i
York Toll Plaza Upgrade Options
A Realistic Approach
All Electronic Tolling Footprint at Mile Marker 6.7
Highway 407 ETR®, Toronto, Ontario
Prepared
by
The eTrans Group, Inc.
for
The Town of York, Maine
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
i
Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 1
1.0
Introduction ............................................................................................................. 3
2.0
Alternative Toll Collection Strategies ......................................................................... 4
3.0
AET is Practicable at the York Toll Plaza ................................................................... 7
3.1
Recognizing AET Success Elsewhere ........................................................................ 7
3.2
Though Dismissed in Phase I - MTA has Already Adopted AET .................................. 9
3.3
AET and ORT Have the Same Operational Challenges .............................................. 10
3.4
Revenue Loss (Leakage) Estimates .......................................................................... 13
3.5
AET’s Concept of Operations -- How AET Really Works .......................................... 16
4.0
Alternative Evaluations .......................................................................................... 18
4.1
Engineering Design Guidelines ............................................................................... 18
4.2
Basic Purpose ........................................................................................................ 19
4.3
Safety and Other Traffic Concerns ........................................................................... 20
4.4
Environmental Impacts ........................................................................................... 24
5.0
Issues Critical to the USACE Review Process ........................................................... 27
Sources ........................................................................................................................... 29
Attachment 1 ................................................................................................................... 32
Attachment 2 ................................................................................................................... 39
Attachment 3 ................................................................................................................... 47
CONTROL SHEET ......................................................................................................... 48
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
ii
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
1
Executive Summary
All electronic tolling (AET) is the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable
Alternative (LEDPA) for the York Toll Plaza upgrade and must be considered
during Phase II evaluations. The minimal footprint required for an AET
solution just south of the existing toll plaza is demonstrated in Figure ES-1.
Figure ES-1
Possible Footprint for All Electronic Tolling
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
2
Even though AET is anticipated to have fewer environmental impacts, the
Maine Turnpike Authority (MTA) submitted a Draft Phase I report for review
by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE or Corps) on March 17, 2010
that recommended the following shortlist of alternatives be considered for
more detailed evaluation in Phase 2 of the Corps’ Highway Methodology
Evaluation Process:
Option 1:
Option 2:
Option 3:
Option 4:
Do Nothing
Open Road Tolling (ORT) and cash toll collection at
Mile Marker 7.3 (aka Option 4A)
ORT and cash toll collection at Mile Marker 8.7, and
ORT and cash toll collection at Mile Marker 9.1.
Table ES-1
Anticipated Environmental Impacts of Practicable Options
Option
Estimated Impacts \
NRCS Wetland (Ac)
Stream (ft)
FEMA Flood Plain (Ac)
Home Displacements
Right-of-Way
Meets Eng & Safety Rqts
Satisfies Purpose & Need
Est’d Construction $
Level of Acceptability:
2/
MM 7.3
28
729
4.3
0
8.1
No
No
$ 56 m
Best
3/
MM 8.7
1.7
939
0.5
0
7.0
Some
Yes
$ 34 m
Neutral
4/
MM 9.1
3.8
1582
0.1
0
7.
Some
Yes
$ 35 m
AET /
MM 6.7
0
0
0
0
0
Yes
Yes
$ 6.9 m
Worst
Sources: Options 2, 3 & 4, Source 7, page 3 and Source 23, Table 4.1; AET
Option, The eTrans Group, Inc., except price, Source 23, Appendix E, pg 11.
Except for the cash toll option in ORT, AET and ORT require the same
roadside technology and, if managed properly, the same back-office
functions to collect tolls in the high speed lanes. The relative success of
each alternative is a function of how well the back-office is managed.
Therefore, AET is the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable
Alternative.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
3
1.0
Introduction
The York Toll Plaza, the southernmost toll plaza on the Maine Turnpike,
collects over $34 million in revenue each year, nearly 39% of all revenue
collected by the Maine Turnpike Authority, from about 16 million vehicles,
and slightly over 50% of these vehicles are from out-of-state. Built in 1969
and well beyond its planned useful life, this toll plaza poses a safety risk for
motorists and employees of the MTA. (Source 7, page 1)
On March 17, 2010, the MTA submitted: “Maine Turnpike Southern Toll Plaza
Replacement Study, Draft – Phase I Report”, HNTB Corporation, November
5, 2009, (22) to the Corps. (Sources 7, 23) This work includes an
assessment of alternative tolling strategies, an existing site evaluation
(ESE), alternative site evaluations (ASE), and a comparative screening
analysis and results in a recommended shortlist of alternatives to be
considered for more detailed evaluation in Phase 2 of the Corps’ Highway
Methodology Evaluation Process.
Option 1:
Option 2:
Option 3:
Option 4:
Do Nothing
Open Road Tolling (ORT) and cash toll collection at
Mile Marker 7.3 (immediately north of the existing
toll plaza) (aka Option 4A)
ORT and cash toll collection at Mile Marker 8.7, and
ORT and cash toll collection at Mile Marker 9.1.
(Source 23)
However, all electronic tolling is a viable option at the York Toll Plaza; and,
when compared to the options above, AET is the Least Environmentally
Damaging Practicable Alternative. This document demonstrates that AET is
the LEDPA and should be considered during Phase II evaluation.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
4
2.0
Alternative Toll Collection Strategies
Mechanization was first introduced to the toll collection process with
automatic coin machines (ACMs) several decades ago. Though ACMs
eliminated the need for a toll collector in the lane motorists still had to stop
and pay their toll by putting coins into the ACM. Electronic toll collection
(ETC) eliminated the need for motorists to actually stop and pay at the
plaza. First deployed in North America on the Coronado Bridge in San
Diego, CA in 1983, ETC allowed motorists to pay their toll through a radiofrequency communications link as they ‘rolled through’ the toll plaza.
ETC provided a much higher level of service to motorists and, by reducing
the revenue collected in cash toll operations, reduced revenue losses
(leakage) at the plaza. Therefore, it was an instant success and by the early
1990's several toll authorities in North America had successfully
implemented ETC with at least one, the Oklahoma Turnpike, offering ETC
service to its patrons in free-flow by-pass lanes adjacent to a toll plaza
offering a cash toll option. This mode of ETC operations was also quickly
adopted by many authorities and by the mid 1990’s ETC service was being
offered in a free-flow, open road environment, without any toll booths or toll
collectors, on both the SR-91 Express Lanes in Orange County, CA and the
Highway 407 Express Toll Route® (H407 ETR®) in Toronto, Ontario.
As ETC operations developed from ‘roll through’ in the toll plaza, to free-flow
by-pass lanes with an adjacent toll plaza offering a cash toll option, to
collecting tolls in a free-flow, open road environment without any toll booths
or toll collectors, the toll industry struggled with (and continues to struggle
with) the most appropriate terminology to reference each mode of operation.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
5
Table 1
ETC Operating Modes
Mode
ETC Operations
Terminology /
First Installed
Roll
Thru (1)
ETC /
Toll
Plaza
with
By-Pass
Lanes
(2)
High Speed
Tolling (HST),
Open Road
Tolling (ORT) /
No Toll
Plaza
No Toll
Booths
(3)
Circa 1983
Circa 1991
Cashless Tolling,
Free Flow Tolling,
All Electronic
Tolling (AET) /
Circa 1995
1) Roll Thru, Caguas Norte, Puerto Rico Highways and Transportation
Authority, San Juan, Puerto Rico. First Roll Thru ETC installation to
collect revenue in North America was on the San Diego Coronado
Bridge in 1983. Tolls were removed from this operation in 2002.
2) By-Pass Lanes, Oklahoma Turnpike Authority, photo courtesy of
TollRoadsNews.com; and,
3) No Toll Plaza or Booths, SR-91 Express Lanes ®, Orange County, CA.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
6
Therefore, in addition to ETC, a number of other terms have been used to
describe the collection of tolls in an automated manner via ETC. What
seems to now be conventional use of these terms is presented in Table 1.
Note that all references that refer to ETC operations in by-pass lanes or
tolling without a toll plaza or toll booths:

High speed Tolling (HST)

Open Road Tolling (ORT)

Cashless Tolling

Free Flow Tolling, and

All Electronic Tolling (AET)
toll vehicles at prevailing speeds in an open road environment. Therefore,
all of these modes of toll operations are faced with collecting tolls from
vehicles without tags that are not participating in the ETC program.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
7
3.0
AET is Practicable at the York Toll Plaza
3.1
Recognizing AET Success Elsewhere
It is important to note that all three modes of ETC operation, including AET,
have been implemented successfully on several facilities since the mid ‘90s.
However, in a discussion on the H407ETR® in Toronto, the supporting
documentation for dismissing AET at the York Toll Plaza in this Phase I
submittal states:
"Even in the instance of the facility being a high commuter
roadway with high ETC tag penetration the system can fail."
(Source 23, Appendix E, All Electronic Tolling Report, p 4.)
And later in the same discussion on the H407 ETR®:
"Currently, there is a significant issue regarding toll collection
of non toll tag users such that there is a severe revenue
shortfall." (Source 23, Appendix E, All Electronic Tolling
Report, p 5.)
Granted, most toll facilities, including the MTA, have experienced some
decline in revenue recently due to the soft economy. However, to infer that
the AET system collecting tolls on the H407ET® has “failed” or that it is the
cause of “a severe revenue shortfall” is inappropriate.
The H407 ETR® has been successfully collecting tolls via its’ AET system
(cover) since 1997, is recognized as one of the most successful toll roads in
the world, and has won several prestigious international awards. The
number of AET ETC programs successfully operating or currently being
implemented in the U.S. is now in the dozens. Toll facilities in the U.S. that
have already successfully implemented AET include:
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
8

