Texas Toll Road Primer Final Report

Home , 183A toll road, Chisholm Trail Parkway, Dallas North Tollway, Fort Bend Parkway, Hardy Toll Road, International Parkway

PRC 14-3 F

Texas Toll Road Primer

Texas A&M Transportation Institute PRC 14-3 F November 2014

Authors David Ellis Brianne Glover Curtis Beaty Nick Norboge Allison Weldon Jeff Borowiec Tim Lomax David Schrank

Table of Contents List of Figures ...... 6 List of Tables ...... 7 Introduction ...... 8 Purpose of the Study ...... 8 Study Scope ...... 8 Preview of Report Organization/Content ...... 9 Data Used ...... 11 Review of Financial Documents ...... 11 Texas Legislation and Tolling ...... 12 77th Legislative Session ...... 12 78th Legislative Session ...... 13 79th Legislative Session ...... 14 80th Legislative Session ...... 15 81st Legislative Session ...... 16 82nd Legislative Session ...... 17 83rd Legislative Session ...... 18 Comparative Summary of Toll Revenue by Toll Facility ...... 20 Limitations of the Comparisons ...... 20 Toll Revenue Data by Facility ...... 20 Comparing Changes in Toll Revenues over Time ...... 21 Toll Rates and Toll Revenues ...... 23 Vehicle Mix and Toll Revenues ...... 24 Comparative Summary of Average Toll Rate per Mile ...... 25 Comparing Texas Toll Facilities to the Nation ...... 27 Texas Toll Road Profiles ...... 30 North Texas Tollway Authority ...... 30 Facility Development Cost and Financing Structure ...... 32 Historical Revenue Generation ...... 33 Dallas North Tollway ...... 36 President George Bush Turnpike ...... 37

Sam Rayburn Tollway ...... 38 Harris County Toll Road Authority ...... 39 Facility Development Cost and Financing Structure ...... 40 Historical Revenue Generation ...... 40 Expenses and Obligations ...... 41 Hardy Toll Road ...... 43 Sam Houston Tollway ...... 44 Westpark Tollway ...... 45 Texas Department of Transportation ...... 46 Facility Development Cost and Financing Structure ...... 47 Historical Revenue Generation ...... 48 Expenses and Obligations ...... 49 Loop 1 North ...... 51 SH 255 ...... 52 SH 45 North ...... 53 SH 130 Segments 1–4 ...... 54 SH 45 Southeast...... 55 Northeast Texas Regional Mobility Authority ...... 56 Loop 49 ...... 58 Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority ...... 59 Facility Development Cost and Financing Structure ...... 59 Historical Revenue Generation ...... 60 Expenses and Obligations ...... 60 Highway 183A Toll Road...... 62 Manor Expressway ...... 63 Cameron County Regional Mobility Authority ...... 64 SH 550 (Phases I, II, and III) ...... 65 Grand Parkway Transportation Corporation ...... 66 SH 99 Segment E ...... 67 Fort Bend County Toll Road Authority ...... 68 Fort Bend Parkway ...... 69

Revenues and Expenses by Toll Agency ...... 70 TxDOT-Owned Toll Facilities ...... 70 NTTA-Owned Toll Facilities ...... 71 HCTRA-Owned Toll Facilities ...... 72 CTRMA-Owned Toll Facilities ...... 73 Toll Road Impacts on Urban Mobility ...... 75 Methodology ...... 75 Results ...... 76 Austin...... 76 Dallas-Fort Worth ...... 76 Houston ...... 76 Summary of Analysis ...... 76 References ...... 79

List of Figures Figure 1. Number of Registered Passenger Vehicles and Motorcycles and Toll Tags Issued in Texas...... 23 Figure 2. North Texas Tollway Authority Facility Map...... 31 Figure 3. Dallas North Tollway Map...... 36 Figure 4. President George Bush Turnpike Map...... 37 Figure 5. Sam Rayburn Tollway Map...... 38 Figure 6. Harris County Toll Road Authority Facility Map...... 39 Figure 7. Hardy Toll Road Map...... 43 Figure 8. Sam Houston Tollway Map...... 44 Figure 9. Westpark Tollway Map...... 45 Figure 10. Central Texas Turnpike System Facility Map...... 47 Figure 11. Loop 1 North Map...... 51 Figure 12. SH 255 Map...... 52 Figure 13. SH 45 North Map...... 53 Figure 14. SH 130 Segments 1–4 Map...... 54 Figure 15. SH 45 Southeast Map...... 55 Figure 16. NET RMA Facility Map...... 56 Figure 17. Loop 49 Map...... 58 Figure 18. CTRMA System Map...... 59 Figure 19. Highway 183A Toll Road Map...... 62 Figure 20. Manor Expressway Map...... 63 Figure 21. CCRMA System Map...... 64 Figure 22. SH 550 Map...... 65 Figure 23. Grand Parkway Facility Map...... 66 Figure 24. SH 99 Segment E Map...... 67 Figure 25. Fort Bend County Toll Road Authority System Map...... 68 Figure 26. Fort Bend Parkway Map...... 69 Figure 27. Estimated CTTS Revenues and Expenses...... 70 Figure 28. Estimated Camino Colombia Revenues and Expenses...... 71 Figure 29. Estimated NTTA Revenues and Expenses...... 72 Figure 30. Estimated HCTRA Revenues and Expenses...... 73 Figure 31. Estimated CTRMA Revenues and Expenses...... 74 Figure 32. Mobility Impacts of Removing Toll Road Capacity...... 78

List of Tables

Table 1. Texas Tolled Facilities Reviewed for This Report...... 10 Table 2. Public Toll Facilities Not Reviewed in This Report...... 11 Table 3. 77th Legislative Session Key Toll Road Legislation (2001)...... 12 Table 4. 78th Legislative Session Key Toll Road Legislation (2003)...... 14 Table 5. 79th Legislative Session Key Toll Road Legislation (2005)...... 15 Table 6. 80th Legislative Session Key Toll Road Legislation (2007)...... 16 Table 7. 81st Legislative Session Key Toll Road Legislation (2009)...... 17 Table 8. 82nd Legislative Session Key Toll Road Legislation (2011)...... 18 Table 9. 83rd Legislative Session Key Toll Road Legislation (2013)...... 19 Table 10. Summary of Annual Toll Revenues for Texas Toll Roads...... 21 Table 11. Annual Percent Change in Toll Revenue for Texas Toll Roads...... 22 Table 12. An Example of the Impact of Vehicle Mix on Toll Revenues...... 25 Table 13. Average Toll Rate per Mile by Toll Tag in Texas...... 26 Table 14. Comparison of Toll Rates for Non-interstate Toll Roads in the United States ()...... 27 Table 15. NTTA Toll Facility Financial Structure...... 32 Table 16. Summary of NTTA Outstanding Obligations (in Millions of Dollars)...... 33 Table 17. NTTA Historical Revenue Generation (in Millions of Dollars)...... 34 Table 18. NTTA Income Statement (in Millions of Dollars)...... 34 Table 19. HCTRA Toll Facility Financial Structure...... 40 Table 20. HCTRA Historical Revenue Generation (in Millions of Dollars)...... 41 Table 21. HCTRA Income Statement (in Millions of Dollars)...... 41 Table 22. CTTS Financial Structure...... 48 Table 23. Summary of CTTS Outstanding Obligations...... 48 Table 24. CTTS Toll Revenue Summary (in Millions of Dollars)...... 49 Table 25. Example of Operating and Non-operating Revenues and Expenses...... 49 Table 26. CTTS Income Statement (in Millions of Dollars)...... 50 Table 27. NETRMA Historical Revenue Generation (in Millions of Dollars)...... 57 Table 28. CTRMA Toll Facility Financial Structure...... 60 Table 29. CTRMA Historical Revenue Generation (in Millions of Dollars)...... 60 Table 30. CTRMA Income Statement (in Millions of Dollars)...... 61 Table 31. Daily VMT and Diverted VMT by Urban Area...... 77 Table 32. Regional Mobility Impacts of Diverted Toll Road Traffic...... 77 Table 33.Toll Road Diversion Impacts by Functional Class...... 78

Introduction

Since 1953, toll financing has played a role in funding Texas’ highway transportation network. Historically, toll financing was pursued in instances where traditional public financing was unavailable. In recent years, factors such as increasing population and declines in the growth of traditional public transportation funding sources have placed renewed interest in toll financing considerations. Although legislation has been in place to authorize the collection of tolls in Texas since 1953, no thorough review or analysis has yet been pursued that comprehensively examines the history, development, financial characteristics, and operational performance of toll facilities in the state. Today, four types of tolling authorities are allowable under state statute: regional toll authorities, county toll authorities, regional mobility authorities (RMAs), and the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). Only one regional toll authority operates in Texas (i.e., the North Texas Tollway Authority); however, seven county toll authorities and eight RMAs have been created throughout the state. In addition, private entities are allowed to collect tolls in the state; however, none of those public-private partnership facilities are profiled in this report. Toll roads provide an alternative method of financing transportation construction and operations costs. With the proliferation of toll roads in Texas over the past two decades and plans to expand existing or build new tolled facilities across the state, this research documents the history as well as the financial and operational performance of public Texas toll roads. It further identifies how toll roads have impacted mobility.

Purpose of the Study The purpose of this research is to provide the Texas Legislature and other elected officials with a comprehensive summary of toll roads from a financial and operational perspective. Findings from this research will aid in the determination of what future policies might be needed, as well as potential funding opportunities for needed infrastructure investment within Texas.

Study Scope This project provides a historical assessment of toll roads in Texas, including a brief legislative history of their development in this state, a brief review of the financial and operational characters of each toll facility, and a comparison of these facilities with those in other states. The major tolling authorities and toll roads in the state were examined, and profiles containing key financial information were created. These include development and construction costs, financing structure and obligations, revenue generation, operations, maintenance, and ongoing cash flows. Using all of this information, researchers then developed a model to examine scenarios where future toll revenues could be leveraged to finance other transportation improvements. This work also included toll revenue leveraging strategies in Texas and other states.

Researchers then focused on the impact of toll roads on urban mobility. For the urban areas in Texas where toll roads are located, the overall impacts the tolled facilities have had on the region’s mobility were assessed. Much of this effort was on modeling these impacts, and it focused on capturing how travel has changed due to the existence of a toll road. This was done using mobility measures including traffic volumes, vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and indices of congestion and delay.

Preview of Report Organization/Content In addition to this introduction, this report consists of five additional elements. These are: 1. Legislative background and history of toll roads in Texas. 2. Comparative summaries of toll revenues and average rates. 3. Basic profiles and financial performance of selected Texas toll roads. 4. Leveraging of toll revenues to finance other roadway improvements. 5. Mobility impacts of toll roads in Texas. The legislature created the Texas Turnpike Authority in 1953 and abolished it in 1997. Since 1953, the following authorities have constructed, maintained, and operated toll facilities in Texas:  North Texas Tollway Authority (NTTA).  Harris County Toll Road Authority (HCTRA).  TxDOT.  North East Texas Regional Mobility Authority (NET RMA).  Fort Bend County Toll Road Authority (FBCTRA).  Cameron County Regional Mobility Authority (CCRMA).  Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority (CTRMA).  Grand Parkway Transportation Corporation (GPTC).1 Table 1 provides an overview of 17 toll facilities comprising over 400 miles of highway currently operational in Texas. The current statewide tolling revenue is $1.2 billion, a 10 percent increase over 2012. The total debt service on existing toll roads (from NTTA, HCTRA, the Central Texas Turnpike System [CTTS],2 and CTRMA) is an estimated annual average of $968 million from 2015 to 2035. Taken as a percentage of all state-registered vehicles, both personal and commercial, 30 percent of all vehicles have some form of toll tag. As a percentage of personal vehicles, 40 percent have toll tags. In 2013, the last year for which complete data are available, a total of 6.7 million toll tags were issued in the state.

1 The Grand Parkway Transportation Corporation is a non-profit Texas corporation created by the Texas Transportation Commission, the governing body of TxDOT. 2 CTTS debt is issued by the Texas Transportation Commission, the governing body of TxDOT.

Table 1. Texas Tolled Facilities Reviewed for This Report. Toll Toll Road Date Toll Facility Authority/Regional Length (Center Facility Mobility Authority Lane Miles) Opened* Dallas North Tollway 31.0 1968 President George Bush Turnpike NTTA 52.0 1977 Sam Rayburn Tollway (SH 121) 26.2 2006 Hardy Toll Road 23.0 1988 Sam Houston Tollway HCTRA 70.0 1988 Westpark Tollway** 19.0 2004 Loop 1 North (Parmer Lane to SH 45 North) 4.0 2006 SH 255 (Camino Columbia) 21.5 2000 SH 45 North TxDOT 12.8 2006 SH 130 Segments 1–4 49.0 2006 SH 45 Southeast 7.04 2009 Loop 49 NET RMA 26.3 2006 Fort Bend Parkway Toll Road** FBCTRA 8.2 2004 SH 550 CCRMA 14.9 2011 183A 11.6 2007 CTRMA Manor Expressway (Phase 1 and 2) 6.2 2014 SH 99 Segment E GPTC 14.4 2013 * Facility opening date refers to the date the toll facility opened to traffic; however, it is customary for a toll road to operate without tolls—free to users—for a few weeks to allow drivers to become accustomed to the facility and where it can be entered and exited. It is also typical after this start-up period for the toll road to operate with discounted tolls (e.g., 50 percent of the full toll rate) for another few weeks to, again, allow drivers to continue to experience the roadway but to begin associating a cost to the experience before the full toll rates are implemented. ** Jointly operated by HCTRA and FBCTRA. Source: Tolled facility statistics compiled by TTI.

Most, but not all, tolled facilities in the state were examined as part of this study. Toll bridges, managed lanes (e.g., I-10 Katy Managed Lanes), and toll tunnels (e.g., Addison Airport Toll Tunnel) were not examined independently in this study; however, they are included in the future revenue forecasts provided by the agencies (with the exception of Loop 1 [MoPac] Managed Lanes). Also, SH 99 Segment I-2A, operated by TxDOT, and public-private toll facilities (e.g., SH 130 Segments 5 and 6) were not profiled. These facilities operate and/or serve slightly different purposes from the traditional toll. Table 2 summarizes facilities that were not included in this study. Profile information for the 17 toll roads listed in Table 1 was compiled and is incorporated in the report.

