Adding Lanes to Expressways
I’m not a fan of tollways. Motorists are forced to pay twice—once at the tollbooth and a second time at the gas pump. And, maybe even a third time, since the Illinois Department of Transportation (not the Toll Highway Authority) gets federal aid for each mile of the tollway's Interstate highways.
In Illinois, tollways are used to suck money out of the six-county area to build freeways Downstate that cannot be justified on the basis of traffic count. (The general rule of thumb is that one needs 20,000 vehicles a day to justify a four-lane expressway. Some of the diverted money is spent on other Downstate highways.)
Chicago Tribune transportation columnist Jon Hilkevitch’s article entitled, “Wider I-55 is in talking (but not funding) stage,” however, pulled up a thought from my American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC, for short) days.
Serving as chairman of ALEC’s Transportation Task Force, I learned how the private sector is sometimes willing to finance public improvements. Locally, Peotone Airport comes to mind. There the private sector seems to have agreed to build the airport.
So, why not allow the private sector to add lanes to expressways?
For more information, go to McHenry County Blog.
12 comments:
Cal,
Downstaters aren't fans of tollways, either, and if you think we're flush with freeways, you need to get out of McHenry county more often.
To answer your question about private sector funding for expressways, just what makes you think ANY private business would be willing to pony up funds for public infrastructure, unless there was something in it for them to show their shareholders as increasing their value? Are you going to allow company employees first dibs on those lanes? How about off ramps that only lead to one particular business (is this the ramp to McDonalds)?
I don't disagree with your sentiment on tolls in general, but you need a reality check.
I'm not completely sold on Cal's idea, but I don't think it's as ridiculous as the first poster implied. Corporations “pony up” for public infrastructure all the time, without receiving any special or exclusive access to that infrastructure.
In reply to the first poster, I am quite familiar with Downstate roads, having campaign statewide by car for State Comptroller as a Republican in 1982 and for governor as a Libertarian in 2002.
I am also aware that Downstate has four-lane roads with less traffic than passes my house in the Crystal Lake suburb of Lakewood every day.
It was one of the people I met at ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) in the mid-1990's whom I specifically asked about adding toll lanes to I-55. He said his company would be interested.
Naturally, the investor would benefit, as most assuredly the California investor who gave Blagojevich's campaign $50,000 from his personal bank account will benefit from managing the tollway oases for years to come.
The California model seems to be that the state gets the road back after 30 years.
If I were drawing up the contract, I would made certain that the road was built to 40-year standards--as they regularly are in Europe--rather than the 20-year standard which IDOT uses...even on the Dan Ryan.
(Go figure. Wouldn't you think Chicago's Southside politicians would prefer to have the highway torn up every 40 years, rather than every 20 years?)
I'm all for private investment Cal, but wouldn't that require making I-55 a toll road?
A private investor needs a long term dedicated source of revenue and as we seen from the raids on the state road fund, there is no bankable revenue guarantee without tolls.
Private groups could even build 40 yr roads, but we'd pay for it. You only get what you pay for. And if the private capital is at risk, I guarantee you the road will be built to last, otherwise the bankers/investors won't fund it.
Finally, I'm for more toll roads, not less. Give people a choice, paying for well designed and efficient superhighways with super speeds, or using free local roads with local speeds.
Cal -
First of all, money that the tollway gets stays with the tollway. IDOT & the tollway are seperate entities. Downstate does not get any money from the tollway to build roads that are public (free) roads.
Secondly, the gouging at the gas pump occurs all at once. The FED MFT & the State MFT get collected at the cash register.
Third - Last I checked, the use of the tollroad is a personal decision. Nobody is forcing you to use it. There are alternate routes that you can use to avoid the tollway.
And Last - IDOT is moving to a 30 year design life for reconstructed interstates.
Just a few other tidbits - Over 1/2 of the IDOT road fund goes to District 1 which is Cook County and the 6 collar counties. The remaining 95 counties have to split the crumbs that are left.
I am pleased to read that IDOT is moving toward a 30-year design life.
Prior to Illinois FIRST's passage, 45% of the road money (I'm talking about money spent for state roads, not distribution of Motor Fuel Taxes to cities, counties and townships) went to Chicagoland's six counties.
After Illinois FIRST passed, the figure dropped to 43%, according to an analysis I had the Legislative Research Unit do.