SR-91 Express Lanes, Orange County CA

I-15 HOT Lanes, San Diego County, CA

Westpark Tollway, Houston, TX

I-394MnPass, Minneapolis, MN

I-95 Lanes Miami, Florida

I-25 Express Lanes, Denver, CO

E-470 Tollway, Denver, CO

Northwest Parkway, Denver, CO

183A Toll Road, Austin, TX

Sam Rayburn Tollway, Dallas, TX

President George Bush Turnpike, Dallas, TX

SR-167 Lanes, Seattle, WA

Lee Roy Selmon Cross Town Expressway, Hillsborough County, FL

MN/I-35W, Minneapolis, MN; and,

Loop 49, Tyler TX.
AET conversions are also well underway at many more facilities, including
the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority (5 expressways in total), the North
Texas Turnpike Authority in Dallas is implementing AET on its 3 expressways
that do not already have it, and Florida Department of Transportation
(FDOT) is currently converting its extensive toll road network to AET.
Maryland also has an AET conversion underway at the Inter County
Connector and the Triangle Expressway under construction in Raleigh will be
AET, as will several more toll facilities in the planning stage in North
Carolina. The UT/I-15 Express Lanes in Salt Lake, and the MD/I-95 north of
the Baltimore Harbor tunnels. (Source 20)
All of the High Occupancy/Toll (HOT) lanes that have been implemented
throughout the country are already successfully tolling with AET, as will the
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
9
ones currently being built. (Sources 14 & 20) A summary of these facilities
and the status of their AET operations is presented as Attachment 1.
Observation 1: AET has already been successfully adopted by many
toll authorities in the U.S. and many other authorities are currently
in the process of upgrading their existing roll-thru ETC and ORT
systems to AET. Many of these authorities, such as those in Florida,
Colorado, Texas, California, Minnesota and Washington state, also
experience a significant volume of tourist and other out-of-state
travel like that experienced on the Maine Turnpike.
3.2
Though Dismissed in Phase I - MTA has Already Adopted AET
The MTA has supported the concept of HST and ORT for at least 5 years.
(Sources 32 and 34) During this evaluation period the MTA also researched
various tolling strategies with the goal of identifying a more efficient and
safer means of tolling for the MTA at this location; and, in July 2006 the MTA
reconfirmed that the tolling technology that best serves the MTA at the York
Toll Plaza is Open Road Tolling (ORT) (Source 22, page 4, Source 20, slide
20)
The reasons cited for this recommendation for ORT are:
1. “E-ZPass® Customers pay tolls at 55-65mph –less congestion
–increased capacity –better service
2. Cash customers are physically separated from highway speed
customers –increased safety
3. Addresses Existing and Future Traffic Demand –increased
capacity –customer service -safety
4. 58% of traffic use E-ZPass at York Plaza
5. Over 80% of York Truck Traffic use E-ZPass
6. Reduced Noise Events
A. Engine brakes and heavy acceleration
B. Rumble strips
C. Similar amount of noise as mainline today”
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
10
(Source 21, slide 21)
Observation 2: The MTA has adopted ORT (also known as HST).
Therefore, MTA has already accepted responsibility for collecting a
toll from those vehicles (licensed both in and out-of-state) that are
not enrolled in the ETC program and drive through the ORT lanes.
Observation 3: Adoption of ORT allows MTA to offer a cash toll
option via an adjacent toll plaza. However, once ORT is offered the
MTA has to also establish the same back-office functions necessary
to collect tolls from those not enrolled in the ETC program that are
required to support AET.
3.3
AET and ORT Have the Same Operational Challenges
In submitting the Phase I report to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on
March 17, 2010 the MTA notes in the cover letter that:
“The MTA considered all-electronic tolling, but determined that
such a system would pose significant financial risks due to its
reliance on interstate and international billing and enforcement
protocols and compacts that do not exists (sic) today and are
uncertain to be established effectively in the future. This reality
makes all-electronic tolling extremely risky for the MTA, which
collects more than half of its annual revenue from out-of-state
and out-of-country vehicles. The MTA was also concerned about
other issues as well, including the necessity under an allelectronic tolling system to charge both in-state and out-of-state
and out-of-state customers with administrative fees, that could
exceed the cost of the toll itself, to pay the cost of processing
and mailing bills to millions of video toll customers each year.
An analysis of the feasibility of all-electronic tolling at Maine
Turnpike’s southern toll plaza is provided in Appendix E of the
Phase I report.” (Source 7, page 2)
Observation 4: The risks from implementing AET are no greater than
the risks from implementing ORT, unless
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
11
a) one assumes that providing the cash toll option in an
adjacent toll plaza is going to somehow make those
who would evade the toll suddenly choose to do the
right thing; and,
b) all of those that drive through the open lanes without a
tag are treated as violators – which would likely result
in an interesting and very expensive public relations
issue.
Observation 5: The MTA is not subject to “reliance on interstate and
international billing and enforcement protocols”.
Interstate and international billing and enforcement protocols can be preempted in many cases if the authority is pro-active and offers motorists not
enrolled in the ETC program another user-friendly option to pay their toll.
1. The MTA could deploy (and should under ORT operations) one or
more of the many user-friendly programs successfully
implemented by authorities that allow motorists to voluntarily
pay their toll (usually with a nominal service fee) via telephone,
the internet or at a conveniently located kiosk (such as at the
southernmost service plaza on the Pike). These kiosks can be
manned or automated and payments can be made anonymously.
2. There are at least 2 commercial services in the U.S. that enroll
motorists and their vehicle license plates and warrant tolls for
those vehicles enrolled in their programs to authorities that
establish a formal agreement with them. In fact, as of April 20,
2010:
o the MTA appears to be already enrolled in the PlatePass®
program through the Inter-agency Group (IAG); and.
o Rent-A-Toll™ had the following testimonial on the front
page of their web site on April 20, 2010:
"Rent A Toll has the most flexible solution in the marketplace to
address this pressing issue within the toll industry" Rick
Herrington, National Director of Technology Services, HNTB.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
12
The MTA should, therefore, be aware of these programs,
especially since they are also appropriate and a necessary
part of a successful ORT program.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
13
In those situations where the MTA finds itself in a position where it
needs to notice a motorist through the mail for outstanding tolls and
fees (which will happen with both AET and ORT toll options) there are
several ways to gather the information necessary to do this, such as
contacting the jurisdiction’s DMV (or its equivalent) or commercial
services that provide this information. In addition, should enforcement
be required other authorities with similar challenges have developed a
number of innovative enforcement programs within their purview that
have been very successful.
3.4
Revenue Loss (Leakage) Estimates
Appendix E of the Phase I report (Source 23) estimated annual revenue
‘leakage’ (losses) for different modes of toll operations at the York Toll
Plaza:
Table 2
MTA’s Estimates of Annual Revenue Leakage
Mode of
Toll Ops
York Toll
Plaza Today
ORT &
Cash
AET
Optimistic
AET
Pessimistic
Estimated Annual
Revenue Leakage (1)
% of Total
Revenue
$ 560,000
1.6%
$ 850,000
2.5%
$ 1,500,000
4.4%
$ 17,100,000
50.3%
1) Leakage is a term used for toll revenue losses.
(Source 23, Appendix E, “Comparison of York Plaza Total Revenue
Leakage under Each Scenario,” page 19)
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
14
Observation 6: Many out-of-state vehicles are already enrolled in
the E-ZPass® program and would be expected to continue to reliably
pay their toll automatically through the E-ZPass® system as they do
today.
Given:

The York Toll Plaza collects over $34 million in revenue each year
(Source 7, page 1)

58% of all traffic using the York toll plaza was already enrolled in
the E-ZPass® program as of November 5, 2009 (Source 21,
slide 21), and

> 80% of the truck traffic is already enrolled in the E-ZPass®
program (traffic which pays a much higher toll and tends to be
long distance trips thus benefiting less from the current EZPass® discounts) (Source 21, slide 21, and MTA, Toll Rate
Charts effective February 1, 2009)
Therefore, even after considering the discounts offered E-ZPass®
patrons these data suggest that ~ 50% of all toll revenue at the York
Toll Plaza is currently being collected by the E-ZPass® program.
Observation 7: The AET pessimistic estimate (above) appears
to assume that toll revenue would be collected from only those
vehicles already enrolled in the E-ZPass® program. This is
pessimistic indeed!
Assuming that the current roll-thru E-ZPass® toll operation on the Pike has
very little toll revenue leakage, more realistic pessimistic estimate for toll
revenue leakage under the AET mode of operation would be based on the
Town of York’s success rate for collecting outstanding parking tickets of ~
88% (i.e. Their revenue loss rate on citations is ~ 12%). Since the Town of
York does not have the luxury of collecting any of these tickets via the EZPass® program, a conservative revenue loss rate for the MTA (after
enforcement options) would be:
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
15
12% Leakage on Non-E-ZPass® Users *
~ 50% of Total Revenue ≤ 6% of Total Toll Revenue Lost
However, this estimate does not consider any benefits from the several user
friendly toll payment options presented above, which should be substantial.
Observation 8: An estimated worst case scenario for Total Revenue
Lost at the York Toll Plaza under AET operations is well below 6%.
Using MTA data and similar logic to develop an estimate of revenue leakage
for cash toll operations:

MTA’s estimate of 1.6% total revenue leakage for current toll
operations at the York Plaza (Figure 2), and

eTrans’ estimate that ~ 50% of the toll revenue collected at the
York Toll Plaza is via the E-ZPass® operation (rever to above);
and, as above

assuming that the current E-ZPass operation encounters only
minor revenue leakage.
A conservative estimate of revenue leakage at the York Toll Plaza under just
cash toll operations is at least:
1.6% Leakage at York Plaza Today /
50% Cash Tolls ≥ 3.2% Leakage for Cash Tolls
Observation 9: Estimated current revenue losses for MTA’s cash toll
operations at the York Toll Plaza (≥3.2%) is more than half of a
realistic pessimistic estimate of revenue losses for AET operations at
the York Toll Plaza (well below 6%). Once all things are considered,
estimates of MTA’s current revenue losses in cash toll operations
may be greater than its actual revenue losses under AET operations.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
16
3.5
AET’s Concept of Operations -- How AET Really Works
Motorists without a tag who voluntarily contact the authority to pay
their toll are typically charged a nominal service fee to recover the
costs of processing their toll for the convenience of not having to
actively enroll in the ETC program and put a tag on their vehicle. This
can even be done in a manner that the motorist remains anonymous.
Motorists who the authority has to mail a notice are assessed a higher
service fee to recover the additional costs associated with having to
retrieve vehicle ownership information and send them a notice.
Motorists who the authority has to process through an enforcement
action are assessed a significant penalty that is usually set at a level
sufficient to recover the toll, the costs of all violations and enforcement
activity and any tolls that may not be recovered.
Assessing service fees and penalties in an escalating manner according to
the level of difficulty, cost and risk associated with collecting tolls at each
level, enables the authority to recover the additional costs associated with
collecting tolls from those vehicles. In fact, penalties associated with all
violations enforcement processing (VEP) activity are usually set at a level
sufficient to recover the costs of all VEP as well as the tolls not recovered.
Therefore, a conservative estimate for AET Optimistic revenue losses is zero.
In fact, less than a year into initial operations for the H407 ETR® the
strategy above resulted in violations enforcement activity being a profit
center within their AET operation. (Author was in Responsible Charge.)
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
17
Table 3
Estimates of Cash and AET Annual Revenue Leakage on the MTA (1)
Mode of
Toll Ops
Cash
AET
Optimistic
AET
Pessimistic
MTA’s
Estimates (2)
n/a
eTrans’
Estimates (3)
 3.2%
4.4%
0%
50.3%
Well below 6.0 %
1) Leakage is revenue loss expressed as % of total revenue that
should be collected.
2) Source 23, Appendix E, “Comparison of York Plaza Total Revenue
Leakage under Each Scenario,” page 19.
3) Conservatives estimates generated by eTrans above.
Observation 10: AET is likely to have less revenue leakage at the
York Toll Plaza than cash toll operations when service fees and
penalties are assessed in an equitable manner.
Appendix E of the Phase I report also provides a summary of both “negative”
and “beneficial” impacts of AET. (Source 23, Appendix E, All Electronic
Tolling Report, pp 7 to 10) These impacts (with salient observations) are
provided as Attachment 2. In summary, most of the recommendations for
NOT recommending AET fail to recognize that ORT and AET, if managed
properly, require the same back-office functions. Therefore, since the MTA
has already committed to provide these back-office functions for ORT
(having embraced ORT), AET is, by default, a viable alternative and should
continue to be considered as a practicable option in the Phase II evaluation
effort.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
18
4.0
Alternative Evaluations
The following criteria were used in the Phase I study to establish a baseline
for alternative evaluations (Source 23, page 3):
1) Engineering design guidelines
2) Basic Project Purpose
3) Toll collection strategies
4) Safety
5) Capacity and plaza sizing
4.1
Engineering Design Guidelines
HNTB established the following nationally recognized engineering guidelines
as design criteria for comparisons between alternatives. (Source 21, slide
9):
“Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (AASHTO,
2004)
“Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices” – MUTCD
(Federal Highway Administration, 2003)
“Roadside Design Guide” (AASHTO, 2006), and
“State of the Practice and Recommendations on Traffic
Control Strategies at Toll Plazas” (FHWA, 2006)
Observation 11: Toll plaza design guidelines are limited.
Observation 12: Design criteria for a traditional toll plaza are very
different from design criteria for an AET toll gateway since AET does
not require a toll plaza or incur their environmental, safety and
operational impacts. Use of traditional toll plaza criteria that do not
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
19
apply to AET applications can inadvertently bias the analyses when
AET is a viable option.
The Phase I report also stresses that:
“A common theme among these guidelines, as it relates to
their purpose, is that uniformity of design practices and
procedures is a key factor in the safety of travelers on our
Nation’s highways. As well, operational efficiency of our
roadway network can be improved through the use of
these national guidelines and best practices. Another
important result of the application of these guidelines is
the efficient use of resources and the positive impact it has
on our environment.” (Source 21, slide 11)
Observation 13: Over 50% of vehicles using the York Plaza Upgrade
are expected to be from out of state (Source 7, page 1). Therefore,
uniformity of design among the York Plaza site, Massachusetts
Turnpike and other roads in the region is critical to both safety and
user acceptance (Sources 10 & 11).
4.2
Basic Purpose
On November 9, 2009 the following conditions were cited as reasons to
implement the York Plaza upgrade now:
1. Safety Concerns and Issues
2. Booths, Tunnel and Canopy
3. Plaza (Area) Design
4. Operations (Traffic Flow)
5. Tolling Technology
(Source 21, slide 17)
Observation 14: Regardless of which ORT options described in
Phase I might be implemented, a conventional toll plaza in each
direction is still required. Many of the problems associated with
issues 1 through 4 above would, therefore, merely be transferred to
the new toll plaza location.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
20
Observation 15: AET is the only option that solves all 5 concerns
identified in the Basic Project Purpose.
4.3
Safety and Other Traffic Concerns
The MTA’s stated purpose for conducting this work is:
“To replace/rehabilitate the existing barrier toll plaza on the Maine
Turnpike at York, Maine incorporating High Speed Tolling (HST) and
addressing settling/subsidence and facilities deficiencies, safety
deficiencies and existing and projected traffic volumes.”
(Source 13, slide 19)
Observation 16: AET is the only option that fully meets the stated
purpose above.
A series of basic design criteria were identified for the initial alternatives
analysis to establish a minimum baseline for safety reasons.
“Basic Design Criteria for Toll Plazas
1. Separation from Interchanges:
A. Minimum 1 mile between interchange and
center of toll plaza.
2. Separation from overhead bridges:
A. Minimum 2500’ between overhead bridge and center
of toll plaza.
B. Desirably not within footprint (approx 8000’)
3. Horizontal Tangent:
A. Straight stretch of approximately 8,000 feet
4. Crest vertical curve:
A. Center of straight stretch (toll plaza) at or near the
top of a small gradual hill.”
(Source 21, slide 12)
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
21
These design criteria are important for the cash toll plazas included in MTA’s
ORT alternatives as it is important to:

Provide adequate roadway length on all approaches to and
departures from a toll plaza to allow motorist to weave
between traffic lanes safely, and

Reduce the likelihood of and minimize the impact from brake
failures and other situations limiting vehicles ability to stop
(e.g. rain, snow, ice) on all approaches to the plaza.
Being able to adequately sign each toll plaza to minimize the number of
conflicts introduced to the traffic stream is also critical to both cash and ORT
and cash toll operations.
Observation 17: AET is not constrained by these criteria established
to avoid safety concerns in traditional toll plaza deployments.
The Phase 1 Report identified options for sizing the toll plaza under cash toll
operations as well as under ORT and cash toll operations. Under ORT and
cash toll operations, the number of lanes that need to be provided for each
mode of toll operation is a function of the anticipated split between ORT and
cash toll operations over time, as well as any peak period or seasonal factors
that could impact ORT and cash toll processing requirements at the toll
plaza. All of these options impose a significant lateral footprint on the
highway regardless of where they are located. (Refer to Figure 1) Once the
longitudinal footprint necessary to accommodate the necessary tapers on
both approaches and departures to each toll plaza are considered the land
footprint of land required to provide these toll facilities is significant.
Observation 18: Since a toll plaza is not required to support AET
operations, AET does not incur a significant lateral or longitudinal
‘footprint’ on the roadway.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
22
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
23
Figure 1
Plaza Options Being Considered by the MTA
(Source 21, slide 25)
Options recommended for further evaluation in the Phase I report are as
follows:
Option 1:
Option 2:
Option 3:
Option 4:
Do Nothing
Open Road Tolling (ORT) and cash toll collection at
Mile Marker 7.3 (immediately north of the existing
toll plaza) (aka Option 4A)
ORT and cash toll collection at Mile Marker 8.7, and
ORT and cash toll collection at Mile Marker 9.1.
(Source 23)
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
24
A fifth option currently not being considered is recommended for
consideration: All Electronic Tolling. Factors that should be considered in
locating an AET toll gateway are minimal and include:

Gantries (overhead structures) can be placed so that toll
gateway covers all travel lanes.