Table 2. Public Toll Facilities Not Reviewed in This Report. Toll Road Authority Description Katy Freeway Managed Lanes HCTRA Managed Lanes Loop 1 (MoPac) Managed Lanes CTRMA Managed Lanes North DFW Airport Connector Managed Lanes TxDOT SH 99 Segment I-2A Tolled Lanes Lake Lewisville Toll Bridge Toll Bridge Mountain Creek Toll Bridge NTTA Toll Bridge Addison Airport Toll Tunnel Toll Tunnel

Data Used The researchers primarily used historical financial statements, as well as traffic and revenue studies and updates from each entity, to gather the pertinent information. Other research and resources, such as Federal Highway Administration databases, were used for reference throughout the report. Through the compilation of these documents, the researchers were able to identify the project and revenue information needed for analysis.

Review of Financial Documents Each agency responsible for the development and operations of toll roads reports its fiscal position with annual financial statements (e.g., balance sheet, statement of revenues and expenses, and cash flow statement). The researchers obtained financial statements from the larger tolling agencies (CTTS, NTTA, HCTRA, and CTRMA), which were published on the websites of each organization. Financial information was also provided by GPTC, NET RMA, and FBCTRA. The review of the audited financial statements consisted primarily of the examination and summarization of the annual operating and non-operating revenues and expenses for each toll enterprise. There was no attempt to perform an independent audit of the financial statements or to assess the financial position of a tolling agency in terms of solvency, the maintaining of adequate reserves, or the future ability to meet the terms of its debt obligations.

Texas Legislation and Tolling

Despite a perception by some that the development of toll roads is a recent trend in Texas, legislation authorizing toll roads in Texas dates back a half century. In 1953, during the 53rd Legislative Session, the Texas Legislature authorized the creation of the Texas Turnpike Authority. The passage of House Bill (HB) 4 authorized this authority to pursue toll road and bridge projects throughout the state; however, most of the Texas Turnpike Authority’s efforts were concentrated primarily in the Dallas-Fort Worth region. Members of the State Highway Commission (the predecessor to the Texas Transportation Commission), together with six persons appointed by the governor, served as directors of that authority. Senate Bill (SB) 370, enacted into law during the 75th Legislative Session in 1997, abolished the Texas Turnpike Authority and created a turnpike division within TxDOT to develop toll roads in the state. This legislation also created NTTA and required the transfer of all Dallas-Fort Worth region toll assets from the Texas Turnpike Authority over to NTTA (1). During subsequent sessions, the legislature enacted new laws that addressed concerns regarding primacy3 and private participation in toll road financing.

77th Legislative Session During the 77th Texas Legislative Session, two bills of note were enacted into law. The purpose of SB 342, among other things, was to remove the requirement for repayment from public entities and to authorize TxDOT to expend funds for the cost of toll projects of public and private facilities (2). SB 454 authorized the implementation of an automated enforcement system at toll facilities and established criminal penalties for failure to pay a required toll or administrative fee (2). Table 3 provides a brief summary of key toll road legislation enacted during the 77th Legislative Session. Table 3. 77th Legislative Session Key Toll Road Legislation (2001). Dates Bill Author Caption Passed/Effective Relating to the participation of TxDOT in Shapiro/ the acquisition, construction, SB 342 June 2001/June 2001 Alexander maintenance, and operation of toll facilities and RMAs Relating to the collection and Armbrister/ June 2001/ enforcement of tolls on certain toll SB 454 Alexander Sept. 2001 roads and toll projects; providing for civil and criminal penalties Source: State legislative data compiled by TTI from http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/.

3 Primacy in this context refers to when an authority has the first right of refusal in pursuing the development of a tolled facility.

78th Legislative Session During the 78th Legislative Session, several bills related to toll road infrastructure were enacted into law. SB 903 required the Texas Transportation Commission and the governing body of each local government entity or private entity that operates a toll project to adopt rules to allow a military vehicle to use toll projects without payment of a toll or fare (3). HB 2384 amended the Transportation Code to expand the applicability of certain provisions relating to unauthorized use of toll roads to a county adjacent to a county with a population of more than 3.3 million (in other words, allowed counties adjacent to Harris County the same administrative enforcement capabilities that Harris County had). HB 3184, among other actions, amended provisions of the Transportation Code to revise the authority of the Texas Transportation Commission and TxDOT over the financing, construction, improvement, maintenance, and operation of turnpike projects and to specify that the Texas Turnpike Division is responsible for promoting and coordinating the development of turnpike projects (4). HB 3588 altered the direction for how transportation would be funded in Texas by integrating existing transportation policies with new financing mechanisms designed to accelerate project delivery and generate additional cash flow, including comprehensive development agreements. Specifically, this legislation allowed private entities to design, build, operate, and finance toll roads and revenue-producing rail systems, adding a new dimension to the way transportation projects have previously been handled in Texas. Notably, Article 2 of HB 3588 authorizes the Texas Transportation Commission to create RMAs that localities can use to approve and generate revenue from regional transportation projects, which in turn can be used to support future infrastructure investments (5). Article 5 of HB 3588 authorized the Texas Transportation Commission to issue state-owned bonds to fund other state highway improvements. In addition, the legislation imposed regulatory fees on driver licenses, increased court costs, increased motor vehicle sales taxes, and required project feasibility studies to be completed on all potential transportation projects (5). SB 716 amended Chapter 284 of the Transportation Code to allow eligible counties to construct, operate, and maintain a toll road project that is located exclusively in adjacent counties, provided that the action has been approved by the adjacent county’s commissioners court (6). SB 1463, among other actions, amended the Transportation Code to authorize the Texas Transportation Commission, under certain conditions and after a public hearing, to convey a non-toll state highway or a segment of a non-toll state highway to a county or a toll road authority in the county in which the state highway or segment is located. This legislation also authorizes the Texas Transportation Commission to convey a non-toll state highway or a segment of a non-toll state highway to a county or toll road authority in a county adjacent to the county in which the highway or segment is located if the county or toll road authority in the county in which the segment or highway is located approves the transfer. Finally, SB 1464, among other actions, authorized HCTRA and the Harris County Commissioners Court to impose an administrative cost for the collection of unpaid tolls (7). Table 4 provides a brief summary of key toll road legislation enacted during the 78th Legislative Session.

Table 4. 78th Legislative Session Key Toll Road Legislation (2003). Dates Bill Author Caption Passed/Effective May 2003/ Relating to the use of toll projects by SB 903 Lindsay/Hamric Sept. 2003 military vehicles; creating an offense June 2003/Effective Relating to the unauthorized use of toll HB 2384 Hegar/Janek Immediately roads in certain counties Relating to the financing, construction, June 2003/Effective improvement, maintenance, and HB 3184 Hill/Barrientos Immediately operation of transportation and transportation facilities Relating to the construction, acquisition, financing, maintenance, management, operation, ownership, and control of HB 3588 Krusee et al. June 2003/Varies* transportation facilities and the progress, improvement, policing, and safety of transportation in the state Relating to causeways, bridges, tunnels, June 2003/Effective turnpikes, and highways in certain SB 716 Lindsay/Eiland Immediately counties bordering the Gulf of Mexico and in adjacent counties June 2003/Effective Relating to the conversion of a non-toll SB 1463 Lindsay/Hamric Immediately state highway to a toll facility Relating to enforcement of the June 2003/ SB 1464 Lindsay/Hamric collection of certain tolls; providing a Sept. 2003 penalty * HB 3588 took effect September 1, 2003 (except for articles 1, 2, 4, 6, 15, and 18, which took effect immediately); Article 8 took effect June 1, 2005; Article 9 took effect September 1, 2005; Article 5 took effect after voters approved HJR 28 (Proposition 14) in 2003. Source: State legislative data compiled by TTI from http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/.

79th Legislative Session During the 79th Legislative Session, one notable Senate bill enacted into law was SB 129, which amended the Transportation Code to authorize TxDOT or an RMA to waive or reduce tolls on state or regional turnpike projects for any vehicle or class of vehicles (8). Several notable House bills were also enacted into law during the 79th Legislative Session. HB 1672, among other provisions, amended the Transportation Code to provide that in a county with a population of 3.3 million or more, the money collected as court costs in connection with the unauthorized use of toll roads is required to be deposited in the county treasury in a special fund to be administered by the county or district attorney. HB 2139, among other provisions, established various requirements between TxDOT and private entities. Specifically, this legislation expanded provisions related to legislation authorizing the payment of pass-through tolls as reimbursement

for construction, maintenance, and operation activities for toll or non-tolled facilities on the state highway system (9). HB 2650 amended the Transportation Code to authorize a local government to enter into an agreement with TxDOT, an RMA, or a private entity under which the local government assists in the financing of the construction, maintenance, and operation of a turnpike project located in the local government’s jurisdiction in return for a percentage of the revenue from the project (10). Finally, HB 2702, an omnibus bill, addressed several issues related to how best to finance and deliver transportation projects (11). Table 5 provides a brief summary of key toll road legislation enacted during the 79th Legislative Session. Table 5. 79th Legislative Session Key Toll Road Legislation (2005). Dates Bill Author Caption Passed/Effective Relating to certain exceptions to the May 2005/ Barrientos/ requirement that the operator of a motor SB 129 Effective Dukes vehicle operated on a turnpike project pay Immediately the proper, full amount of the toll June 2005/ Relating to costs imposed in connection with Howard/ HB 1672 Effective the collection and enforcement of certain Janek Immediately tolls June 2005/ Phillips/ Relating to certain agreements by TxDOT HB 2139 Effective Wentworth involving pass-through tolls Immediately Krusee/ June 2005/ Relating to local government participation in HB 2650 Brimer Sept. 2005 the financing of turnpike projects Relating to the construction, acquisition, financing, maintenance, management, June 2005/ operation, ownership, and control of Krusee/ HB 2702 Effective transportation facilities and the progress, Staples Immediately improvement, policing, and safety of transportation in this state; providing a penalty Source: State legislative data compiled by TTI from http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/.

80th Legislative Session During the 80th Legislative Session, SB 792 imposed a moratorium on comprehensive development agreements (CDAs), with some exceptions, and implemented a range of changes to CDA law. HB 570 amended the Transportation Code to prohibit an entity authorized by law to acquire, design, construct, finance, operate, and maintain a toll project from using motor vehicle registration or license plate information, including information obtained by the use of automated enforcement technology, for purposes other than toll collection, collection enforcement, and certain law enforcement purposes. This bill further provided that if the entity enters into an agreement with an entity in another state that involves the exchange of this information, the

agreement must provide that the information may not be used for purposes other than those described in the provisions of this bill (12). Table 6 provides a brief summary of key toll road legislation enacted into law during the 80th Legislative Session. Table 6. 80th Legislative Session Key Toll Road Legislation (2007). Dates Bill Author Caption Passed/Effective Relating to the authority of certain counties Williams/ and other entities with respect to certain May 2007/ SB 792 Smith, transportation projects and to CDAs with June 11, 2007 Wayne regard to such projects; authorizing the issuance of bonds; providing penalties May 2007/ Relating to the use of motor vehicle Leibowitz/ HB 570 Effective registration or license plate information Carona Immediately collected by a toll project entity Source: State legislative data compiled by TTI from http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/.

81st Legislative Session During the 81st Legislative Session, several House bills were enacted into law. HB 2983 made several changes to how motor vehicle rental information is transmitted in relation to the payment of tolls. HB 3097 amended the Transportation Code, Business and Commerce Code, Code of Criminal Procedure, Family Code, Finance Code, Government Code, Health and Safety Code, Human Resources Code, Local Government Code, Occupations Code, Penal Code, and Tax Code to create the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (TxDMV) and subject it to the Texas Sunset Act. Finally, HB 3139 amended the Transportation Code to authorize a toll project entity to establish a discount program for electronic toll collection customers (13). Table 7 provides a brief summary of key toll road legislation enacted into law during the 81st Legislative Session.

Table 7. 81st Legislative Session Key Toll Road Legislation (2009). Dates Bill Author Caption Passed/Effective Relating to the electronic transmission of June 2006/ HB 2983 Phillips/Hegar motor vehicle rental information in Sept. 2009 connection with the payment of tolls Relating to the creation, organization, governance, duties, and functions of TxDMV, including the transfer of certain duties to McClendon June 2006/ HB 3097 TxDMV and the Texas Department of et al./Carona Sept. 2009 Licensing and Regulation, and to the regulation of certain franchised motor vehicle dealers; providing a penalty Herrero June 2006/ Relating to discount programs for certain HB 3139 et al./Van de Sept. 2009 veterans provided by toll project entities Putte Source: State legislative data compiled by TTI from http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/.