Ir memory serves me correctly, 56% of the registered motor vehicles were from the six-county area. I believe the percentage of vehicle miles driven was about the same.
The fact remain that those using a tollway pay for that tollway through tolls. No Motor Fuel Tax collected when gasoline and diesel fuel is purchased comes back to the tollway.
A couple of studies in the 1990's put that figure somewhere more than $80 million per year. It may be a lot more now, considering the increase in traffic on the tollway.
At their toll tax hike hearings in 2002, tollway board members were asked if they had even asked for any of that MFT, which, it seems to me rightly should be spent where the fuel is consumed.
The reply was that the tollway had never asked for any MFT.
Does anyone dispute that the federal financial assistance that comes (or at least used to come) on the basis of the number of miles of Interstate highway goes entirely to IDOT to be spent as it desires? None is given the tollway, correct?
Hopes this adds to the discussion.
BTW... Will County already has to pay tolls on one of its new interstate extensions.
Why should they be forced to pay tolls for additional lanes that benefit a large part of the state economy? IDOT seems able to find plenty of money to widen I-55 in Bloomington. Should we compare the traffic?
Remember, no one is forcing you to drive on the tollway or to drive in general. These are personal choices that each driver makes. Before I get to far ahead, I think we need to consider the beauty of the Motor Fuel Tax (MFT) before we beat it up to badly. It is a pure "user fee", the less you drive the less fuel you consume and thus the less you contribute to both the federal and state MFTs. Now before someone gets started, I will readily agree that to participate in today's economy, one must have an automobile (there are some exceptions, such as living in Chicago and using CTA) and thus paying into the MFTs is an evil necessity. Do we want to go back to buggys? The roadway network has helped to drive our economy into what we have today. We are a very prosperous nation and we enjoy a very good lifestyle.
Now, as was pointed out earlier by Cal, more automobiles are in the 6-county area than the percentage of roadway funds spent in the same area. What was not considered are the expenditures into transit that come from both the state and federal MFT funds. Transit is not providing dollars into the MFT, but is drawing from it. Considering that CTA and Pace combined are larger than the remaining transit systems in Illinois combined, I think adding these 6-county transit expenditures would balance out the financial equation between downstate and metropolitan Chicago. I did not include Metra since last I heard they are making enough to fully fund their operations.
Lastly, IDOT spends a majority of their budget on maintaining the existing system and unfortunately, very little on expanding the roadway network. This is due to the priorities established long ago to take care of the existing roads first, expand second. Think of it as protecting the state's assets. Due to this, new interstates would be very difficult to be built if it wasn't for the tollway system. There simply isn't enough money.
I hope this clarifies some of the equity that is already in place and I am sure it will raise a few more issues/questions.
I did not include Metra since last I heard they are making enough to fully fund their operations.
Metra's farebox recovery is in the neighborhood of 55%. The other 45% comes from various sources such as the RTA sales tax in the 6 counties. They do get capital projects such as UP West and Southwest extension money from FTA, which is largely funded with a portion from federal gas tax.
A few comments:
New roads are easier to build in downstate IL, where farmland sells for $5000 an acre or less, most people are favorably disposed to highway projects, and labor and material costs are comparatively low.
OTOH, in the city and the suburbs, expensive land, well organized and financed NIMBY opposition, and higher labor and material costs are the prevailing conditions.
Money for highway expansion projects, like most things, often follows the path of least resistance.
To your question of adding "Lexus Lanes" to be built, tolled and maintained by franchise to a private bidder, to the other free lanes to be maintained by state forces:
It is a quicker way to add capacity to the system, that's for sure. And the free lanes lying next to the toll lanes would act as a check on the operator charging exhorbitant rates.
OTOH, the California Route 91 experience (probably the most prominent private toll lane/public free lane project implemented in the US to date) has been a mixed bag, that's for sure. It'd be interesting to see if IL users would pay a variable rate toll that could amount to $15 or more at peak travel times to use a less-congested toll lane vs. sitting in bumper to bumper traffic for free.
Mark my words, I-55 will be widened from I-80 to Weber Road and the project will break ground before election day. The money will be obtained by shaking down the budgets of state highway districts 2-9, who will force a smile as they hand over the money to district 1, even as the highways and bridges downstate suffer a little from the induced neglect.
It would seem that the new federal legislation that is allowing California to subsidize tollways could be used to put federal money into the I-355 extension.
Anyone know anything about that possibility?
Post a Comment