There is sufficient room for an environmentally enclosed cabinet
to house electronic equipment and a parking pad for a service
vehicle, and

Accessibility to electrical power nearby.
The AET Option could, therefore, be easily placed at a number of locations
without impacting the surrounding areas.
Design criteria such as those needed for toll plazas are irrelevant to an AET
toll gateway. In addition, AET’s only traffic operations concern is that
motorists are properly informed that they are about to drive through a toll
gateway. Traffic weaving and merging concerns, major safety issues at toll
plaza approaches and departures, are not incurred in AET applications.
Observation 19: AET is the safest option.
4.4
Environmental Impacts
The AET Option could be easily be installed immediately North of the
Connector at Mile Marker 6.7. At this location AET gateways would toll
vehicles on both the ramps and the mainline. (Refer to Figure 2) . The AET
toll gateway could be placed here without any aquatic impacts and there is
already power at this location. Other environmental impacts, such as noise
and emissions would also be significantly less for the AET option. Nighttime
lighting would also be required. However, the impacts of this lighting an AET
gateway are significantly less than those from an ORT and cash toll plaza.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
25
Figure 2
Estimated Footprint for AET Toll Gateway at Mile Marker 6.7
Observation 20: Anticipated Footprint from an AET toll gateway
immediately North of the Connector at Mile Marker 6.7.
A summary of the anticipated environmental impacts of Options 2 thru 4 as
presented in the Phase I report, and the anticipated environmental impacts
of AET implemented at a location such similar to that identified in Figure 2
above are presented in Figure 3.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
26
Figure 3
Anticipated Environmental Impacts of Practicable Options
Option
Estimated Impacts\
NRCS Wetland (Ac)
Stream (ft)
FEMA Flood Plain (Ac)
Home Displacements (1)
Right-of-Way (2)
Meets Eng & Safety Rqts
Satisfies Purpose & Need
Est’d Construction $ (4)
Level of Acceptability:
2/
MM 7.3
28
729
4.3
0
8.1
No
No
$ 56 m
Best
3/
MM 8.7
1.7
939
0.5
0
7.0
Some
Yes
$ 34 m
Neutral
4/
MM 9.1
3.8
1582
0.1
0
7.
Some
Yes
$ 35 m
AET /
MM 6.7
0
0
0
0
0
Yes
Yes
$ 6.9 m
Worst
Sources: Options 2, 3 & 4, Source 7, page 3 and Source 23, Table 4.1.
AET Option, The eTrans Group, Inc., except price which was taken
from Source 23, Appendix E, All Electronic Tolling Report, page 11.
Notes:
1) Though no home displacements are technically encountered, land near
new homes at MM 8.7 and MM 9.1 could be significantly impacted
should a new toll plaza be built at these locations.
2) Estimates may not include right-of-way for local access road to main
utility building. (An access road is not necessary for AET Option.)
3) AET option at MM 6.7 would allow reclamation of several acres of
wetlands. The cost of this reclamation is not included in the estimated
cost of providing the AET Option above.
4) AET estimate for construction cost includes roadside systems,
structures and civil work. Though front and back-office systems costs
will be incurred for all options in Figure 5, they are not included in the
AET construction cost estimate as they do not appear to have been
included in the estimates for Options 2, 3 or 4.
Observation 21: AET is clearly the Least Environmentally Damaging
Practicable Alternative. The AET Option also offers environmental
benefits in several other areas (e.g. air quality, noise, visual and
light intrusion).
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
27
5.0
Issues Critical to the USACE Review Process
It is our understanding that section 404(b)(1) Guidelines of the Clean Water
Act allow the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to issue a permit only if it has
been demonstrated that the project is the Least Environmentally Damaging
Practicable Alternative (LEDPA). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers verifies if
the recommended alternative is ‘Practicable’ and ‘Least Environmentally
Damaging’; and, “Only the LEDPA may receive a USACE Permit.” (Source
17, slide 11)
Observation 21: At least one ‘Practicable’ alternative (AET) has not
been recommended for further evaluation at the completion of Phase
I of this project. This alternative, if implemented correctly, should
have no negative impact on the aquatic environment in this area
(unlike the 4 options that have been forwarded for more detailed
evaluation). Therefore, the Least Environmentally Damaging
Practicable Alternative (LEDPA) cannot possibly be selected for this
project if the AET option is not included in the options for further
evaluation. MTA’s application is thus incomplete.
It is also our understanding that priorities regarding impacts to aquatic
resources are to:
1. Avoid impacts if possible
2. Minimize impacts that cannot be avoided, and to
3. Mitigate unavoidable impacts.
Therefore, the AET Option is the environmentally friendly option. The AET
Option:
1. avoids impacts to the local aquatic environment
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
28
2. allows the MTA to reclaim several acres of wetlands from
the existing toll plaza site; and
3. offers significant other environmental benefits in the form
of reduced fuel consumption and fewer emissions, as well
as less noise, visual intrusion and less impact on ambient
lighting in nearby neighborhoods.
The AET option is also clearly safer than those options that have been
recommended for further consideration as it requires no barriers in the
roadway to introduce conflict to the traffic stream. In addition, the AET
option is, by far, the least expensive option; and, if managed properly can
also be the most cost-effective option.
Conclusion: The AET Option must be included with other options
recommended for further evaluation to make the Phase I MTA
application complete and enable selection of the LEDPA.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
29
Sources
1. “E-ZPass Personal Account Terms & Conditions”, April 6, 2010,
https://ezpassmaineturnpike.com/EZPass/docs/EZPassPersonalTerms.pdf.
2. “E-ZPass Account Types”, April 6, 2010”,
https://ezpassmaineturnpike.com/EZPass/info/accounttypes.jsp;jsessioni
d=0000sEWrY_EpWdYZSUFgz5HIoxB:-1
3. “Dallas TX area to go cashless by year's end, Miami HEFT next spring”,
Posted on Fri, 2010-04-02 02:43,
http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4683.
4. “Commuter Automatic Quarter Renewal to be completed April 10th and
11th”, April 1, 2010,
https://ezpassmaineturnpike.com/EZPass/News.do;jsessionid=0000s0Dh
74WuL_2Xillk_BX_73o:-1?id=1246459009780.
5. “HNTB Designer, Number 92, 2010”, a publication of the HNTB
Corporation,
http://www.hntb.com/sites/default/files/issues/Designer92.pdf.
6. “HNTB Viewpoints, 2010”, a publication of the HNTB Corporation,
http://www.hntb.com/sites/default/files/issues/TranspNewDay_Finn_011
0.pdf
7. Letter from Conrad W. Welzel, Government Relations Manager, Maine
Turnpike Authority, to Jay clement, Senior Project Manager, Maine Project
Office, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, March 17, 2010. (cover to
submittal of “Maine Turnpike Southern Toll Plaza Replacement Study”,
Draft Phase 1 Report, prepared by HNTB Corporation, November 5, 2010)
8. “MTA Votes to Send First Phase of York Toll Plaza Study to U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers”, February 25, 2010,
http://www.maineturnpike.com/about/press_release.html?recordid=169.
9. “Maine Turnpike stick to 'fat' toll plaza design, city of York hires AET
expert to contest” Posted on Thu, 2010-02-25 00:45,
http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4623.
10. “Mass Governor to appoint all-electronic toll manager” (MAJOR
ADDITIONS), Posted on Tue, 2010-02-16 17:59,
http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4606.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
30
Sources (cont)
11. “Deval Patrick puts toll takers on notice, Governor eyes electronic booths on Pike“,
BostonHerald.com, by Hillary Chabot, February 8, 2010, updated
February 9, 2010.
12. “HNTB viewpoints, 2010”, a publication of the HNTB Corporation,
http://www.hntb.com/sites/default/files/issues/TranspNewDay_Finn_011
0.pdf
13. “US Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, Regulatory
Program and Highway Methodology Overview”, Maine Turnpike Authority,
Public Meeting for York Toll Plaza, January 21, 2010. (Presentation)
14. “A Critique of HNTB’s Appendix E Review of All-Electronic Tolling:
Point, Counterpoint”, Peter Samuel, Editor of TOLLROADSNews.com,
2010-01-18. (Unpublished)
15. “Maine Turnpike Authority's effort to build a new south-end toll plaza
raises issue of all-electronic tolling’, Posted on Thu, 2010-01-07 01:31,
http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4528.
16. “Maine Turnpike Authority pushes on with fight for big new ORT + cash
toll plaza”, Posted on Wed, 2010-01-06 00:06,
http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4526.
17. “Getting caught in the crossfire of a Maine civil war - TOLLROADSnews
takes hits”, Posted on Wed, 2009-11-18 11:57,
http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4452
18. “Two I-95 toll plaza upgrade efforts - York ME, Newark DE –
compared”, Posted on Sun, 2009-11-15 21:29,
http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4447
19. “HNTB: a clarification”, Posted on Fri, 2009-11-13 11:55,
http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4443
20. “HNTB provides Maine false & misleading advice on all-electronic
tolling” (EDITORIAL), Posted on Tue, 2009-11-10 21:49,
http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4441
21. “Maine Turnpike Southern Toll Plaza Replacement Study”, Draft Phase
One report for submittal to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers”, HNTB
presentation to the Maine Turnpike Authority, November 9, 2009.
(Presentation)
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
31
Sources (cont)
22. “Engineer Recommends Short-list of Sites for Improved York Toll
Plaza, --Smaller Toll Plaza Design Avoids Home Displacements—“,
November 5, 2009,
http://www.maineturnpike.com/about/press_release.html?recordid=164.
23. “Maine Turnpike Southern Toll Plaza Replacement Study, Draft – Phase
I Report”, for submittal to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, HNTB
Corporation, November 5, 2009.
24. “Ten Year Planning report, prepared for the Maine Turnpike Authority,
Prepared by HNTB”, September, 2009,
http://www.maineturnpike.com/pdf/2009%2010Year%20Planning%20Report.pdf.
25. “Engineer reports on the feasibility of constructing new toll plaza on
site where existing York Toll Plaza stands”, June 16, 2009,
http://www.maineturnpike.com/about/press_release.html?recordid=158.
26. “Maine Turnpike, Southern Toll Plaza, Initial All-Electronic Tolling,
Feasibility Review,” prepared for Maine Turnpike Authority, HNTB
Corporation, February 20, 2009.
27. “Tolls and Other Revenue Sources”, with Dr. Ramon Grijalva,
presentation to the Atlantic Provinces Transportation Forum, Fredericton,
New Brunswick, February 12, 2009
28. “Maine Turnpike Replaces Automatic Coin Lanes with Dedicated EZPass Lanes”, January 8, 2009,
http://www.maineturnpike.com/about/press_release.html?recordid=151.
29. “Maine Turnpike Annual Report”, 2008,
http://www.maineturnpike.com/pdf/MTA-Annual_Report_2008.pdf.
30. Letter from Gerard P. Conley, Sr. Chairman, MTA, to Michael L. Estes,
Chairman, York Board of Selectmen, October 9, 2008,
http://www.maineturnpike.com/pdf/Conley-Estes_100908.pdf.
31. “Congestion Pricing – Is it Real or a Planner’s Pipedream?”,
presentation to the Transportation Group at the University of New
Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick, March 27, 2008.
32. “Maine Turnpike Annual Report”, 2007,
http://www.maineturnpike.com/pdf/MTA-Annual_Report_2007.pdf.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
32
Sources (cont)
33. “Simplicity – The Future of Electronic Toll Collection (ETC)”, paper
presented to the 8th Asia-Pacific Intelligent Transportation System Forum
and Exhibition, Hong Kong, July 11, 2006.
34. “Maine Turnpike Annual Report”, 2005,
http://www.maineturnpike.com/pdf/MTA-Annual_Report_2005.pdf.
35. “Toll Systems & Operations – IT Products Meet Patrons”, Monthly
Transportation Trends and Issues Seminar, Steer Davies Gleave Ltd.
London, England, April 30, 2005.
36. “Making Technology Work in Transportation”, presentation to the
Transportation Group at the University of New Brunswick, Fredericton,
New Brunswick, February 17, 2005.
37. “Open Road Toll Collection -- Highway to the Future”, with Dr. Thomas
McDaniel, proceedings of the 70th Annual Meeting of ITE, August 2000.
38. “Transponders, Transactions and Other Trends in Transportation”,
presentation to the Transportation Group at the University of New
Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick, February 4, 1999.
39. "Challenges to Deployment of Automated Toll Collection Systems”,
presentation to the Institute of Transportation Engineers Southern District
7th Annual Meeting, April 1995.
40. Implementing Electronic Toll Collection on a New Facility: The GA 400
Experience", with David Burgess, Georgia State Tollway Authority,
proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of IBTTA, October 1993.
41. "Congestion Management: What are the Real Opportunities?,
presentation to the 4th National Conference on Transportation Planning
Methods Applications, May 1993.
42. "Integrating Electronic Toll and Traffic Management Systems:
Opportunities for Congestion Pricing", proceedings of the MTT 1992
Conference, April 1992.
43. "Laying the Foundation for Congestion Pricing", proceedings of Annual
Meeting of ITE, District 6, July 1991.
44. "Electronic Toll Collection: A California Update", proceedings of IBTTA,
Spring Workshop, April 1991.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
33
Sources (cont)
45. "Public Relations Issues of Electronic Toll Collection and Traffic
Management", presentation to IBTTA Winter Workshop, February 1991.
46. “Electronic Toll Collection: The California Challenge", HNTB's First
Annual Toll Road Symposium, September 1990.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
32
Attachment 1
High Occupancy/Toll (HOT) Lanes in the U.S.
Abbreviations used on this page: SOV (Single-occupant vehicle); HOV (High-occupancy
vehicle); HOT (High occupancy/toll); ETL (Express toll lane). On this page, the word "hybrid" is
used to indicate systems that are part HOT and part ETL.
Current HOT Lanes
The following roads currently use HOT lanes:
California
free.
Interstate 15, San Diego County. SOV toll ($0.50-$8.00); HOV-2+
[1]
Colorado
Interstate 25 between 20th Street in Downtown Denver and the US-36
interchange. SOV toll ($0.50-$3.50);
HOV-2+, motorcycles, buses free.[2]
Florida
Interstate 95 Northbound and southbound lanes between I-195 and the
Golden Glades interchange have been
opened. Motorcycles, registered HOV-3, hybrid, vanpool, and buses ride
free. SOV toll ($0.25-$2.65).[3]
Interstate 394, MnPASS Minneapolis, from I-494 to TH 100.[4] SOV
toll ($0.25-$8.00); HOV-2+ free.[5]
Minnesota
Utah
Interstate 15 between 600 N in Salt Lake City, Utah and University
Parkway in Orem, Utah. SOV toll
($50/mo.); HOV-2+/clean-fuel free. This is not truly a HOT or ETL
project, as it operates by selling permits instead of collecting a toll. There
is a maximum of 2,000 permits that will be sold.[6]
Washington
motorcycles free.
SR 167, Auburn to Renton. SOV toll ($0.50-$9.00); HOV-2+ and
[7]
Current Hybrid Systems
California