82nd Legislative Session During the 82nd Legislative Session, several House bills were enacted into law. HB 1112, among other actions, expanded the powers of RMAs. Specifically, this legislation authorized RMAs to:  Participate in the state travel management program.  Borrow money from or enter into a loan agreement or other arrangement with any public or private entity.  Pledge available funds to the payment of any obligations of the authority under an authorized contract. HB 1201 amended the Transportation Code to repeal the authority for the establishment and operation of the Trans-Texas Corridor and amended that code and the Tax Code to remove statutory references to the corridor (14). HB 1274 amended the Transportation Code to define military vehicle for purposes of the exemption from the payment of a toll for an unmarked military vehicle conducting or training for emergency operations (15). Several Senate bills were also enacted into law during the 82nd Legislative Session. SB 19 added a chapter to the Transportation Code to address the development of toll projects (other than certain excluded projects) located in the territory of a local toll project entity (16). SB 246 amended Transportation Code provisions relating to toll collection services that a regional tollway authority must provide for a toll project located in the boundaries of the authority (17). SB 959 authorizes alternative tolling methods. SB 469 amended the Transportation Code to require a regional tollway authority to use alternative tolling methods to permit the registered owner of a vehicle that is driven or towed through a toll assessment facility to pay the toll at a

later date and establishes procedures to allow the authority to collect the toll within a certain time frame (18). Finally, SB 1420, also known as the TxDOT Sunset Bill, included a provision authorizing TxDOT and local tolling authorities to enter into public-private partnerships for specific projects only (19). Table 8 provides a brief summary of key legislation enacted into law during the 82nd Legislative Session. Table 8. 82nd Legislative Session Key Toll Road Legislation (2011). Bill Author Dates Passed/Effective Caption Phillips/ May 2011/According to Relating to the authority and powers of HB 1112 Nichols Its Terms RMAs Relating to repeal of authority for the Kolkhorst June 2011/Effective HB 1201 establishment and operation of the et al./Hegar Immediately Trans-Texas Corridor Relating to an exemption from the Pena/ June 2011/Effective payment of a toll for unmarked military HB 1274 Wentworth Immediately vehicles conducting or training for emergency operations Relating to the development, financing, Nichols/ June 2011/Effective SB 19 construction, and operation of certain Smith, Wayne Immediately toll projects Shapiro/ June 2011/Effective Relating to toll collection services SB 246 Harper-Brown Immediately provided by a regional tollway authority Nelson et al./ Relating to the collection of unpaid tolls SB 469 June 2011/Sept. 2011 Patrick by a regional tollway authority Wentworth/ May 2011/Effective Relating to toll collection and SB 959 Pickett Immediately enforcement Nichols et al./ May 2011/According to Relating to the continuation and SB 1420 Harper-Brown Its Terms functions of TxDOT; providing penalties et al. Source: State legislative data compiled by TTI from http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/.

83rd Legislative Session During the 83rd Legislative Session, several House bills were enacted into law. HB 341 amended the Transportation Code to require a regional tollway authority, in a statement or petition in condemnation of real property, to exclude from the interest to be condemned all the oil, gas, and sulphur that can be removed from beneath the real property (20). HB 1123 amended the Transportation Code to make additional recipients of military license plates for extraordinary service eligible for free or discounted use of a toll project (21). HB 2585 amended the Transportation Code to make permanent the requirement that TxDOT and an applicable utility share equally the cost of the relocation of a utility facility that is required by the improvement, construction, or expansion of certain toll projects (22).

Several Senate bills were also enacted during the 83rd Legislative Session. SB 1029 made several changes to state law regarding exceptions to how TxDOT can operate certain highway projects (23). SB 1792 amended the Transportation Code and Government Code to establish optional remedies for the nonpayment of tolls and administrative fees assessed by a toll project entity. Table 9 provides a brief summary of key toll road legislation enacted into law during the 83rd Legislative Session. Table 9. 83rd Legislative Session Key Toll Road Legislation (2013). Dates Bill Author Caption Passed/Effective Relating to the exclusion of certain mineral Pitts/ June 2013/Effective interests (oil, gas, and sulphur) from the HB 341 Nichols Immediately property interests that may be condemned by a regional tollway authority Herrero/ June 2013/ Relating to discount programs for certain HB 1123 Rodriguez Sept. 2013 veterans provided by toll project entities Relating to the reimbursement of utilities for Harper- June 2013/Effective relocation of utility facilities following HB 2585 Brown et Immediately improvement or construction of certain al./Paxton tolled highways Campbell Relating to the conversion of a non-tolled June 2013/Effective SB 1029 et al./ state highway or segment of the state Immediately Phillips highway system to a toll project Watson/ May 2013/Effective Relating to the powers and jurisdiction of an SB 1489 Phillips Immediately RMA Nichols/ June 2013/ SB 1730 Relating to CDAs of TxDOT or an RMA Phillips Sept. 2013 Relating to remedies for nonpayment of tolls Watson et June 2013/Effective SB 1792 for the use of toll projects authorizing a fee; al./Phillips Immediately creating an offense Source: State legislative data compiled by TTI from http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/.

Comparative Summary of Toll Revenue by Toll Facility

Two fundamental measures are used to determine the operational performance of a toll road: the number of transactions and the amount of toll revenue generated for a given period. A transaction occurs each time a vehicle passes a toll collection point. A vehicle traveling southbound on SH 130, beginning in Georgetown, to the SH 45 Southeast interchange would pass through four mainline toll plazas, generating four individual transactions in a single trip; therefore, transactions and traffic volumes are not the same. Toll revenue is generally reported in aggregate, for example, monthly or annual toll revenue. Some agencies calculate the average revenue per transaction for internal information, but such a measure is highly toll road specific and cannot be compared across multiple facilities with any statistical validity.

Limitations of the Comparisons When reviewing toll road operational data, it is not possible to directly link the revenue totals with the transaction data on a toll road because of the way transactions and revenues are reported. Transactions are recorded in the period (e.g., day and month) in which they occur. Revenue, however, is recorded differently based on the payment type. Specifically, transactions using a transponder (e.g., TxTag™) are reported in the period in which they are earned, while transactions incurred through video capture of the license plate (e.g., pay-by-mail or violations) have their revenues recorded in the period in which they were received. Also, when comparing toll transactions and revenues, it is important to understand that each tolled facility was built for a specific reason and is highly influenced by its location, connection to the greater regional transportation infrastructures, demographics, and several other factors. For example, one toll road could have been constructed primarily to connect two underserved communities, while another could have been built primarily to serve as an alternative route to another highly congested, non-tolled road. In addition, the positive impact of a toll facility to an area’s regional mobility and economy could be far greater than the nominal revenue generated from the tolls alone. Therefore, the study authors determined that only a descriptive comparison of total revenue and growth based on data provided by Texas toll authorities was appropriate for this task.

Toll Revenue Data by Facility With this in mind, Table 10 presents total toll revenue data by Texas toll facility from fiscal year (FY) 2007 to FY 2013. In some cases, data were not readily available from public sources or not received from the specific tolling agency.

Table 10. Summary of Annual Toll Revenues for Texas Toll Roads. Total Revenue ($ Million) Facility FY FY FY FY FY FY FY 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 SH 255 (Camino Columbia) N/A N/A $0.2 $0.6 $1.3 $1.4 $1.1 SH 45 North $4.6 $17.9 $19.9 $19.8 $20.3 $21.9 $29.1 SH 45 Southeast N/A N/A $0.5 $3.2 $3.6 $4.1 $4.3 SH 130 Segments 1–4 $5.6 $19.5 $27.1 $34.4 $36.2 $40.7 $54.5 Loop 1 (Parmer Lane to SH 45 $6.1 $11.4 $11.9 $11.9 $12.3 $13.0 $16.1 North) Dallas North Tollway $102.6 $122.9 $137.5 $165.7 $179.2 $195.8 $205.1 President George Bush $103.3 $112.8 $118.7 $142.8 $155.1 $202.9 $223.9 Turnpike Sam Rayburn Tollway (SH 121) N/A $12.7 $51.6 $78.9 $96.2 $110.4 $123.4 Hardy Toll Road $33.1 $40.7 $42.5 $44.1 $45.1 $45.9 $49.3 Sam Houston Tollway $287.5 $321.3 $330.7 $345.9 $356.2 $381.1 $406.7 Westpark Tollway $33.3 $41.9 $42.2 $39.9 $41.4 $42.8 $46.8 Fort Bend Parkway N/A N/A $1.6 $1.4 $1.5 $1.6 $1.7 183A (Manor Expy. Phase 1) N/A $15.3 $17.3 $20.2 $21.5 $23.6 $32.1 Loop 49 $0.1 $0.4 $0.6 $0.6 $0.7 $0.7 $0.7

It is logical to assume that the toll roads with the greatest amount of traffic have the highest levels of toll revenues, and in general, that is true. Table 10 shows that the Sam Houston Tollway received the highest yearly total toll revenue at $406.7 million in FY 2013 and carried some of the highest traffic volumes. This is followed by the President George Bush Turnpike ($223.9 million), the Dallas North Tollway ($205.1 million), and the Sam Rayburn Tollway ($123.4 million), which also carry significant traffic.

Comparing Changes in Toll Revenues over Time Again, merely comparing the annual toll revenues of one facility to another provides little meaning other than to put perspective on the order of magnitude in total revenues. It is more informative to observe the change in revenue for a single toll road over time. Table 11 presents the year-over-year percent change in toll revenues.

Table 11. Annual Percent Change in Toll Revenue for Texas Toll Roads. Percent Change in Toll Revenue Facility FY FY FY FY FY FY 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 SH 255 (Camino Columbia) 117% 8% −21% SH 45 North 11% -1% 3% 8% 33% SH 45 Southeast 13% 14% 5%

SH 130 Segments 1–4 39% 27% 5% 12% 34% Loop 1 (Parmer Lane to SH 45 4% 0% 3% 6% 24% North) Dallas North Tollway 20% 12% 21% 8% 9% 5% President George Bush Turnpike 9% 5% 20% 9% 31% 10% Sam Rayburn Tollway (SH 121) 53% 22% 15% 12% Hardy Toll Road 23% 4% 4% 2% 2% 7% Sam Houston Tollway 12% 3% 5% 3% 7% 7% Westpark Tollway 26% 1% −5% 4% 3% 9% Fort Bend Parkway −10% 4% 8% 5% 183A (Manor Expy. Phase 1) 13% 17% 6% 10% 36% Loop 49 69% 6% 5% 5% 7% Note: Years with partial data are not included in this table.

Table 11 shows that there are usually large percent increases in toll revenues when comparing the first full year of operations to the second year. This is attributed to the ramp-up that occurs after the opening of a new toll facility as drivers become aware of and accustomed to the new toll road. This ramp-up period is expected and is accounted for within the feasibility and investment- grade traffic and revenue forecasts. It is more telling to view the revenue growth rate after a few years of stable operations. The year-over-year increase in revenues cannot be solely attributed to gradual and predictable increases in traffic. For example, the 183A toll road in Austin saw a notable increase in toll revenue in FY 2013 that can be largely attributed to the fact that an extension of the toll road opened during that year. This extension made the toll road attractive to more users, but it also introduced additional tolling points, where additional tolls are generated, for the existing users that are now traveling farther along the toll road. As another example, SH 130 Segments 1–4 noticed a marked increase in the toll revenues generated during FY 2013. This specific case of markedly higher toll revenues is attributed to the opening of SH 130 Segments 5 and 6 (not part of CTTS) for a completed bypass of the I-35 corridor through Austin and San Marcos, and to the introduction of a substantial toll rate increase beginning January 1, 2013. Figure 1 illustrates the growth in the number of registered passenger vehicles and motorcycles in Texas, and the increasing numbers of electronic toll tags being issued by tolling entities.

Figure 1. Number of Registered Passenger Vehicles and Motorcycles and Toll Tags Issued in Texas.

Toll Rates and Toll Revenues Toll revenues tend to increase merely with the introduction of higher toll rates, even if traffic declines slightly, because the initial higher toll rate might discourage some users. Numerous examples and studies show that increasing toll rates actually increases toll revenues. For toll roads in Texas and across the nation, analyses show that toll rates have elasticities of approximately −0.35. For example, assume that 1,000 users pay $1 each for their toll on a toll road. The resulting revenue would be $1,000 (1,000 × $1). The toll rate is then raised to $2 (a 100 percent increase in the toll), and the elasticity calculation predicts the volume of users would decrease by 35 percent. Revenue, however, would actually increase to $1,300 (650 × $2). This same type of result can also be seen in mass transit systems when bus, train, and subway fares increase (24). So what happens to those toll road users who stop using the facility due to the higher toll rates? Although not as extensively studied, there is evidence that traffic volumes on the tolled facility do recover to a large extent after a period of time. Some of the traffic recovery is due to the annual traffic growth that occurs naturally for roadways. Another significant reason for the

traffic rebound is the fact that once people leave the tolled facility, they discover that the next best alternative—either using a non-tolled route or changing transportation modes (e.g., bus transit)—is not as desirable to them. They value the benefits of the toll road more than the cost of the increased toll rate, and they eventually return to the tolled facility. Depending on the choice of alternative routes and travel modes, a driver’s decision to go back to the toll road may occur sooner rather than later. The frequency of toll rate increases and the amount of each increase do impact the driver’s decision-making process.

Vehicle Mix and Toll Revenues During the feasibility and planning phase for a toll road, core assumptions are made about the number and percentage of various types of vehicles, as well as the toll rate each vehicle type will incur, in order to forecast future toll revenues. Vehicle types are commonly defined by the number of axles per vehicle or by their general shape. The toll rate charged to each vehicle type is frequently based on a multiplier applied to a base vehicle type (e.g., a standard passenger car). A typical toll multiplier would be as follows for these vehicle classifications:  1.00 for two-axle vehicles.  2.00 for three-axle vehicles.  3.00 for four-axle vehicles.  4.00 for five-axle vehicles.  5.00 for six-axle vehicles. An example may be the most direct method of explaining how the vehicle mix and toll multipliers affect revenues. As mentioned previously, several calculated assumptions are made to estimate future annual traffic volumes and revenues of a toll road. Assume that five years after a toll road opens, the traffic is anticipated to be 1,000,000 transactions per month, and for simplicity, it is assumed 90 percent of the transactions are generated by passenger cars and 10 percent are generated by five-axle trucks. If the toll rate is $1 per transaction for a passenger car, then the forecasted revenue would be as follows using the example multiplier: (1,000,000 × 90% × $1) + (1,000,000 × 10% × $1 × 4.00) = $1,300,000 In five years when it is possible to observe actual toll road activity, the estimation of usage may reveal that 1,000,000 transactions per month was a rather accurate forecast. However, the toll revenues generated did not match expectations because the assumptions about vehicle mix were not accurate. Even a small change in the actual vehicle types using the toll road can have a significant impact on revenues, as illustrated in Table 12.

Table 12. An Example of the Impact of Vehicle Mix on Toll Revenues. Percent of Two- Percent of Five- Toll Toll Total Monthly Axle Vehicles Axle Vehicles Revenue Revenue Monthly Transactions (Passenger (Commercial Generated Generated Toll Cars) Trucks) by Cars by Trucks Revenue 1,000,000 85% 15% $850,000 $600,000 $1,450,000 1,000,000 90% 10% $900,000 $400,000 $1,300,000 1,000,000 95% 5% $950,000 $200,000 $1,150,000

As shown in Table 12, although the usage of the toll road remained the same within the three scenarios (i.e., 1,000,000 transactions per month), the toll revenue generated can fluctuate rather significantly (±11.5 percent) in response to a rather small change in the vehicle mix (±5 percent).

