ Local Highway Bridges 13.2 $ State Pavements 40.0 $ Selected Local Pavements 3.9 $ Traffic & Safety 1.2 $ Mobility 2.7 $ Pedestrian / Bicycle / ADA 2.0 $ Drainage / ITS / Guide Rail / Rest Areas / Fleet & Facilities 15.7 $ Public Transit Capital 6.5 $ Freight Rail, Passenger Rail, and Ports 5.2 $ Aviation 4.3 $ Local Capital Aid 8.6 $ NYSDOT Other * 4.5 $ NYSDOT Capital Program Subtotal 125.2 $ Illustrative Major Projects 50.0 $ 20 Year Total 175.2 $

* NYSDOT Other includes Capital Program Management, Bridge Inspection, Emergency Repairs, and Miscellaneous

Conclusions/Summary

Investment Results

• Provides sustainable investment levels to

preserve system

• Avoids higher costs for deferred treatment
• Continued safety of the system
• Opportunities to be more energy efficient
• System conditions will improve
• Multimodal system for the 21st Century
• Preserves and enhances New York’s economic

competitiveness

Thank You

Astrid C. Glynn, Commissioner