91 Express Lanes, Orange County, 10 miles. Toll rates are time-based instead of
congestion-based. SOV toll ($1.20-$10.00); HOV-3+ 50% discount ($0.60-$5.00).[35][36]
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
33
Attachment 1
High Occupancy/Toll (HOT) Lanes in the U.S. (cont)
Texas



Interstate 10 (Katy Freeway managed lanes) Houston between Texas State
Highway 6 and Interstate 610 HOV-2+ free in peak hours; SOV and HOV-2+ nonpeak toll ($0.30-$1.60 per toll plaza; there are 3)[37]
Interstate 10 (Katy Freeway - QuickRide), Houston (HOV2 toll/free off-peak, HOV3+
free, SOV prohibited, east of Interstate 610) (HOV-2 toll: $2.00)[38]
U.S. Highway 290 (Northwest Freeway), Houston (HOV2 toll/free off-peak, HOV3+
free, SOV prohibited)
Future HOT lanes (including studies underway)
California
San Francisco Bay Area
The Bay area is planning an entire network of HOT lanes.[8]

Interstate 680 Under construction.[9] Expected to open in 2010.[10] The portion being
constructed is the Sunol grade.

Interstate 580 Under construction. Expected to open in 2010.[10] The portion being
constructed is in the Tri-Valley area.

U.S. 101 Planned.[11] The areas to be constructed include the total area of the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (San Francisco Bay Area) (MTC), with the
exception of the City of San Francisco, the northern approach to the Golden Gate Bridge,
and northern San Mateo County.[12]
Interstate 80 Planned. The areas to be constructed include the total MTC area, with the
exception of the City of San Francisco, and the approach to the San Francisco – Oakland
Bay Bridge.[12]


SR 4 Planned, portions fully funded. The areas to be constructed are from the junction
with I-680 to Antioch.[12]

Interstate 880 Planned, portions fully funded. The areas to be constructed go from the
south end of Oakland to the junction with U.S. 101.[12]

SR 92 Convert lanes from HOV. The area to be converted is the approach to the San
Mateo - Hayward Bridge.[12]

SR 84 Convert lanes from HOV. The area to be converted is from the I-880
intersection to the approach to the Dumbarton Bridge.[12]

Interstate 280 Planned. The areas to be constructed go from the intersection with I680 in San Jose to past the intersection with SR 85.[12]

SR 85 Fully Funded. The area to be constructed is the entire length (both ends
connecting with U.S. 101. Expected to open in 2012.[12]
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
34
Attachment 1
High Occupancy/Toll (HOT) Lanes in the U.S.
(cont)

SR 87 Convert lanes from HOV. The area to be converted is its entire length, from
U.S. 101 to SR 85.[12]

SR 237 Planned. The area to be constructed is practically the entire length, from I880 to SR 85.[12]
Riverside County
Riverside County is recognized by the California Transportation Commission (CATC) as having
a traffic congestion problem second only to Los Angeles.[13]


SR 91 Recommended. Two HOT lanes and a mixed-flow lane from the Orange county
line to the intersection with I-15.[13]
Interstate 15 Recommended. Two HOT lanes and a mixed-flow lane from the San
Bernardino county line to the intersection with SR 74. Further, an HOV lane and an
eventual HOT lane extension to the San Diego county line.[13]
Los Angeles County
Los Angeles County has a plan in place that has been approved by the California legislature.[14]
They have received a grant for $213.6 million from the USDOT(US Department of
Transportation). This plan will be implemented in two phases, although it is currently unknown
when those phases will take place.[15]
Both phases are for the conversion of HOV lanes to HOT lanes.