Comparative Summary of Average Toll Rate per Mile In an effort to better understand toll road performance from one facility to the next, it is desirable to find a measure to compare toll roads with one another. As seen from Table 13, the toll roads in Texas have a toll rate that ranges from $0.53 per mile to $0.08 per mile for a passenger vehicle. Table 13 compiles the toll rates per mile for toll roads in Texas. The average cost per mile is based on the toll rate for transactions conducted with an electronic tag and are presented for a typical two-axle passenger vehicle and the traditional five-axle (i.e., tractor -trailer) truck. The data are from toll facilities in operation as of January 1, 2013, and the toll rates in effect at that time. Note that in some cases, a single toll road is divided up into segments in order to report the variations in the cost per mile along its length. As seen from Table 13, the toll roads in Texas have a toll rate that ranges from $0.53 per mile to $0.08 per mile for a passenger vehicle.

Table 13. Average Toll Rate per Mile by Toll Tag in Texas. Average Average Passenger Length Truck Cost Name of Facility Vehicle Cost in Miles per Vehicle per Vehicle Mile Mile Hardy Airport Connector (Harris County) 1.7 $0.53 $2.60 Manor Expressway—Phase 1* 1.2 $0.39 $1.18 Fort Bend Parkway Extension*** 8.3 $0.31 $1.27 Loop 1 (Parmer Lane to SH 45 North) 3.5 $0.26 $0.78 Manor Expressway—Phase 2* 5 $0.26 $0.77 US 183A 11.6 $0.25 $0.74 Westpark Tollway—Fort Bend County 6 $0.20 $0.80 SH 99 (Grand Parkway) Segment I-2A 6.6 $0.18 $0.53 Sam Houston Tollway East 7.3 $0.17 $0.72 SH 550 1 $0.17 $0.50 Chisholm Trail Parkway* 28.6 $0.16** $0.48** SH 45 North 12.8 $0.16 $0.48 Dallas North Tollway 30.1 $0.16 $0.45 President George Bush Turnpike 29.7 $0.16 $0.45 President George Bush Turnpike—Western 11.8 $0.16 $0.45 Extension President George Bush Turnpike—Eastern Extension 9.9 $0.16 $0.45 Sam Rayburn Tollway 26.2 $0.16 $0.45 Loop 49 5.1 $0.15 $0.45 Sam Houston Tollway West 25.7 $0.15 $0.63 SH 45 Southeast 7.0 $0.15 $0.45 SH 130 Segments 1–4 49.0 $0.14 $0.42 Sam Houston Tollway—SE Belt 9.7 $0.13 $0.54 Hardy Toll Road 21.1 $0.12 $0.50 Sam Houston Tollway—SW Belt 10.9 $0.10 $0.46 SH 255 (Camino Colombia) 22.5 $0.09 $0.36 Westpark Tollway 13.2 $0.08 $0.37 Sam Houston Tollway NE 13 $0.08 $0.38 * These toll roads were not open to traffic until May 2014, and therefore sufficient revenue data were not available at the time of reporting (25); however, they were included in the table to show how their toll cost per mile rate will compare. ** For the most northern section of the Chisholm Trail Parkway, local residents elected to pay on additional $0.04 per mile to pay for additional landscaping and other enhancements they wanted incorporated into the project. *** Fort Bend Parkway Extension consists of 6.2 miles in Harris County and 2.1 miles in Fort Bend County. The cost per mile represents a weighted average of reported rates. Note: Updated average passenger vehicle cost per vehicle mile for NTTA facilities was provided by NTTA.

Comparing Texas Toll Facilities to the Nation To see how Texas non-interstate toll roads compare in context with other tolled facilities across the United States, Table 14 summarizes average toll rates per mile for toll roads in Texas and the nation. The average cost per mile is based on the toll rate for an electronic tag. Toll rates for video tolling—pay-by-mail—are typically 25 to 50 percent higher. Table 14. Comparison of Toll Rates for Non-interstate Toll Roads in the United States (26). Average Average Passenger Length Truck Cost State Name of Facility Vehicle Cost in Miles per Vehicle per Vehicle Mile Mile Prospect Mountain Veterans Memorial New York 5.9 $0.67 N/A* Highway Texas Fort Bend Parkway Extension 2.1 $0.63 $2.69 Texas Hardy Airport Connector 1.7 $0.53 $2.60 Puerto Rafael Martínez Nadal Expressway 1.6 $0.47 $0.34 Rico (PR 20) San Joaquin Hills Trans Corridor California 15 $0.40 $1.80 (Route 73) Colorado Pikes Peak Toll Road 19 $0.39 $0.39 Texas Manor Expressway—Phase 1 1.2 $0.39 $1.18 Colorado Northwest Parkway 11 $0.29 $1.23 California Route 91 Express Lanes 10 $0.28 $0.00 Florida Miami Airport Expressway 4.1 $0.26 $1.08 Texas Loop 1 North (Parmer Lane to SH 45N) 3.5 $0.26 $0.78 Texas Manor Expressway—Phase 2 5 $0.26 $0.77 California Foothill Trans. Corridor (Route 241) 28 $0.25 $1.00 Puerto Expreso Rio Hondo (PR 5) 2.1 $0.25 $0.99 Rico Texas US 183A 11.6 $0.25 $0.74 Colorado E-470 47 $0.24 $1.35 John Land—Apopka Expressway Florida 5 $0.23 $0.44 (SR 414) Homestead Extension of Florida Florida 47.9 $0.20 $0.20 Turnpike South Cross Island Parkway (US 278) 7.5 $0.20 $0.67 Carolina Texas Westpark Tollway—Fort Bend County 6 $0.20 $0.80 Fort Bend Parkway Extension—Fort Texas 6.2 $0.20 $0.80 Bend County Florida Holland East-West Expressway 22.4 $0.19 $0.37

Average Average Passenger Length Truck Cost State Name of Facility Vehicle Cost in Miles per Vehicle per Vehicle Mile Mile Florida Goldenrod Road Extension 2.7 $0.19 $0.19 Alabama Foley Beach Express 8.5 $0.18 $3.50 Texas SH 99 (Grand Parkway) Segment I-2 6.6 $0.18 $0.53 Daniel Webster—Western Beltway Florida 22 $0.17 $0.13 Part C Texas Sam Houston Tollway East 7.3 $0.17 $0.72 Texas SH 550 1 $0.17 $0.50 Texas Chisholm Trail Parkway 28.6 $0.16 $0.48 Texas SH 45 North 12.8 $0.16 $0.48 Texas Dallas North Tollway 30.1 $0.15 $0.45 Texas Sam Houston Tollway West 25.7 $0.15 $0.63 Texas President George Bush Turnpike 29.7 $0.15 $0.45 President George Bush Turnpike— Texas 11.8 $0.15 $0.45 Western Extension President George Bush Turnpike— Texas 9.9 $0.15 $0.45 Eastern Extension Texas Loop 49 5.1 $0.15 $0.45 Texas Sam Rayburn Tollway (SH 121) 25.5 $0.15 $0.45 Texas SH 130 Segments 5 and 6 $0.15 $0.45 Florida Central Florida Greenway (SR 417) 33.4 $0.14 $0.27 Texas SH 45 Southeast 10 $0.14 $0.53 Texas SH 130 Segments 1–4 49 $0.14 $0.42 Florida Beachline Expressway 22.5 $0.13 $0.19 Florida Polk Parkway (SR 570) 24.4 $0.13 $0.42 Texas Sam Houston Tollway—SE Belt 9.7 $0.13 $0.54 Florida Veterans Expressway (SR 589) 12.2 $0.12 $0.35 Florida Seminole Expressway 17.5 $0.12 $0.36 Texas Hardy Toll Road 21.1 $0.12 $0.50 Florida Southern Connector Extension 5.1 $0.10 $0.32 New New Jersey Turnpike (Mainline) 37.7 $0.10 $0.52 Jersey Texas Sam Houston Tollway—SW Belt 10.9 $0.10 $0.46 Florida Sawgrass Expressway (SR 869) 21.7 $0.09 $0.27 Florida Lee Roy Selmon Crosstown Expressway 14.2 $0.09 $0.24 Oklahoma John Kilpatrick Turnpike 25.3 $0.09 $0.38 Texas SH 255 (Camino Colombia) 22.5 $0.09 $0.36 Florida Gratigny Parkway 5.4 $0.08 $0.24 Florida Snapper Creek Expressway 3 $0.08 $0.11

Average Average Passenger Length Truck Cost State Name of Facility Vehicle Cost in Miles per Vehicle per Vehicle Mile Mile Florida Suncoast Parkway (SR 589) 41.4 $0.08 $0.22 Oklahoma Creek Turnpike 34.4 $0.08 $0.33 Oklahoma Cherokee Turnpike 32.8 $0.08 $0.32 Texas Westpark Tollway 13.2 $0.08 $0.37 Texas Sam Houston Tollway NE 13 $0.08 $0.38 Florida Beachline West 8.4 $0.07 $0.22 Florida Osceola Parkway 12.4 $0.06 $0.84 Florida Florida Turnpike—Mainline 266 $0.06 $0.19 Oklahoma Muskogee Turnpike 53.1 $0.06 $0.20 Florida East-West (Dolphin) Expressway 14 $0.05 $0.15 New Garden State Parkway 148.4 $0.05 $0.30 Jersey Gov. Thomas E. Dewey Thruway New York 5.6 $0.05 $0.24 Berkshire Section Oklahoma Indian Nation Turnpike 105.2 $0.05 $0.21 Florida South Dade (Don Shula) Expressway 7.2 $0.04 $0.10 Oklahoma Cimarron Turnpike 67.7 $0.04 $0.20 Oklahoma Chickasaw Turnpike 17.3 $0.04 $0.14 Beachline East (Central Florida Florida 15 $0.03 $0.01 Expressway) New Atlantic City Expressway 31.5 $0.03 $0.08 Jersey * No trucks are allowed on this roadway.

Texas Toll Road Profiles

As a consolidated and quick reference, this section of the report contains brief profiles of tolling entities and individual toll roads in Texas. The toll roads are organized under the entity responsible for their current operations. Each profile includes the following information: location, physical description, governance, project delivery, financing, and timeline.

North Texas Tollway Authority As discussed previously, in 1997, the Texas Legislature created NTTA under Chapter 366 of the Texas Transportation Code (1). Effective September 1, 1997, NTTA became the successor agency to the Texas Turnpike Authority and succeeded to all assets, rights, liabilities, and other property of the Texas Turnpike Authority located in Collin, Dallas, Denton, Johnson, and Tarrant Counties. NTTA also assumed and became liable for all duties and obligations related to the Texas Turnpike Authority at the time. NTTA is authorized and empowered by the Regional Tollway Authority Act to construct, maintain, repair, and operate turnpike projects within Collin, Denton, Dallas, and Tarrant Counties. NTTA is further authorized to issue turnpike revenue bonds,4 payable solely from tolls and other NTTA revenue, for the purpose of paying all or part of the cost of a turnpike project. The NTTA System consists of the following toll facilities (illustrated in Figure 2) (27):  Dallas North Tollway.  Addison Airport Toll Tunnel.  President George Bush Turnpike.  Mountain Creek Lake Bridge.  Sam Rayburn Tollway.  Lewisville Lake Toll Bridge.  Chisholm Trail Parkway (Special Projects System).

4 A revenue bond in this context refers to a type of bond that is repaid from revenues generated primarily from a tolled facility only.

Source: NTTA 2013 Final Budget. Figure 2. North Texas Tollway Authority Facility Map.

Facility Development Cost and Financing Structure The Texas Turnpike Authority (TTA) used a $58 million bond issue in 1954 to begin constructing the Dallas-Fort Worth Turnpike. Subsequently, the authority issued another round of bonds in 1965 that were used to fund the Dallas North Tollway (DNT). The tolls on the Dallas-Fort Worth Turnpike were removed in 1978 and the road redesignated as I-30. Since the transfer, NTTA has issued several bonds to fund the President George Bush Turnpike (PGBT), the Sam Rayburn Tollway (SRT), and other projects. In order to consolidate the debt issued by NTTA, the authority used a $5.3 billion system revenue bond issue by leveraging its entire system to reduce investment risk for existing and new projects. Table 15 provides an overview of the financial structure for three toll facilities on the NTTA System. Table 16 presents a historical review of NTTA’s outstanding debt by type by fiscal year (28). Table 15. NTTA Toll Facility Financial Structure. Date Cost of Toll Road Financing Mechanism Open Construction Information Not Dallas North Tollway 1968 Information not available Available Section 129 loan, TTA toll-backed revenue bonds, TTA capital President George 1998 $2.8 Billion improvement fund, right-of-way Bush Turnpike donation, TxDOT contributions, system revenue bonds, TIGER 1, TIFIA loan Purchased by NTTA used $3.5 billion in bond Sam Rayburn NTTA for anticipation notes (BANs) and then paid 2006 Tollway $3.2 Billion from off the BANs with a system bond issue of TxDOT $5.3 billion in revenue refunding bonds

Table 16. Summary of NTTA Outstanding Obligations (in Millions of Dollars). Bond Commercial TxDOT Revenue TxDOT Total Debt Year Anticipation Paper Notes Loan Bonds ISTEA Loan Amount Notes Payable Payable 2003 $1,139 - - $135.0 $4.6 $1,278 2004 $1,125 - - $135.0 $4.6 $1,265 2005 $1,420 - - $135.0 $4.6 $1,560 2006 $1,390 - $25.0 $135.0 $4.6 $1,554 2007 $1,368 $3,487 $75.0 $135.0 $4.6 $5,070 2008 $6,150 - $89.7 $135.0 $4.6 $6,380 2009 $7,122 - $5.2 $146.6 $4.6 $7,278 2010 $7,543 - $119.0 $142.9 - $7,805 2011 $7,555 - $56.3 $140.6 - $7,752 2012 $7,556 - $38.3 $138.3 - $7,732

Historical Revenue Generation NTTA owns and operates several tolled facilities. The DNT, PGBT, SRT (previously SH 121), Mountain Creek Lake Bridge, Addison Airport Toll Tunnel, and Lewisville Lake Toll Bridge compose what is referred to as the NTTA System. A separate enterprise fund of NTTA called the Special Projects System is comprised of the PGBT Western Extension and the Chisholm Trail Parkway. For the purposes of this report, only the revenues of the major tolled facilities are reported. NTTA reports revenue generation on an annual basis as shown in Table 17. The revenue performance of the three major NTTA toll roads indicates the following:  The DNT grew 100 percent in revenue from 2007 to 2013, which represents an average year-over-year growth rate of 16.7 percent.  The PGBT grew 117 percent in revenue from 2007 to 2013, which represents an average year-over-year growth rate of 19.5 percent.  The SRT grew 139 percent from 2009 to 2013, which represents an average year-over- year growth rate of 27.8 percent.

Table 17. NTTA Historical Revenue Generation (in Millions of Dollars). Dallas North President George Sam Rayburn Fiscal Year Tollway Bush Turnpike Tollway 2007 $102.60 $103.30 N/A 2008 $122.90 $112.80 $12.70 2009 $137.50 $118.70 $51.60 2010 $165.70 $142.80 $78.90 2011 $179.20 $155.10 $96.20 2012 $195.80 $202.90 $110.40 2013 $205.10 $223.90 $123.40 Source: Data compiled by TTI from historical NTTA financial statements.Expenses and Obligations

From the audited financial statements published by NTTA, the researchers summarized the data to compile a simplified statement of revenues and expenses in order to obtain an annual snapshot of the yearly financial activities of NTTA. Revenues and expenditures were categorized as either operating or non-operating based on the activities the items were associated with. The simplified summary of revenues and expenses for NTTA is presented in Table 18. NTTA reported revenues and expenses for the entire agency until 2011 when NTTA created two separate enterprise funds as previously mentioned, the NTTA System and Special Projects System. The summary of expenses in Table 18 combines the NTTA System and the Special Projects System. A closer examination of the revenues, expenses, and, in particular, debt obligations of the separate enterprise funds will be provided. Table 18. NTTA Income Statement (in Millions of Dollars). (Simplified statement of revenues and expenses compiled by TTI from audited financial statements published by NTTA) FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Operating $177.6 $198.1 $210.7 $250.0 $307.6 $383.9 $455.1 $515.4 $623.9 Revenue Non-operating $15.6 $21.5 $20.2 $149.9 $27.8 $25.7 $19.9 $26.4 $29.4 Revenue Contributions/ $0.0 $0.0 $25.0 $0.0 $67.1 $57.8 $128.5 $497.2 $131.5 Transfers In Total Revenues $193.2 $219.6 $255.8 $399.9 $402.5 $467.4 $603.5 $1,039.0 $784.8 Operating $94.2 $116.2 $132.8 $137.5 $126.4 $125.7 $157.2 $159.0 $155.3 Expenses Non-operating $65.7 $62.1 $62.9 $322.6 $463.3 $459.0 $1,004.1 $538.9 $627.5 Expenses5 Transfers Out $0.0 $25.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.2 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 Total Expenses $159.9 $203.3 $195.7 $460.1 $589.7 $584.8 $1,161.3 $697.9 $782.9 Source: Data compiled by TTI from NTTA System Annual Financial Reports and Special Projects Annual Financial Reports (29).

5 Non-operating expenses include construction costs and do not reflect the annual cost of operating the system.

The following pages profile the following NTTA facilities in further detail:6  Dallas North Tollway.  President George Bush Turnpike.  Sam Rayburn Tollway (SH 121).

6 Due to data and project scope limitations, only selected facilities were profiled in this report.

Dallas North Tollway Governance The DNT is owned and operated by NTTA. Location Upon the DNT’s opening in 1968, researchers The Dallas North Tollway is a connection for were only able to collect data from 2007 through motorists between downtown Dallas and Collin, 2013. For this time period, transactions for the Denton, and the northern Dallas Counties. The total facility have increased from 195 million in roadway spans from I-35 in Dallas County to 2007 to 233 million in 2013. US 380 in Collin County. Project Delivery Physical Description Information is not available. The DNT is 31 miles in length and consists of six lanes (Figure 3). Major intersections include Financing the President George Bush Turnpike and the Information is not available. Sam Rayburn Tollway. Project Timeline 1968: Original construction from downtown to I-635 begins. 1987: Briargrove Lane addition is completed. 1994: Sam Rayburn Tollway is completed. 2004: Gaylord Parkway is completed. 2007: Extension to Highway 380 is completed.

Operational Performance Total Total Fiscal Transactions Revenue Year (Million) ($ Million) 2007 195.4 $102.6 2008 207.3 $122.9 2009 205.0 $137.5 2010 205.8 $165.7 2011 215.6 $179.2 2012 230.3 $195.8 2013 233.2 $205.1

Figure 3. Dallas North Tollway Map.

President George Bush Turnpike Financing The Main Section was constructed for Location $530.5 million and was financed by a The President George Bush Turnpike functions Section 129 loan, TTA toll-backed revenue as an outer loop around Dallas County, while bonds, TTA Capital Improvement Fund, and also serving Collin and Denton Counties. The local right-of-way donations. The East Extension corridor spans from I-35 at the Dallas/Tarrant was constructed for $1.05 billion and financed by County border to I-30 near Dallas/Rockwall NTTA toll-backed revenue bonds, TxDOT, and County. Major intersections include I-30, Belt city contributions. The final West Extension was Line Road, I-635, I-35, the DNT, and US 75. constructed for $1.2 billion and financed by system revenue bonds, a TIFIA loan, TIGER Physical Description 1TIFIA, and equity. The PGBT consists of six lanes for most of the 52-mile corridor (Figure 4). It is generally Project Timeline divided into three sections: Main, Eastern 1998: PGBT staged opening begins between Extension, and Western Extension. Preston and Midway. 2006: PGBT is completed. October 2008: Construction begins on Eastern Extension. February 2010: NTTA Board authorizes agreement with TxDOT for Western Extension. December 2011: Eastern Extension opens to traffic. October 2012: Final Western Extension phase opens to traffic. December 2012: Final Western Extension connector opens.

Figure 4. President George Bush Turnpike Operational Performance Map. Total Total Fiscal Transactions Revenue Year Governance (Million) ($ Million) The turnpike is owned and operated by NTTA. 2007 183.1 $103.3 2008 180.7 $112.8 Project Delivery 2009 175.4 $118.7 2010 181.6 $142.8 All three sections were constructed by NTTA 2011 192.4 $155.1 (the Eastern and Western Extensions were in part 2012 237.4 $202.9 constructed by TxDOT): 2013 250.8 $223.9

 Main—$530.5 million.  Eastern Extension—$1.05 billion.  Western Extension—$1.2 billion.

Sam Rayburn Tollway Project Timeline August 2006: Denton Tap to Old Denton is Location completed. The Sam Rayburn Tollway (Figure 5) is a August 2008: Old Denton to Hillcrest is 26-mile corridor extending through the cities of completed. Allen, Carrolton, Fairview, Frisco, Lewisville, McKinney, Plano, and The Colony. September 2008: SH 121 is purchased by NTTA and becomes SRT. Physical Description September 2009: Hillcrest to Hardin is With six lanes, three in each direction, the SRT completed. (also known as SH 121) begins at I-35 East, intersects with the DNT, and ends at the March 2011: Harding to East of US 75 is intersection of the South Central Expressway. completed. October 2011: First four ramps of SRT/DRT Governance Interchange is completed. The tollway is owned and operated by NTTA. November 2011: Last four ramps of SRT/DRT Project Delivery Interchange is completed. The roadway was purchased in 2007 by NTTA Operational Performance from TxDOT for $3.2 billion. Total Total Fiscal Transactions Revenue Financing Year (Million) ($ Million) For the SRT, NTTA used $3.5 billion in BANs 2008 19.2 $12.7 to purchase the tollway from TxDOT. The 2009 69.5 $51.6 BANs were then refunded into long-term system 2010 89.3 $78.9 debt of $5.3 billion, which included the BANs 2011 99.4 $96.2 2012 111.6 $110.4 and approximately $700 million of non-SRT 2013 120.0 $123.4 refunded debt.

Figure 5. Sam Rayburn Tollway Map.

Harris County Toll Road Authority HCTRA was established in 1983 by the Harris County Commissioners Court pursuant to Chapter 284 of the Texas Transportation Code, and voters in the county approved $900 million in bonds to be issued by the authority for the purpose of building and maintaining toll roads. The Hardy Toll Road was completed in 1987, and the western segment of the Sam Houston Tollway was completed in 1990. In 1994, HCTRA purchased the Jesse H. Jones Memorial Bridge toll facility from the Texas Turnpike Authority, and in 2004, HCTRA opened the Westpark Tollway. In 2009, the Katy Managed Lanes were opened for full operations. HCTRA, a division of the Harris County Public Infrastructure Department, is an enterprise fund of the county and relies on charges from users of the toll road system to fund operations, debt service, and future transportation projects. The following toll facilities are operated by HCTRA (illustrated in Figure 6) (30):  Sam Houston Tollway.  Hardy Toll Road.  Westpark Tollway (Harris County segment only).  Fort Bend Parkway (Harris County segment only).

Source: HCTRA. Figure 6. Harris County Toll Road Authority Facility Map.

Facility Development Cost and Financing Structure In 1987, the Hardy Toll Road became the first road to be completed by HCTRA. In 1990, the Sam Houston Tollway became the second toll road to open under the authority’s control. Since its creation, HCTRA has used its bond-issuing authority to construct the entire Beltway 8 (i.e., Sam Houston Parkway), the Westpark Tollway, and the Hardy Toll Road. As of February 2013, the authority still has over $15 million in available bond-issuing authority from the initial approval in 1983. In order to finance all of the projects that HCTRA has taken on over the years, Harris County and TxDOT have used bond issues and transfers to the authority to help with specific projects. Harris County used over $230 million in tax and revenue bonds to assist with the financing of the Sam Houston Ship Channel Bridge in 1994. Table 19 provides an overview of the financial structure for three HCTRA toll facilities. Table 19. HCTRA Toll Facility Financial Structure. Date Cost of Toll Road Financing Mechanism Open Construction Paid for by revenue and tax- Hardy Toll Road 1988 $365.9 Million supported debt Bond sales, existing toll road funds, Westpark Tollway 2004 $240–260 Million and pass-through financing Bond sales, toll revenues, and Sam Houston Tollway 1988 Varies by Section contributions from other agencies

Historical Revenue Generation HCTRA reports revenue on an annual basis as shown in Table 20. The revenue performance of the three major HCTRA toll roads indicates the following:  The Hardy Toll Road grew 165 percent in revenue from 2005 to 2013, which represents an average year-over-year growth rate of 20.6 percent.  The Westpark Tollway grew 103 percent in revenue from 2006 to 2013, which represents an average year-over-year growth rate of 14.8 percent.  The Sam Houston Tollway grew 58 percent in revenue from 2005 to 2013, which represents an average year-over-year growth rate of 7.8 percent.

Table 20. HCTRA Historical Revenue Generation (in Millions of Dollars). Sam Houston Fiscal Year Hardy Toll Road Westpark Tollway Tollway 2005 $18.59 $8.73 $256.71 2006 $31.95 $23.04 $271.25 2007 $33.09 $33.32 $287.47 2008 $40.74 $41.87 $321.34 2009 $42.51 $42.23 $330.69 2010 $44.10 $39.92 $345.94 2011 $45.06 $41.43 $356.19 2012 $45.85 $42.79 $381.12 2013 $49.25 $46.83 $406.72 Source: Data compiled by TTI from historical HCTRA financial statements.

Expenses and Obligations From the audited financial statements published by HCTRA, the researchers summarized the data to compile a simplified statement of revenues and expenses in order to obtain an annual snapshot of the yearly financial activities of HCTRA. Revenues and expenditures were categorized as either operating or non-operating based on the activities the items were associated with. The simplified summary of revenues and expenses for HCTRA is presented in Table 21. Table 21. HCTRA Income Statement (in Millions of Dollars). (Simplified statement of revenues and expenses by TTI) FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 20147 Operating $265.9 $317.7 $349.3 $394.6 $430.2 $443.0 $456.7 $482.2 $525.4 $560.7 $610.2 Revenue Non-operating $11.1 $6.3 $20.8 $40.1 $53.8 $42.3 $35.5 $14.5 $40.4 $27.9 $6.1 Revenue Contributions/ $15.2 $12.5 $3.1 $3.1 $3.1 $9.3 $7.2 $4.1 $0.6 $0.1 $0 Transfers In Total $292.2 $336.6 $373.3 $437.9 $487.0 $494.6 $499.5 $500.8 $566.3 $588.7 $616.3 Revenues Operating $104.7 $100.3 $119.4 $159.6 $155.3 $184.5 $227.1 $218.0 $217.3 $235.4 $252.1 Expenses Non-operating $109.3 $113.1 $110.8 $117.1 $117.6 $121.2 $132.9 $145.3 $151.4 $150.7 $133.9 Expenses Transfers Out $67.5 $20.1 $20.2 $31.1 $120.5 $120.2 $127.1 $124.4 $133.5 $120.0 $121.0 Total $281.5 $233.5 $250.5 $307.8 $393.5 $426.0 $487.2 $487.6 $502.2 $506.1 $507.1 Expenditures Source: Data compiled by TTI from HCTRA Basic Financial Statements from FY 2004–2014 (31).

7 HCTRA also reports FY 2014 expenses as $226.9 million in debt service and $132.5 million in operations and maintenance.

The following pages profile the following HCTRA facilities in further detail:  Hardy Toll Road.  Sam Houston Tollway.  Westpark Tollway (Harris County segment only).