Interstate 10 Phase 1: Convert the San Bernardino Freeway HOV lanes from Alameda
St/Union Station to the intersection with I-605. Phase 2: From I-605 to SR 57: in design;
from SR-57 to the San Bernardino county line.[15]

Interstate 210 Phase 1: Convert the Foothill Freeway from I-710 to I-605. Phase 2:
From I-605 to the San Bernardino county line.[15]

Interstate 110 Phase 1: Convert the Harbor Freeway from 182nd St./Artesia Transit
Center to Adams Blvd.[15]

SR 60 Phase 2: Convert from the intersection with I-605 to Brea Canyon (under
construction), and convert from Brea Canyon to the San Bernardino county line.[15]
San Diego County

Interstate 15 Extension of already-existing HOT lanes. "Stage 3": From SR 163 to SR
56(Ted Williams Pkwy) (under construction). "Middle Stage A&B": from SR 56 to W.
Bernardo Dr. (under construction; partially complete). "Stage North": From W. Bernardo
Dr. to SR 78 in Escondido.[16]
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
35
Attachment 1
High Occupancy/Toll (HOT) Lanes in the U.S. (cont)
Florida

Interstate 95 will be done in phases. Phase 1A was opened December 2008; Phase 1B
opened in January 2010. Currently open are northbound and southbound lanes between
the Golden Glades Interchange and I-395. As of February 2010, Phase 2, from the
Golden Glades Interchange to I-595 in Broward County is unfunded with no scheduled
launch date. However, FDOT has stated that, with proper funding, construction could
start as early as September 2010, and be open as early as Spring 2012[3]
Georgia

Conversion of the existing HOV lanes to HOT lanes on Interstate 85 has been
approved to relieve the congestion in the DeKalb County portion of the Northeast Atlanta
region. This would be done from Chamblee-Tucker road south of the I-285 junction to
Old Peachtree Road in Gwinnett County. HOT lanes on I-85 are expected to be in service
by 2011.[17]
Illinois

Illinois Tollway System "Green Lanes" (really, HOT lanes) are to be added to all
roadways in the Illinois Tollway System. The lanes could begin operating as early as
2010. All Chicago-area tollways will have "green lanes" by 2015.[18] Suspended after
former Governor Rod Blagojevich, who suggested the idea, was arrested, impeached, and
removed.[19]
Minnesota

Interstate 35W Segment 3: From SR 65/I-94 split to 42nd St. This will be a Priced
Dynamic Shoulder Lane (PDSL) (a type of HOT lane). Scheduled to open 9/2009.
Segment 2: From 42nd St. to 66th St. This is an HOV to HOT conversion project.
Scheduled to open 2010. Segment 1: From 66th St. to Burnsville Parkway (see
Burnsville, Minnesota). This is an HOV to HOT conversion project. Scheduled to open
2011.[20]
New York/New Jersey Port Authority

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is studying the concept of merging
HOT lanes with the existing XBL (eXclusive Bus Lane) lanes in the Lincoln Tunnel.[21]
North Carolina

Interstate 77 Charlotte, from I-85 to SH 2158 (Griffith Street) at Davidson,
Mecklenburg County. Extend existing HOV Lanes, convert HOV Lanes to HOT Lanes
and evaluate shoulder use lanes. Under study.[22]
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
36
Attachment 1
High Occupancy/Toll (HOT) Lanes in the U.S. (cont)
South Carolina
All South Carolina projects are under study.

Interstate 77 From the intersection with U.S. 21 to the North Carolina state line. This
highway portion is very heavily used, and so HOT lanes is one option being studied to
relieve congestion.[23]

Interstate 26/Interstate 126/Interstate 20 Projections are that traffic on these
interstates will double by the year 2030. A corridor taskforce has been in place to study
all the possibilities for managing the anticipated traffic growth. All these could
accommodate HOT lanes.[23]
o These are the only segments that would support widening for HOT lanes:
 A 7.22 mile segment of
I-26 from the intersection with I-126 to the
intersection with U.S. 321.
 A 6 mile segment of
I-20 east of I-77 to the northeast section of
Richland County. No funds are currently available.
o These segments could not be widened, but are still being considered for HOT
lanes:
 A 9.22 mile segment of the
I-26/I-126 corridor from U.S. 176 to
U.S. 21.
 A 14.45 mile segment of
I-20 from the northeast section of Richland
County to the intersection with U.S. 378.

Interstate 385 A 6.45 mile segment of I-385 from east of I-85. This segment could be
widened for HOT lanes; however, no construction funds are currently available.[23]
Texas








Loop 1604 There have been discussions of adding HOT lanes to this road in the
future.[24]
U.S. 281 There have been discussions of adding HOT lanes to this road in the
future.[24]
Interstate 10 Extending the I-10 HOT lanes from SH 6 in Harris County to FM 359 in
Waller County (under study).[25]
Interstate 635 From east of Luna Road to Greenville Avenue (under study).[26]
Interstate 35E From south of the Loop 12/I-35E split to south of Valwood Parkway,
including the reconstruction of existing facilities, construction of frontage roads and the
addition of managed lanes.[26]
SH 121/SH 183 (Fort Worth district) Proposed improvements are planned to
include three general purpose lanes in each direction with three HOT lanes in each
direction for a total of twelve lanes with frontage roads for future traffic volumes. Under
study.[27]
Interstate 35W From Wautauga Ave. to Meacham St. in Fort Worth. Under study.[28]
Interstate 820 From I-35W to SH 121/SH 183. Under study.[29]
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
37
Attachment 1
High Occupancy/Toll (HOT) Lanes in the U.S. (cont)
Virginia


Interstate 495 between Springfield and just north of the Dulles Toll Road in
Mclean.[30] Officials of the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) signed an
agreement with two private companies in April 2005. A contract was finalized on
December 20, 2007, and construction began in the summer of 2008.[31]
Interstate 95/Interstate 395 corridor. VDOT signed an interim agreement with a
private company on 24 October 2006 to supply HOT lanes between Massaponax and
Arlington.[30] A start date has been set for the northern part of this project: mid-2010,
pending commercial and financial arrangements. No completion date has been set.[32] The
project was put on hold because of locality concerns and the "daunting task" of raising
sufficient capital in today's markets.[33]
Future ETL lanes (including studies underway)
Maryland