Hardy Toll Road Project Timeline 1984: Construction begins. Location 1988: Hardy Toll Road is completed. The Hardy Toll Road (Figure 7) runs northwest to southeast located north of downtown Houston 2000: Airport connector opens in January. from I-610 to I-45 at the Harris County line. 2013: Final design phase of downtown connector is completed. Physical Description The toll road is 21 miles in length with an 2015: Expected design phase of widening from additional 3 miles connecting to George Bush FM 1960 to Grand Parkway. Intercontinental Airport. The roadway varies Operational Performance between four and six divided lanes. Total Total Fiscal Transactions Revenue Governance Year (Million) ($ Million) The Hardy Toll Road is owned and operated by 2005 32.5 $18.6 HCTRA. 2006 33.6 $31.9 2007 34.0 $33.1 Project Delivery 2008 37.9 $40.7 Total project cost was $365.9 million paid for by 2009 36.6 $42.5 revenue and tax-supported debt. The 3-mile 2010 37.1 $44.1 2011 37.4 $45.1 airport connector was constructed for 2012 38.0 $45.9 $31.7 million. 2013 39.7 $49.3

Financing Information is not available.

Figure 7. Hardy Toll Road Map.

Sam Houston Tollway Financing TxDOT paid $90 million for the construction of Location the segment between SH 225 and US 59. The The Sam Houston Tollway (Figure 8) is an outer northeast section was constructed for loop around the city of Houston and surrounding $400 million and was financed entirely by toll areas. The non-tolled portions of the tollway are revenue. known as Beltway 8. The tollway crosses over the Houston Ship Channel and I-10 E to SH 225. Project Timeline 1982: Houston Ship Channel toll bridge opens Physical Description in May. Extending 70 miles in length, the roadway has 1985: Groundbreaking is held. major interchanges and connections that include SH 225 in Pasadena, and I-45, I-69/US 59, and 1988: First segment opens. I-10 in Houston. The Sam Houston Tollway has 1989: Second segment opens. two to four lanes in each direction. 1990: Third segment opens, and toll road is complete. 2000: Airport connector opens. 2005: Expansion to eight main lanes on the west and north sides is completed. 2011: Last remaining section in the northeast is completed.

Operational Performance Total Total Fiscal Transactions Revenue Year (Million) ($ Million) 2005 252.0 $256.7 2006 270.0 $271.3 2007 281.6 $287.5 2008 288.2 $321.3 Figure 8. Sam Houston Tollway Map. 2009 272.0 $330.7 2010 281.8 $345.9 Governance 2011 286.4 $356.2 This toll road is owned and operated by 2012 309.8 $381.1 HCTRA. 2013 322.2 $406.7

Project Delivery Information is not available.

Westpark Tollway Financing Financing the roadway was done through bond Location sales and existing toll road funds. There is an The Westpark Tollway (Figure 9) spans from estimated reimbursable value of $36.7 million to I-610 to FM 1464 in Harris County and from Fort Bend County, which pays the remaining FM 1464 to west of SH 99 in Fort Bend County. balance. An extension of the Westpark Tollway in Fort Bend County, from SH 99 to FM 723 tapering Project Timeline off to east of the FM 1463/FH 359 intersection, 2001: Phase 1 groundbreaking is held. is currently in the design-build phase. Construction is set to begin in 2015. 2003: Phase 2 groundbreaking is held. 2004: Phase 1 opens. Physical Description 2005: Phase 2 opens (remaining 5 miles into Currently, the four-lane roadway is 19 miles in Fort Bend County). length, with major interchanges and connections at SH 99, SH 6, Beltway 8, and US 59. 2014: Proposed construction start of extension from SH 99 to FM 1463. 2015–2016: Proposed construction end.

Operational Performance Total Total Fiscal Transactions Revenue Year (Million) ($ Million) 2005 12.7 $8.7 2006 30.3 $23.0 2007 41.6 $33.3 2008 46.0 $41.9 2009 42.0 $42.2 2010 39.3 $39.9 2011 39.5 $41.4 2012 41.2 $42.8 Figure 9. Westpark Tollway Map. 2013 43.6 $46.8

Governance The Westpark Tollway is owned and operated jointly by HCTRA and FBCTRA.

Project Delivery The tollway project was constructed through a design-bid-build contract at a cost of $240– 260 million.

Texas Department of Transportation In 1953, the Texas Legislature created the original Texas Turnpike Authority as an independent entity with statewide authority to construct toll roads and bridges. SB 370, enacted into law in 1997, subsequently abolished the old Texas Turnpike Authority and created a turnpike authority division, the Texas Turnpike Authority Division, within TxDOT to develop toll road facilities in the state. This bill also established the regional NTTA and transferred to it all Texas Turnpike Authority assets in certain North Texas counties (32). In 2011, toll facility duties originally housed within the TxDOT Texas Turnpike Authority Division were transferred to the Toll Operations Division (TOD). This division now handles the transaction processing, toll tag registration, customer service, toll equipment management, and all other back-office services for toll roads owned and operated by TxDOT and GPTC. In addition to CTTS facilities, TxDOT TOD handles the transaction processing and violation processing for Loop 49, the portion of SH 99 Segment D within Harris County, SH 99 Segments E and I-2A, and the SH 255 Camino Columbia toll roads. The Strategic Project Division of TxDOT is now responsible for the procurement, development, and delivery of TxDOT-owned toll roads and the development of public-private partnership agreements in the form of CDAs. TxDOT owns and operates CTTS facilities, which include Loop 1 North (Parmer Lane to SH 45N), SH 130 Segments 1–4, SH 45 North, and SH 45 Southeast, as shown in Figure 10. In addition, TxDOT owns and operates SH 255 (Camino Colombia) near Laredo and SH 99 Segment I-2A in the east Houston area.8

8 Information about facility development costs, financing structure, and historical revenue generation for SH 255 (Camino Columbia) and SH 99 Segment I-2A is not included in this report due to data and project scope limitations.

Source: TxDOT. Figure 10. Central Texas Turnpike System Facility Map.

Facility Development Cost and Financing Structure Four toll facilities make up CTTS. Table 22 shows the individual toll roads of CTTS including the year they opened to traffic, the reported cost of construction, and the original financing method for the roads. Bonds issued in 2002, as well as others associated with the funding of CTTS, were refunded by the revenue from sale of newly issued bonds in 2012. In 2013, debt included $1.6 billion in revenue bond debt and $1.1 billion under the TIFIA program (33). Table 23 summarizes this bond information.

Table 22. CTTS Financial Structure. Date Toll Road Cost of Construction Financing Mechanism Open $822.8 Million $1.3 billion in toll revenue bonds Loop 1 North 2006 (Packaged with SH 45 issued by TxDOT in August 2002, and North) $900 million in bond appreciation SH 130 notes (issued in anticipation of a 2006 $1.3 Billion Segments 1–4 $900 million TIFIA loan), state- $822.8 Million appropriated funds, and right-of-way SH 45 North 2006 (Packaged with Loop 1) contributions (33,34) SH 45 Southeast was added to the system effective Sept. 1, 2012; SH 45 Southeast was financed with cash on SH 45 Southeast 2009 $142 Million deposit in the State Highway Fund; SH 45 Southeast did not have any outstanding debt obligations prior to its inclusion in the system

Table 23. Summary of CTTS Outstanding Obligations. Par Amount Series Issued ($ Million) Central Texas Turnpike System First Tier Revenue Bonds Series 2012-A $585.3 Central Texas Turnpike System First Tier Revenue Bonds Series 2012-B $225.0 Central Texas Turnpike System First Tier Revenue Bonds Series 2002-A $428.7 Subordinate Lien Obligation Issued to the U.S. Department of $900.0 Transportation, TIFIA Secured Loans Note: Par amount is the amount or value of the bond at the time it is issued.

Historical Revenue Generation TxDOT reports toll revenues for each facility in CTTS through quarterly and annual financial statements (35). The revenues for each toll road are presented in Table 24. The revenue performance of the four major CTTS toll roads indicates the following:  Loop 1 North grew 49 percent in revenue from 2008 to 2013, which represents an average year-over-year growth rate of 9.8 percent.  SH 130 Segments 1–4 grew 197 percent in revenue from 2008 to 2013, which represents an average year-over-year growth rate of 39.3 percent.  SH 45 North grew 71 percent in revenue from 2008 to 2013, which represents an average year-over-year growth rate of 14.3 percent.

 SH 45 Southeast grew 33 percent in revenue from 2010 to 2013, which represents an average year-over-year growth rate of 11.0 percent. Table 24. CTTS Toll Revenue Summary (in Millions of Dollars). Loop 1 SH 130 SH 45 SH 45 Fiscal Year North Segments 1–4 North Southeast 2007 $6.13* $5.63* $4.55 N/A 2008 $11.44 $19.46 $17.97 N/A 2009 $11.92 $27.11 $19.88 $0.47* 2010 $11.94 $34.42 $19.80 $3.21 2011 $12.32 $36.24 $20.27 $3.60 2012 $13.02 $40.74 $21.95 $4.25 2013 $16.14 $54.49 $29.08 $4.27 * Not a complete fiscal year. Source: Data compiled by TTI from TxDOT CTTS Actual Traffic and Revenue Reports (36).

Expenses and Obligations From the audited financial statements published by TxDOT, the researchers summarized the data to compile a simplified statement of revenues and expenses in order to obtain an annual snapshot of the yearly financial activities of CTTS. Revenues and expenditures were categorized as either operating or non-operating based on the associated activities. Table 25 provides examples of the items included within these categories. The simplified summary of revenues and expenses for CTTS is presented in Table 26. Table 25. Example of Operating and Non-operating Revenues and Expenses. Revenues Expenses Operating Non-operating Operating Non-operating  Toll revenues  Interest from  Salaries  Interest payments  Fees associated investments  Professional  Debt service with toll  Lease revenue services/fees  Bad debt expense transactions  Increase in fair  Repairs and  Loss on disposal of value of maintenance capital assets investments  Depreciation

Table 26. CTTS Income Statement (in Millions of Dollars). (Simplified statement of revenues and expenses compiled by TTI from audited financial statements published by CTTS) FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Operating Revenue $66.36 $73.30 $74.86 $85.81 $119.14 Non-operating Revenue $10.39 $6.64 $6.89 $6.87 $6.35 Contributions/Transfers In $27.75 $63.29 $46.09 $55.26 $225.109 Total Revenues $104.50 $143.23 $127.84 $147.93 $350.58 Operating Expenses $68.03 $67.61 $69.45 $73.14 $67.17 Non-operating Expenses $152.85 $139.47 $140.43 $142.71 $145.88 Contributions/Transfers $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TotalOut Expenditures $220.88 $207.08 $209.88 $215.85 $213.06 Source: Data compiled by TTI from TxDOT CTTS Actual Traffic and Revenue Reports (36).

The following pages profile the following TxDOT facilities in further detail:  Loop 1 North (Parmer Lane to SH 45 North).  SH 255 (Camino Columbia).  SH 45 North.  SH 130 Segments 1–4.  SH 45 Southeast.

9 $225.10 million in FY 2013 represents the addition of SH 45 Southeast to the system.

Loop 1 North Financing In 2002, the Texas Transportation Commission Location issued $2.2 billion in revenue bonds and bond Loop 1 North (Figure 11) is the northern portion anticipation notes to help finance a portion of of the MoPac Expressway (Loop 1) and the project system; this system included Loop 1, traverses between SH 45 and Parmer Lane, west SH 45 North, and SH 130. of I-35 in Austin. Project Timeline Physical Description 1961: Loop 1 is included as part of the 1961 Located to the west of I-35 in Austin, the City of Austin Master Plan. corridor runs 3 miles long with six divided lanes, three lanes traveling northbound and three lanes 2002: Loop 1 is included as part of the system southbound. identified by the Texas Transportation Commission for expansion, enlargement, or extension.

Operational Performance Total Total Fiscal Transactions Revenue Year (Million) ($ Million) 2007 10.9 $6.1 2008 17.2 $11.4 2009 17.4 $11.9 2010 18.1 $11.9 2011 18.9 $12.3 2012 19.9 $13.0 2013 19.7 $16.1

Figure 11. Loop 1 North Map.

Governance This toll road is owned and operated by TxDOT as part of CTTS.

Project Delivery For this project TxDOT used Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc., an engineering management firm, and a traditional design-bid- build process.

SH 255 traffic from Mexican shipping and hazmat transportation. Location Upon foreclosure auction, TxDOT was originally SH 255 (Figure 12) connects I-35 with FM 1472 outbid by Camino Texas Partnership, LP (CTP) (a about 18 miles northwest of Laredo. The southern group of original investors), and the road was sold section of the road extends from FM 1472 to the for $12.1 million. TxDOT was concerned the group roadside operations building, and the northern was attempting to raise the price to recoup its losses section connects the operations building to I-35. and stopped bidding early in the auction. An agreement was eventually reached with CTP, and Physical Description TxDOT purchased the road for $20 million a few The full length of the roadway is 22 miles with months after the auction. primarily two lanes. The southern section is a 3.5-mile, four-lane divided roadway, and the Financing northern section is 18.5 miles long with two non- The total construction costs of CCTR were nearly divided lanes. $90 million and financed by a variety of private- sector investors, with John Hancock and New York Life Insurance as the leading lenders. TxDOT purchased the roadway for $20 million using funds from the State Highway Fund.

Project Timeline 1997: The Texas Transportation Commission approves Camino Columbia, Inc., to finance, construct, and maintain a private toll road. 2000: Camino Columbia Toll Road opens. January 2004: The toll road is foreclosed on and auctioned to Camino Texas Partnership, LP. June 2004: TxDOT purchases the toll road from Camino Texas Partnership, LP. September 2004: TxDOT opens the road as SH 255.

Figure 12. SH 255 Map. November 2004: Tolling begins on the road. 2008: Road is converted to all-electronic, open-road Governance tolling facility. The original toll road was owned by Camino Colombia, Inc. (CCTR), which consisted of Operational Performance Total Total landowners along the road. TxDOT purchased the Fiscal Transactions Revenue road in 2004 following foreclosure by John Hancock Year and New York Life Insurance. (Million) ($ Million) 2009 0.07 $0.2 Project Delivery 2010 0.20 $0.6 2011 0.30 $1.3 The roadway was constructed for around $90 million 2012 0.30 $1.4 between 1997 and 2000 by CCTR. In January 2004, 2013 0.30 $1.1 CCTR was foreclosed on as a result of low revenue. This was attributed to unfulfilled expectations of

SH 45 North Financing Funding for SH 45 North was a combination of Location toll revenue bonds issued by TxDOT, a federal SH 45 North (Figure 13) is an east-west corridor TIFIA loan, traditional state-appropriated funds, that runs north of Austin from US 183 to and local government contributions in the form SH 130. of right of way.

Physical Description Project Timeline The roadway is 13 miles in length with four to 2006: First segment from Loop 1 to SH 130 six lanes. There are major interchanges and opens one year ahead of schedule. connections with US 183, Loop 1, I-35, and SH 130. February 2007: Second segment opens. April 2007: Third segment from US 183 to Governance FM 620 opens six months ahead of schedule. SH 45 North is owned and operated by TxDOT as a part of CTTS. Operational Performance Total Total Fiscal Project Delivery Transactions Revenue Year This toll road was constructed through a design- (Million) ($ Million) bid-build contract at a cost of $822.8 million for 2007 9.0 $4.6 2008 29.5 $17.9 SH 45 North and Loop 1 combined. 2009 31.3 $19.8 2010 32.2 $19.8 2011 33.5 $20.3 2012 35.8 $21.9 2013 37.1 $29.1

Figure 13. SH 45 North Map.

SH 130 Segments 1–4

Location SH 130 (Figure 14) runs parallel to I-35 in Central Texas. The relief route for the heavily congested I-35 runs north-south on the east side of Austin from I-35/SH 195 at Georgetown to US 183 in southern Travis County. The toll road then stretches from US 183 to SH 45 Southeast to connect to I-35.

Physical Description This roadway is 49 miles in length with four main lanes, two traveling northbound and two southbound. There are major interchanges with I-35, US 79, SH 45 North, US 290, SH 71, and SH 45 Southeast. Future plans include expanding the road to six lanes should there be a Figure 14. SH 130 Segments 1–4 Map. demand and funding available. In 2011, TxDOT agreed to extend SH 130 an additional 53 miles, Project Timeline from Seguin and moving west to end at I-35 2002: Notice to proceed is issued to design-build outside of San Antonio. Segments 5 and 6 were contractor. not included in this research effort because they are not operated or maintained directly by November 2006: Segment 2 from US 79 near TxDOT, but rather by a concessionaire through Hutto to US 290 near Manor opens to traffic. a public-private partnership CDA. December 2006: Segment 1 from I-35 near Georgetown to US 79 opens to traffic. Governance SH 130 is owned and operated by TxDOT as 2007: Segment 3 from US 290 to SH 71 opens part of CTTS. to traffic. 2008: Segment 4 from SH 71 to SH 45 opens to Project Delivery traffic. Construction for the tollway came through a design-build contract at a cost of $1.3 billon. Operational Performance Total Total Fiscal Financing Transactions Revenue Year Funding for SH 130 was a combination of toll (Million) ($ Million) revenue bonds issued by TxDOT, a federal 2007 6.9 $5.6 2008 19.3 $19.5 TIFIA loan, traditional state-appropriated funds, 2009 24.5 $27.1 and local government contributions in the form 2010 28.3 $34.4 of right of way. 2011 30.6 $36.2 2012 34.4 $40.7 2013 41.4 $54.5

SH 45 Southeast Governance The toll road has been owned and operated by Location TxDOT as a part of CTTS since September SH 45 Southeast (Figure 15) runs east-west 2012. through the southern part of Austin near Creedmoor. This roadway connects I-35 at Project Delivery FM 1327, north of Buda, to the SH 130 and Construction of SH 45 Southeast took place US 183 junction near Mustang Ridge. through a design-build contract at a cost of $142 million. Physical Description SH 45 Southeast is a 7.4-mile, four-lane Financing highway with no frontage roads. It has major The Texas Transportation Commission financed interchanges and connections with I-35, North the road project with cash on deposit in the State Turnersville Road, RM 1625, and Highway Fund. SH 130/US 183. Project Timeline 2007: SH 45 Southeast is approved for construction. March 2009: SH 45 Southeast is planned to open. May 2009: SH 45 Southeast opens with no toll charged. June 2009: Toll is collected for pay-by-mail users and 50 percent reduced for TxTag users. July 2009: SH 45 Southeast opens with full tolling.

Operational Performance Total Total Fiscal Transactions Revenue Year (Million) ($ Million) 2007 2008 2009 N/A $0.5 2010 2.9 $3.2 2011 3.3 $3.6 Figure 15. SH 45 Southeast Map. 2012 3.8 $4.3 2013 4.3 $4.3

Northeast Texas Regional Mobility Authority NET RMA, the fifth RMA to be established in the state since HB 3588, was enacted into law in 2003 and was approved as an RMA by the Texas Transportation Commission on October 28, 2004. NET RMA was founded by Smith and Gregg Counties; in June 2006, Cherokee, Rusk, Harrison, and Upshur Counties joined NET RMA (37). Finally, in July 2007, concluding that an “expanded RMA will benefit local governments by increasing local control over transportation planning and through additional transportation projects that may be funded through the RMA,” the commission approved the addition of six new counties to NET RMA: Bowie, Cass, Panola, Titus, Van Zandt, and Wood (38). Figure 16 illustrates NET RMA member counties.

Source: NET RMA 2013 Annual Report. Figure 16. NET RMA Facility Map.

Initially, TxDOT owned and operated Loop 49. NET RMA was created on October 28, 2004, to accelerate the development of transportation projects in the region and is governed by a 19-member board of directors. In March 2013, the Texas Transportation Commission transferred the ownership of Loop 49 to NET RMA. Through a tolling agreement, TxDOT still processes the toll transactions for NET RMA. Table 27 shows the historical toll revenue generated from Loop 49. These revenue figures only account for the time that Loop 49 was owned by TxDOT. Table 27. NETRMA Historical Revenue Generation (in Millions of Dollars). Fiscal Year Loop 49 200710 $0.12 2008 $0.36 2009 $0.61 2010 $0.64 2011 $0.67 2012 $0.71 201311 $0.76

One NET RMA toll facility is profiled in this report—Loop 49.

10 Tolling began in November 2006. 11 Revenue numbers are through March 28, 2013.

Loop 49 Governance Loop 49 is owned and operated by NET RMA. It was Location passed from TxDOT in 2012. Loop 49 (Figure 17) in Smith County is a partially completed project that encompasses three existing Project Delivery project plans: Loop 49, the Longview Outer Loop, and The first segment was completed and opened in August the Lindale Relief Route. The loop is divided into seven 2006 at a cost of $22.3 million. Tolling began on the major segments: Segment 1, Segment 2, Segment 3A, roadway in November 2006. The second segment was Segment 3B, Segment 5, the Lindale Relief Route, and completed in late 2007 for a total construction cost of the East Texas Hourglass. The loop is currently planned $15 million. to extend 33 miles; however, that plan does not include TxDOT contracted the construction of Segment 3A to the East Texas Hourglass, which does not have a Longview Bridge and Road, Ltd., for nearly $38 million. determined length at this time. Loop 49 currently has five Segment 3B was delivered by CH2M Hill using a out of seven segments complete. design-build contract. Segment 5 was contracted by Physical Description TxDOT for $22 million. The first segment completed in the Loop 49 project is Financing about 5 miles long and extends from SH 155 to US 69. Information regarding the financing for Segment 1 and The road currently has two lanes, but all sections will be Segment 2 was not available. expanded to four lanes when the project is ultimately completed. The second segment consists of nearly A portion of the funding for Segment 3A came from the 2 miles of road as it extends from US 69 to FM 756 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) after (Paluxy Road). approval in early 2009 by the Texas Transportation Commission. Segment 3B received funding from a State Segment 3A, the two-lane, 6.6-mile portion of Loop 49, Infrastructure Bank Loan of $39.2 million and a Toll intersects with SH 155 and SH 31. Segment 3B is the Equity Loan of $50 million secured by NET RMA from fourth section and connects SH 31 to I-20. Currently, this TxDOT. road only has two lanes, but four lanes are expected in the future. Segment 5 runs 2.5 miles from FM 756 to Project Timeline SH 110 and was designed by Atkins, NET RMA’s 2006: Segment 1 (5 miles) is completed. general engineering consultant, and constructed by Longview Bridge and Road, Ltd. 2008: Segment 2 (2 miles) is completed. 2012: Segment 3A (6.6 miles) is completed. 2012: Segment 5 (2.5 miles) is completed. 2013: Segment 3B (10.2 miles) is completed.

Operational Performance Total Total Fiscal Transactions Revenue Year (Million) ($ Million) 2007 0.4 $0.1 2008 1.2 $0.4 2009 1.6 $0.6 2010 1.8 $0.6 Figure 17. Loop 49 Map. 2011 1.9 $0.7 2012 2.0 $0.7

Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority CTRMA was created in 2002 under the provisions outlined in Chapter 370 of the Texas Transportation Code. CTRMA serves Williamson and Travis Counties with a mission to “implement innovative, multi-modal transportation solutions that reduce congestion and create transportation choices that enhance quality of life and economic vitality” (39). CTRMA is governed by a seven-member board; the governor appoints the chairman, and the remaining six members are chosen evenly by the counties. CTRMA is pursuing several projects throughout Central Texas, as illustrated in Figure 18 (40).

Source: CTRMA 2013 Annual Report. Figure 18. CTRMA System Map.

In order to serve the growing transportation needs of Travis and Williamson Counties, CTRMA was created in 2002. The authority continues to expand the transportation infrastructure under its control. Facility Development Cost and Financing Structure The 183A toll road and Manor Expressway are highlighted in this report. Phase 1 of the 183A toll road was financed using Series 2005 obligation bonds. The second phase of the project used a more complex financing system that leveraged Series 2010 Senior Lien Bonds, Series 2010 Subordinate Lien Bonds, and revenue from the existing system. Manor Expressway Phases 1 and 2 were financed through federal stimulus funding and revenue bonds. These are shown in Table 28.

Table 28. CTRMA Toll Facility Financial Structure. Cost of Date Toll Road Construction Financing Mechanism Open ($ Million) Revenue bonds, TIFIA loan, state-appropriated 183A 2007 $304.7 funds, right-of-way government contribution Federal stimulus funding, state-appropriated Manor 2014 $426.0 funds, State Infrastructure Bank loan, revenue Expressway bonds

Historical Revenue Generation CTRMA reports revenue on an annual basis, which is summarized in Table 29. Toll revenues from 183A grew 109 percent from 2008 to 2013, which represents an average year-over-year growth rate of 21.8 percent. Some of this revenue growth is attributed to the opening of an expanded 183A in 2012. Table 29. CTRMA Historical Revenue Generation (in Millions of Dollars).12 Fiscal Year 183A 2008 $15.34 2009 $17.33 2010 $20.22 2011 $21.46 2012 $23.61 2013 $32.05 Source: Data compiled by TTI from historical CTRMA financial statements.

Expenses and Obligations From the audited financial statements published by CTRMA, the researchers summarized the data to compile a simplified statement of revenues and expenses in order to obtain an annual snapshot of the yearly financial activities of CTRMA. Revenues and expenditures were categorized as either operating or non-operating based on the activities the items were associated with. The simplified summary of revenues and expenses for CTRMA is presented in Table 30.

12 Tables 29 and 30 show revenues and expenses up to FY 2013 only; therefore, these tables do not include the Manor Expressway, which opened in 2014.

Table 30. CTRMA Income Statement (in Millions of Dollars). (Simplified statement of revenues and expenses by TTI) FY FY FY FY 2011 2012 2013 2014 Operating Revenue $21.5 $23.6 $32.2 $40.0 Non-operating Revenue $32.0 $28.6 $92.6 $116.0 Total Revenue $53.5 $52.2 $124.8 $156.0 Operating Expenses $17.7 $17.1 $24.8 $27.4 Non-operating Expenses $11.6 $21.4 $22.3 $17.6 Total Expenses $29.3 $38.5 $47.1 $45.0 Source: Data provided by CTRMA.

The following pages profile the following CTRMA facilities in further detail:  Highway 183A.  Manor Expressway.

Highway 183A Toll Road Project Delivery The roadway was constructed through a design- Location build contract at a cost of $304.7 million, which The 183A toll road (Figure 19) extends from excludes the cost of the 5-mile extension northwest Austin through Cedar Park and constructed in 2012. Leander in Williamson County. The roadway runs parallel and to the west of I-35. Financing Funding for 183A was through a combination of Physical Description revenue bonds, a federal TIFIA loan, traditional Highway 183A is 11.6 miles in length and is a state-appropriated funds, and a local government four-lane roadway with the ability to expand to contribution in the form of right of way. six lanes. Project Timeline 2007: 183A Phase I opens. 2010: Construction begins on Phase II. 2011: Shared-use path opens. 2011: San Gabriel Parkway, 183A East, opens. 2012: Phase II Extension opens.

Operational Performance Total Total Fiscal Transactions Revenue Year (Million) ($ Million) 2008 19.4 $15.5 2009 21.4 $17.4 2010 22.3 $20.2 2011 22.7 $21.5 2012 24.9 $23.6 2013 36.1 $32.1

Figure 19. Highway 183A Toll Road Map.

Governance Highway 183A is owned and operated by CTRMA.

Manor Expressway Governance Manor Expressway is owned and operated by Location CTRMA. When all phases are completed, Manor Expressway (Figure 20) will extend from Project Delivery US 183 to east of Parmer Lane. Phase 1 used a design-bid-build contract. Phase 2 used a CDA. Physical Description Once completed, the Manor Expressway will be Financing a 6.2-mile, limited-access toll road with three This first phase of the Manor Expressway was lanes in each direction. The existing US 290 will initially funded using a combination of the be improved and will remain non-tolled. The federal stimulus funding and a State Manor Expressway will link important roadways Infrastructure Bank loan. Senior lien revenue in the region, including US 183 and the SH 130 bonds ($306 million) and subordinate lien toll road. revenue bonds ($70 million) were sold to finance the remainder of Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Manor Expressway from Chimney Hill Boulevard to east of Parmer Lane. The total project cost was approximately $426 million.