Under construction. Interstate 95, north of Baltimore from just south of Exit 61 (US
40) to New Forge Road in White Marsh.[34]
References
1. ^ HOT Lanes on I-15 in San Diego Retrieved May 29, 2009
2. ^ I-25 HOV/Tolled Express lanes
3. ^ a b 95 Express Retrieved February 6, 2009
4. ^ I-394 Background Retrieved July 13, 2009
5. ^ Mn/PASS I-394 'HOT' Lanes Retrieved May 30, 2009
6. ^ Express Lanes Retrieved May 28, 2009
7. ^ WSDOT - Toll Rates Retrieved May 29, 2009
8. ^ MTC Planning - HOV/HOT Lanes
9. ^ I-680 Express Retrieved May 26, 2009
10. ^ a b 2 HOT Network Update Retrieved May 26, 2009
11. ^ HOT Network Report 12-08 Retrieved May 26, 2009
12. ^ a b c d e f g h i j 2 HOT Network Update PPT Retrieved May 26, 2009
13. ^ a b c HOTLanes Executive Summary Retrieved May 27, 2009
14. ^ LA gets legislative OK to take NYC's $210m for dynamic priced lanes I-10, I-110
Retrieved May 28, 2009
15. ^ a b c d e Los Angeles votes to toll HOV lanes on busiest freeways, gets NYC's US$s
Retrieved May 28, 2009
16. ^ Expanding and Extending Interstate 15’s Managed Lanes Retrieved May 28, 2009
17. ^ I-85 HOT Lanes Retrieved May 27, 2009
18. ^ Green Lanes are a go Retrieved May 28, 2009
19. ^ Green Lanes Still a No-Go Retrieved July 27, 2009
20. ^ UPA - Innovative Choices for Congestion Relief Retrieved May 28, 2009
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
38
Attachment 1
High Occupancy/Toll (HOT) Lanes in the U.S. (cont)
21. ^ 12th International HOV Systems Conference: Improving Mobility and Accessibility
with Managed Lanes, Pricing, and BRT Retrieved May 28, 2009
22. ^ BOARD OF TRANSPORTATION MEETING November 6, 2008 Retrieved May 31,
2009
23. ^ a b c SCDOT to Study Possible HOV/HOT Lanes Beyond I-26 in the Charleston area
Retrieved May 28, 2009
24. ^ a b March 5 Transcript: Texas Department of Transportation Special Commission
Meeting Retrieved May 29, 2009
25. ^ Public Meeting - IH 10 Managed Lanes Retrieved May 30, 2009
26. ^ a b I-635 MANAGED LANES PROJECT Retrieved May 30, 2009
27. ^ SH121/SH 183 Study Retrieved May 30, 2009
28. ^ 820 Studymap Retrieved May 30, 2009
29. ^ North Tarrant Express Segment One Retrieved May 30, 2009
30. ^ a b VDOT COMPLETES AGREEMENT FOR CAPITAL BELTWAY HOT LANES
Retrieved May 29, 2009
31. ^ Craig, Tim (2007-12-21). "Deals Clinched on HOT Lanes". The Washington Post.
p. B01. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2007/12/20/AR2007122002733.html. Retrieved December 21, 2007.
32. ^ I95/395 Megaproject Information Retrieved July 23, 2009
33. ^ Va. Delays Work on I-395/95 HOT Lanes Retrieved October 7, 2009
34. ^ MTA I-95 Express Toll Lanes Retrieved September 10, 2009
35. ^ SR 91 Case Study Final (effective 1/1/2008) Retrieved May 29, 2009
36. ^ 91 Express Lanes Retrieved May 29, 2009
37. ^ Katy Managed Lanes Toll Schedule Retrieved October 3, 2009
38. ^ Evaluation of Usage Retrieved October 3, 2009
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_HOT_and_ETL_lanes_in_the_United_States,
April 20, 2010.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
39
Attachment 2
Maine Turnpike Authority Reasons for Dismissing All Electronic Tolling (Annotated)
Appendix E, Phase I Report (Executive Summary)
eTrans
“Since 2006, a few agencies in the US have either begun implementing or
have set policy that future replacement facilities will be AET. A handful of
agencies have begun conversion or have set policies that future
installations will incorporate AET. A few more agencies have initiated
extensive formal studies to evaluate the applicability of AET. Many
agencies are mainly waiting to see the results of these agencies activities
before conducting extensive assessments. It should be noted that although
some agencies have committed to convert to AET, at the time of this
review, no existing cash based agency has completed a total conversion to
AET. Furthermore, there is very little standardization of reporting of the
business impacts of AET and much reluctance on the part of those
agencies involved in AET to release documented and audited results of the
business impacts.” (page i)
“While the potential benefits of AET can be documented, the significant risk
associated with the uncertainty behind the business costs of AET make the
option of AET for the York Toll Plaza replacement not feasible. The
following points elaborate on this risk:” (page i)
A
“The ability to recover toll revenue from as much as 26 percent of the total
traffic at York due to the lack of legislation that would compel payment from
out of state patrons weighs significantly in this risk. This inability has
perplexed toll agencies for over 10 years and we believe that this issue will
not be cured in the next 20 years.” (page ii)
The eTrans Group, Inc.
1) ’A few’ typically means a small
number (e.g. less than 5), but
apparently not here. At the time this
report was published ~ 12 AET
facilities were successfully operating in
the U.S., one for over a decade!
2) Not sure what the reference to ‘no
existing cash based agency’ means,
as most toll agencies in the U.S. have
offered electronic toll collection (ETC)
for ~ a decade.
3) ‘Audited results’ of any operation
are very difficult to find in the toll
industry.
Refer to Section 3.5 & Observation 10
above in this report.
1) Losing all such revenue is an
extremely pessimistic perspective.
(Refer to Section 3.4 & 3.5.)
2) Effective enforcement in this type of
situation was proven well over a
decade ago.
April 23, 2010
40
B
C
“The traffic mix of the Maine Turnpike is such that a significant number of
patrons are non E-ZPass users and from out of state. The extent to which
these customers would not migrate to E-ZPass and pre-paid video products
is uncertain and these factors greatly influence business costs such as
operating costs and revenue losses.” (page ii)
These issues have all been
successfully managed by others.
(Refer to Section 3.4 & 3.5.)
“The resulting toll and fee structure for an AET system could result in actual
or perceived unfair distribution of payments between Maine and out of state
customers. This results when out of state violators do not pay because
there is no significant enforcement capability and the structure is set up or
perceived to be set up to offset these losses by paying in-state patrons
further compelled to pay because of threat of registration hold.” (page ii)
1) MTA can ensure that administrative
fees and penalties are equitable.
(Refer to Section 3.4 & 3.5.)
D
“Difficulties attributed to the duplicate license plate numbering system and
the ability of video systems to recognize the myriad of different plate types
present minor operational challenges.” (page ii)
‘Duplicate license plates’ is a rare and
easily managed issue. (Refer to
Section 3.5.)
E
“The current lack of industry data for similar roadways already implementing This is more of a management
AET limits the ability to compare potential MTA outcomes makes
function than a forecasting function.
forecasting difficult to calibrate.” (page ii)
(Refer to Section 3.2 to 3.5.)
F
“The uncertainty relative to how customers will respond to the changes in
payment methods and the uncertainty relative to revenue recovery potential
for violations pose too broad a range of potential outcomes. These include
potentially significant risks to net revenue required to operate the roadway.”
(page ii)
In several recent annual reports the
MTA has applauded the tremendous
success of and benefits from motorists
embracing ETC on the Pike.
G
“The MTA may be limited in its ability to allow for certain types of post
payment options typical for AET systems. For example, post payments of
video tolls by customers are considered an extension of credit and any
restrictions on how the MTA operates under these situations would need to
MTA must resolve these issues if open
road tolling (ORT) on the Pike is to be
successful. (Refer to Section 3.2 to
3.5.)
The eTrans Group, Inc.
2) As of 2/1/2010 a ME resident w/o
E-ZPass® pays a $3.00 toll to travel
from York to Kennebunk while a ME
resident with E-ZPass® pays a toll of
$1.20.
April 23, 2010
41
be considered.”
H
“Greater certainty around the potential impacts to toll operating costs and
revenue impacts resulting from AET would be necessary to determine if the
range of risks can potentially be mitigated to an acceptable level or if the
risks are insurmountable. Based on the cost analyses conducted, the range
of risk to the MTA resulting from uncertainties related to AET over 20 years
could be as high as $400 million.” (page ii)
This is more of a management
function than a forecasting function.
(Refer to Section 3.2 to 3.5)
Appendix E, Phase I Report
0
eTrans
“While the benefits and cost considerations for AET are very similar to the
decision to incorporate the option of HST, one fundamental difference
exists. HST maintains an option for non-ETC customers preferring to use a
stop condition form of payment, such as cash. AET is entirely electronic and
eliminates the option to stop and pay by cash at the plaza. This distinction
provides both benefits and costs worthy of careful consideration:
In conjunction with a decision to incorporate AET at future toll plazas, the
Maine Turnpike Authority must also consider the following negative
impacts:” (page 7)
MTA must also resolve many of the
issues below if HST / ORT on the Pike
is to be implemented successfully and
in a cost-effective manner. (Refer to
Section 3.2 to 3.5, especially
Observation 4.)
1
“AET will measurably increase operational costs for back office and the
customer service center due to initial and ongoing customer education,
additional post processing of transactions and increased violation image
and notice processing.” (Page 7)
The total operating costs of ORT (as
apparently envisioned) are likely to be
significantly more than AET, as is the
total revenue lost. (Refer to Sections
3.2 to 3.5.)
2
“Non-payment events at an AET plaza will likely increase due to patron
confusion, technology limitations and increased scofflaws. Other toll
agencies who have installed highway speed lanes or AET have typically
1) ORT may lead to more motorist
confusion than AET.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
2) Roadside technology required for
April 23, 2010
42
experienced increases after conversion that lessens over time as a result of
familiarization and enforcement. The issue of revenue collection has been
discussed previously regarding scofflaws. The issue of collecting from
patrons who infrequently use the roadway must also be considered as the
cost to collect for one or two trips must be weighed against the available
tolls and fees that could be charged.” (Page 7)
AET and ORT is identical.
3
“Current limitations or lack of interstate agreements to enforce out of state
toll violators limit the options for penalizing these violators. Without these
agreements or laws, the Turnpike has few options to try to compel these
violators to pay.” (Page 7)
MTA must resolve this same issue if
ORT on the Pike is to be successful.
(Refer to Section 3.2 to 3.5, especially
Observation 4.)
4
“Improperly structured AET programs could result in a real or perceived
subsidization of revenue by certain customers (for example, in-state patrons
paying for out of state violators who do not pay). An AET program would
need to be structured to minimize subsidization of tolls by certain groups of
paying patrons at different points in the payment stream. For example,
rates/fees/penalties associated with violations would need to be
appropriately assigned to cover losses in that category due to lost revenue
rather than having ETC or video rates set to offset a portion of losses due to
violations. Global inefficiencies such as unreadable images would need to
be distributed given an appropriate traffic assumptions.” (Page 7)
Agree. MTA has the responsibility of
structuring the rates/fees/penalties so
that actual or perceived inequities do
not exist. (Refer to Section 3.5.)
3) Successfully collecting tolls in both
AET and ORT applications is a
function of proper management of the
back-office functions.
5
“Privacy concerns may emerge given that AET reduces the anonymous
options for driver payments. Currently cash is exchanged with no record of
the driver. An AET system may require anonymous account options to
satisfy a portion of this concern. However, patrons who do not prepay with
an account would be subject to identification via license plate lookup. The
actual level of this concern is unknown and would need to be the subject of
further understanding of patrons.” (Page 8)
A properly managed AET and ORT
program offers an anonymous option
to motorists. This can and has been
accomplished a number of different
ways. (Refer to Sections 3.3 & 3.5.)
6
“Regardless of the result of capital, operating maintenance and revenue
impact costs and savings comparisons, consideration must be given for the
potential equity or ethical concerns that could arise from the initial or
Agree that AET offers the MTA a net
cost savings / increase in revenue if
managed properly. Managing the
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
43
sustained increases in non-payments expected under AET. The business
case of cost savings would have to be weighed against the policy decision
to accept that the potential that fewer patrons will ultimately pay the toll.
More specifically, a system that allows higher revenue leakage but results
in a net positive revenue over previous tolling regimes could still be viewed
as inequitable or unethical since a larger portion of patrons are not actually
paying the toll.” (Page 8)
operation to ensure that sustained
increases in non-payments do not
happen and that toll rates/penalties/
fees are assessed equitably so that
real or perceived inequities do not
exist is the responsibility of the MTA
for both AET and ORT operations.
(Refer to Sections 3.2 to 3.5.)
7
“The capacity of local judicial processes is a potential concern if the judicial
system is not set up to handle the additional cases resulting from AET.
Advanced planning and coordination with the appropriate agencies would
be necessary to determine costs and considerations needed as part of AET
planning and implementation.” (Page 8)
Agree. MTA has the responsibility of
managing the enforcement program
with both AET and ORT so that only a
few of the enforcement actions in up in
the judiciary process.
8
“Unbanked customers (those without bank or credit card accounts) that
prefer to pay cash at the point of tolling will find the cash option of pre or
post paying with cash offsite as a burden.” (Page 8)
MTA can offer these motorists a cash
payment option at the Kennebunk
service area, the Maine Welcome
Center and several other convenient
locations.
9
“AET may result in revenue decreases from increased diversion to local
roads (some of which are already congested) as some patrons who
perceive a lack of options to pay the toll that suits their preferences, seek
alternate routes.” (Page 8)
A properly managed AET or ORT toll
operation offers motorists a number of
convenient and user friendly options
for paying their toll.
10 “AET will require additional costs to increase transponder use, develop,
market and implement new tolling products, as well as implement a
significant public relations campaign to inform the public of the changes
initially and ongoing education of future customers. The introduction of
video tolling products and the removal of cash payment on the roadway will
require significant public communication. Other products may include
anonymous accounts to satisfy privacy concerns by some patrons.” (Page
A properly managed AET or ORT toll
operation will promote of increased
transponder use and require:
1) development and implementation of
a number of toll payment plans, some
that are, by design, anonymous; and,
2) marketing/communications efforts
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
44
8)
to establish and sustain cost-effective
operations.
11 “Weather impacts to equipment are magnified with increasing reliance on
video technologies. Significant snow or similar conditions may reduce the
quality of images resulting in higher volumes of image rejections resulting in
direct revenue losses.” (Page 9)
A properly managed AET or ORT toll
operation will consider this when it
establishes toll rates/penalties/fees in
an equitable manner. (Refer to
Section 3.5)
12 “AET may violate restrictions associated with existing bond covenants, trust
indentures or similar agreements associated with the financing of the Maine
Turnpike. For example, where bonds require toll revenues to meet certain
thresholds, a higher amount of revenue loss under AET may require higher
toll rates either initially or over a sustained period.” (Page 9)
This issue is resolved in both AET and
ORT operations by establishing
equitable penalties/fees to overcome
any anticipated shortfall. (Refer to
Section 3.5)
13 “Consideration for labor agreements and the impact regarding AET
implementation.” (Page 9)
1) In several recent annual reports the
MTA has applauded the benefits
(including savings in labor costs) from
motorists embracing ETC on the Pike.
2) Collectors could be offered the
opportunity to support AET back-office
efforts through a retraining program.
14 “In some cases, the location for the construction of an AET plaza may not
be conducive for the construction of a cash plus highway speed toll plaza
given the different site requirements. If for some reason the plaza needed to
be converted to add cash collection in the future, some AET plaza sites
may restrict this option.” (Page 9)
AET site requirements are far less
restrictive than those for all other
forms of toll collection. The
environmental impacts are also
significantly less. (Refer so Section 4)
15 “The conversion of only one location on the Maine Turnpike to AET while
maintaining cash options at others may present confusion among patrons
with regards to where payments options are available. Since cash lanes on
the Maine Turnpike do not have enforcement cameras, if patrons assuming
MTA could easily resolve this concern
by converting all toll collections on the
Pike to AET – enabling the MTA and
citizens of Maine to benefit from the
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
45
AET payment options pass through these lanes without stopping to pay, the
Maine Turnpike would not realize this revenue.” (Page 9)
16 “Without fare collection staff at toll plazas, the Maine Turnpike will need to
consider alternatives to handling wide load permits, which are currently a
function served by fare collection staff.” (Page 9)
expected increase in net revenue.
(Refer so Section 4)
Wide load permits must be processed
prior to the trip. Paying the
appropriate toll is easily integrated
with this process.
“With the challenges understood, the following beneficial impacts
associated with AET include:” (Page 9)
1
“An AET toll plaza has the potential for greater safety due to the removal of
any decisions required of the patron at the toll point. The goal of AET is a
transparent roadway that reduces or eliminates any change to the driver’s
environment than what is typically encountered on other parts of the
facility.” (Page 9)
A properly designed and implemented
AET toll gateway introduces no
conflict to the traffic stream thus is
much safer for motorists than all other
toll options. The safety of most
authority personnel is also greatly
enhanced since they no longer need
to be pedestrians in an active toll
plaza to do their jobs..
2
“Under AET, all customers of the facility benefit from the convenience of not
having to stop to pay the toll. Customers can either sign up for a
transponder or opt for other products such as pre-paid or post-paid video
tolling options that could be offered by the agency.” (Page 9 & 10)
A host of user-friendly payment
options should be offered to all
motorists wishing to use either AET or
ORT tolling options.
3
“AET toll plaza configurations minimize plaza construction capital cost by
eliminating the need for toll booths that may require wider right of way and
additional infrastructure.” (Page 10)
Other toll options also have significant
safety and environmental impacts.
4
“AET toll plazas typically require less long term maintenance, since an AET
plaza includes significantly less infrastructure.” (Page 10)
The eTrans Group, Inc.
AET toll gateways have very little civil
infrastructure and less equipment to
maintain.
April 23, 2010
46
5
“AET eliminates the cost of fare collection staffing and support at the toll
plaza.” (Page 10)
These costs are extensive since it is a
24 hour day/7 day a week operation.
6
“Additional environmental benefits are possible with an AET plaza. By
increasing the average speed of vehicles passing through the plaza, the
average fuel economy of vehicles will increase. This quantifiable reduction
in the use of fuel will not only provide financial benefits to the patrons, but
reduce the consumption of nonrenewable resources.“ (Page 10)
Less fuel consumption and elimination
of stop and go conditions also reduces
emissions. Other environmental
benefits of AET typically include fewer,
if any, aquatic impacts, less noise and
less visual and light intrusion into
nearby neighborhoods.
“An AET plaza would require patrons to either sign up for an E-ZPass
account or pay via a pre-paid or post-paid video toll account. The MTA
would need to consider pricing of such options would be matched to the
frequency of the trip by the customer and cover administrative costs for
each product. Pricing considerations can also go further to influence
patrons to utilize more cost efficient products. Infrequent users who cannot
justify the cost of a transponder would have the option to pay a video toll at
a higher rate than the transponder rate but less than the cost of a
transponder. Depending on the magnitude of the rate adjustment, larger
portions of infrequent users would find the transponder option more
financially practical. It may be expected that this adjustment may be as high
three or more times the existing transponder rate in cases where patrons
delay payment until an invoice or notice is received. While having the
positive impact of driving patrons towards more cost efficient pre-payment
options, this would likely have significant negative public acceptance
issues.” (Page 10)
The eTrans Group, Inc.
This issue can be resolved in both
AET and ORT operations by
establishing equitable penalties/fees
to overcome any anticipated shortfalls.
Penalties, which need to be punitive to
establish the deterrence factor, are
established at a sufficient level to
allow fees to be kept to a minimum for
those who voluntarily pay their toll
through one of the user-friendly
programs offered. (Refer to Section
3.5)
April 23, 2010
47
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
47
Attachment 3
Daryl S. Fleming, PhD, PE
Principal
EDUCATION AND REGISTRATIONS
Dr. Fleming holds a BSCE from the University of Maine, Orono, an MScE and PhD in
Transportation Planning and Engineering from the University of New Brunswick, Canada. Dr.
Fleming is also a registered professional engineer in several states and New Brunswick,
Canada.
CAREER OVERVIEW
Dr. Fleming has nearly 35 years experience in the planning, engineering and management of major
transportation infrastructure projects. Dr. Fleming is one the world's leading experts in in the
deployment and operation of electronic toll collection (ETC) systems, including all electronic tolling
(AET) and automated enforcement systems. Dr. Fleming is also recognized as an expert in traffic
and toll road operations, HOT lanes, traffic and revenue projections, revenue collections and
enforcement and high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes.
Dr. Fleming's ability to establish functional solutions to complex technical and operational
problems are evident from his repeated success as part of the senior management team on
projects collectively valued at over $10 Billion (US) in current dollars, including the:





Orange County Toll Roads -- re-introduction of toll roads to Southern California
Long Beach / Los Angeles Light Rail Transit System -- re-introduction of light rail
transit to Southern California
407 Express Toll Route™, Toronto, Ontario, the world's first fully automated toll
road
AutoExpreso™, Puerto Rico Highways and Transportation Authority, one of the
world’s first ETC programs with distributed tag purchase and account
replenishment capabilities, and,
GA 400 Extension -- North America's first fully integrated, electronic toll system.
Dr. Fleming’s has also been responsible for developing and implementing successful operating
plans for several innovative programs in the transportation industry. The more notable of these
include:



the initial operations plan for the SR-91 Express Lanes™ in Orange County,
California, the world’s first HOT lanes (and currently leading the team providing
ETC systems and operations advisory)
reversible HOV lanes on the North I-25 Corridor in Denver, Colorado, and, an
Itinerary verification system for monitoring trucks hauling debris from the World
Trade Center site following September 11, 2001.
Dr. Fleming has also managed the operations design of over 50 freeway interchanges, 8 that
are freeway-to-freeway junctions.
Dr. Fleming has led many projects from inception through to deployment and initial operation.
In doing so he has managed all stages of these large, infrastructure development programs.
The fact that these projects cover the spectrum of most current major operational technical
innovations exemplifies his versatility to meet the unique challenges facing both large and small,
innovative infrastructure deployment programs in the transportation industry.
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010
48
CONTROL SHEET
PROJECT:
York Toll Plaza Upgrade
DOCUMENT TITLE:
York Toll Plaza Upgrade Options
A Realistic Approach
CLIENT CONTACT:
Mr. Dean Lessard
Director of Public Works
Town of York
186 York Street
York, Main 03909
(207) 363-1010
ETRANS PROJECT #:
P00099
Release:
2.1
AUTHOR:
Daryl S. Fleming
Daryl S. Fleming
SIGNATURE:
__________________
Date:
April 22, 2010
The eTrans Group, Inc.
April 23, 2010