Project Timeline April 2013: Phase 1 is completed. May 2014: Phase 2 opens to traffic.

Operational Performance The full length of the Manor Expressway opened to traffic in May 2014; transactions and revenue data are not available at this time.

Figure 20. Manor Expressway Map.

Cameron County Regional Mobility Authority On September 30, 2004, the Texas Transportation Commission approved the creation of the Cameron County Regional Mobility Authority. The commission determined that this approval was granted in order “to promote and improve regional mobility within Cameron County, South Texas, and internationally with the Northern Tamaulipas region of Mexico” (41). According to the CCRMA 2012–2016 Strategic Plan, 22 projects are in various stages of development, as illustrated in Figure 21.

Source: CCRMA 2012–2016 Strategic Plan. Figure 21. CCRMA System Map.

One CCRMA toll facility was profiled for this report—SH 550 Segments 1–3.

SH 550 (Phases I, II, and III) Governance SH 255 is owned and operated by CCRMA. Location SH 550 (Figure 22) is a limited-access tollway Project Delivery that extends from the northern to the eastern Construction on this toll road took place through edge of Brownsville in South Texas. Phase I of the design-bid-build process. this project will be the construction of a tollway that extends from Paredes Line Road to Financing FM 1847, a length of 1.9 miles. Phase II extends This project has been financed through revenue from FM 3248 to SH 48. Phase III extends from bonds and a grant from the ARRA. Project costs US 77/US 83 to SH 48, a length of 10.0 miles. were approximately $10 million for Phase I and $34 million for Phase II. Costs for Phase III Physical Description were not available. Phase I consists of new 2×2 lanes of expressway. Design plans call for a wide median Project Timeline between frontage roads built by TxDOT with tax 2011: Phase I opens to traffic. monies. Access, egress, and turns are done via 2013: Phase II opens to traffic. slip lanes between the tolled main lanes and the frontage roads. 2014: Phase III opens to traffic. Operational Performance Information is not available.

Figure 22. SH 550 Map.

Grand Parkway Transportation Corporation GPTC is a non-profit Texas corporation created by the Texas Transportation Commission to finance certain segments of SH 99, the Grand Parkway (Figure 23). In 2013, GPTC financed Segments D (the portion within Harris County), E, F-1, F-2, and G of SH 99, which comprise the Grand Parkway System. Segment E and the portion of Segment D within Harris County opened to traffic in December 2013. Segments F-1, F-2, and G are under construction and are expected to open to traffic in late 2015. Segment I-2A, already open to traffic, is currently not part of the system and is owned and operated by TxDOT. Additionally, the portion of Segment D within Fort Bend County is open to traffic and is owned and operated by the Fort Bend County Toll Road Authority.

Figure 23. Grand Parkway Facility Map.

One portion of the Grand Parkway System is profiled in this report—SH 99 Segment E.

SH 99 Segment E Governance The tollway is developed and operated by the Location Grand Parkway Transportation Corporation. Toll SH 99 (Figure 24), also known as the Grand transaction back-office services are provided by Parkway, is an 11-segment highway that runs TxDOT. through seven counties surrounding the Houston metropolitan area. Segment E is on the west side Project Delivery of the project, extending from north of I-10 to Segment E is being constructed pursuant to four US 290. different design-bid-build contracts. Physical Description Financing Development of the Grand Parkway began in the Segment E was developed as a part of a larger 1980s, and the first leg of the highway was $2.9 billion financing by GPTC, which also opened to traffic in mid-1994. Segment E of the encompassed the portion of Segment D within highway was opened on December 21, 2013, Harris County and Segments F-1, F-2, and G. and is a designated toll road. It provides a four- Financing elements included TIFIA, toll revenue lane direct link between Katy and Cypress. The bonds, and a toll equity loan agreement with segment extends 14.4 miles. TxDOT.

Project Timeline Segment E opened December 2013.

Operational Performance Information is not available due to limited operating history.

Figure 24. SH 99 Segment E Map.

Fort Bend County Toll Road Authority In 1996, the Fort Bend County Commissioners Court and TxDOT created the Fort Bend County Toll Road Authority to provide Fort Bend County with needed transportation development. In 2004, FBCTRA opened its first toll road, the Fort Bend Parkway. The authority is governed by a five-member board that is appointed by the Fort Bend County Commissioners Court from members of the local community (42). A system map of FBCTRA is provided in Figure 25.

Source: FBCTRA. Figure 25. Fort Bend County Toll Road Authority System Map.

One FBCTRA toll facility was profiled for this report—Fort Bend Parkway.13 This facility, like the Westpark Tollway, has a segment in Harris County, which is owned and operated by HCTRA.

13 For more information on the Westpark Tollway, a facility co-owned and operated by FBCTRA and HCTRA, see the Westpark Tollway facility profile presented earlier in this report.

Fort Bend Parkway Governance The Fort Bend Parkway is operated by Location FBCTRA. The Fort Bend County Toll Road Authority operates the approximately 8.2 miles of the Fort Project Delivery Bend Parkway (Figure 26) beginning at the Fort Construction on the Fort Bend County Toll Bend/Harris County line just south of Beltway 8 Road was through the design-bid-build process. to Sienna Parkway. Financing Physical Description This project was financed through revenue The Fort Bend Parkway is a four-lane facility, bonds issued in 2012. with two lanes in each direction. Currently there are two main lane plazas. The first is between Project Timeline FM 2234/McHard Road and Fondren; the 2004: FBCTRA opens its first toll road to the second is between Sienna Parkway and SH 6. traveling public. On August 31, 2004, the Fort There are also entrance and exit ramp plazas at Bend Parkway from SH 6 to Beltway 8 opens. McHard Road and at Lake Olympia Boulevard. 2013: FBCTRA begins construction of Segment B-1 of the Fort Bend Parkway connecting Sienna Parkway and SH 6. 2014: Fort Bend Parkway Segment B-1 opens to traffic extension.

Operational Performance Total Total Fiscal Transactions Revenue Year (Million) ($ Million) 2009 3.3 $1.6 2010 3.3 $1.4 2011 3.1 $1.5 2012 3.2 $1.6 2013 3.5 $1.7 Figure 26. Fort Bend Parkway Map.

Revenues and Expenses by Toll Agency Forecasted revenues and expenses were obtained for the following toll authorities: TxDOT, NTTA, HCTRA, and CTRMA. TxDOT-Owned Toll Facilities TxDOT toll facilities consist of CTTS, Camino Colombia (SH 255), and SH 99 Segment I-2A. CTTS consists of Loop 1 North, SH 130 Segments 1–4, SH 45 North, and SH 45 Southeast. Figure 27 charts estimated CTTS revenues and expenses obtained from the official statement dated November 15, 2012 (43). Estimated revenues range from $145 million in 2015 to $490 million in 2035, while toll operation and maintenance costs range from $47 million to nearly $94 million.

$600 Reserve Maintenance

Operations & Maintenance Millions $500 Debt

TxDOT Revenue Forecast $400

$300

$200

$100

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2015 Figure 27. Estimated CTTS Revenues and Expenses.

Camino Colombia (SH 255) was purchased by TxDOT in 2004 after the facility was foreclosed upon and auctioned off earlier the same year. TxDOT’s Toll Operation Division provided revenue and operational expense projections for Camino Colombia (SH 255) for the years 2015 through 2017. An average revenue per transaction of $3.27 was used for revenue projections, and historic transactions were projected using an annual 5 percent growth rate. Figure 28 forecasts the revenues and operational expenses out to 2035. No maintenance expenses are included

because maintenance is covered through TxDOT’s routine maintenance budget. Estimated revenues range from $1.3 million in 2015 to $3.5 million in 2035, while operating expenses range from $264,000 to $550,000.

$4.0 Operating Cost Toll Revenue Forecast

Millions $3.5

$3.0

$2.5

$2.0

$1.5

$1.0

$0.5

$0.0

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2015 Figure 28. Estimated Camino Colombia Revenues and Expenses.

NTTA-Owned Toll Facilities NTTA is one of the two largest toll systems in the state in terms of revenues and expenses. The NTTA System consists of the DNT, PGBT including the Eastern Extension, SRT, Mountain Creek Lake Bridge, Addison Airport Toll Tunnel, and Lewisville Lake Toll Bridge. Projected revenues and obligations were provided by NTTA and are shown in Figure 29. Principal and interest include First and Second Tier Bonds, CIF Subordinate Bonds, and an ISTEA loan. Estimated revenues range from $585 million in 2015 to $1.5 billion in 2035, while expenses range from $557 million to nearly $1.1 billion.

$1,800 Reserve Maintenance Operations & Maintenance

Millions $1,600 Debt NTTA Revenue Forecast $1,400

$1,200

$1,000

$800

$600

$400

$200

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2015 Figure 29. Estimated NTTA Revenues and Expenses.

HCTRA-Owned Toll Facilities HCTRA is also one of the largest toll systems in the state in terms of revenues and expenses. HCTRA consists of the Hardy Toll Road, Sam Houston Tollway, Sam Houston Ship Channel Bridge, Westpark Tollway, Spur 90A Tollway (Fort Bend Parkway Extension), and Katy Managed Lanes. Projected revenues and expenses were provided by HCTRA and are shown in Figure 30. The projections assume an average annual growth rate of 4 percent for revenues and 6 percent for operations and maintenance. Estimated revenues range from $668 million in 2015 to about $1.4 billion in 2035, while expenses range from $590 million to nearly $950 million.

$1,600 Non-operating Expenses Operations & Maintenance Millions $1,400 Debt HCTRA Revenue Forecast $1,200

$1,000

$800

$600

$400

$200

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2015 Figure 30. Estimated HCTRA Revenues and Expenses.

CTRMA-Owned Toll Facilities CTRMA encompasses two toll facilities: 183A and Manor Expressway. Revenues and expenses were obtained from the official statement dated April 23, 2013 (44). Figure 31 forecasts the revenues and expenses out to 2035. Estimated revenues range from $57 million in 2015 to $228 million in 2035, while expenses range from nearly $50 million to $91 million.

$250 Anticipated Renewal & Replacement Expense

Non-system Administrative Millions Operations & Maintenance $200 Debt CTRMA Revenue Forecast

$150

$100

$50

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2015 Figure 31. Estimated CTRMA Revenues and Expenses.

Toll Road Impacts on Urban Mobility

As has already been well established in previous sections of this analysis, toll roads in Texas have played an important role in funding transportation capacity improvements in the large urban areas of Texas. Using information highlighted in the previous section of this report, researchers developed scenarios where future toll revenues could be leveraged to finance other transportation improvements in Texas. This work included analyzing toll revenue leveraging strategies in Texas and other states. This analysis focuses on the impact of toll roads on urban mobility. For the urban areas in Texas where toll roads are located, researchers assessed the overall impacts the tolled facilities have had on the region’s mobility. Much of this effort was on modeling these impacts, and it focused on capturing how travel has changed due to the existence of a toll road. Researchers used mobility measures including traffic volumes, VMT, and indices of congestion and delay. No effort was made to identify or assess any economic impacts, so none are included. Only congestion impacts were calculated.

Methodology The general methodology used to calculate the toll roads’ impacts on mobility is the same methodology used to estimate delay for TxDOT’s Texas 100 Congested Roadways (45). Toll road volumes were allocated to roads that are logical, parallel routes for the toll roads. In only the most obvious of cases, such as a diagonal toll road with no parallel roads, was volume assigned to non-parallel roads. Volumes were allocated to roads based on proximity to the toll road alignment and according to 2012 volumes on the road. Close, heavily traveled roads received more traffic than distant, lightly traveled roads. VMT was maintained relatively constant, although some changes are likely in an actual “no toll road” scenario. Once the toll road traffic was moved to other roadways, the traffic densities on these roadways were recalculated to determine how much speeds would deteriorate throughout the day due to higher traffic volumes and higher traffic densities based on an equation that links traffic density to travel speed. This is an estimate of a scenario that is not likely to occur. The volumes on some toll road segments are very high because they serve large employment centers and developments that would not likely have been developed in those locations given the existence of only surface street capacity in those areas. The existence of the toll roads has contributed to the mobility of the region and allowed growth to occur. If that roadway capacity was not there, the demand would not have occurred. It is possible that not only would the traffic have spread to the surrounding roadway network, which is what is seen here, but also moved to other parts of the urban area. The results shown are the best estimate of an unlikely situation given the complexities involved.

Results This methodology was employed for the Austin region, the Dallas-Fort Worth region, and the Houston region. The traffic volumes on toll facilities were diverted to non-tolled facilities to ascertain the impact of not having the toll road capacity. The VMT numbers reported in this section include all counties for which a toll road exists in that region and are 2012 data. The results of this analysis are described by urban area and are reported in terms of VMT, hours of delay, and cost of delay. Austin The toll road facilities in the Austin area included in this analysis are Loop 1 North, SH 130, SH 45, and US 183A. The daily VMT in the region for 2012 was 38.3 million. Diverting traffic volume off the toll roads resulted in moving 800,000 vehicle miles onto existing facilities, or 2.1 percent of the daily VMT. This resulted in 3.2 million additional person hours of delay per year, an 8.2 percent increase. The additional annual delay cost was about $70 million. Dallas-Fort Worth The toll road facilities in the Dallas-Fort Worth region included in this analysis are the Dallas North Tollway, the President George Bush Turnpike/SH 161, the Sam Rayburn Tollway, and the International Parkway (not part of the NTTA System). The daily VMT in the region for 2012 was 137.2 million. Diverting traffic volume off the toll roads resulted in moving 3.4 million vehicle miles onto existing facilities, or 2.5 percent of the daily VMT. This resulted in 10.5 million additional person hours of delay per year, a 5.3 percent increase. The additional annual delay cost was approximately $231 million. Houston The toll road facilities in the Houston region included in this analysis are the Hardy Toll Road, the Westpark Tollway, the Sam Houston Tollway/Beltway 8, and the Fort Bend Parkway. The daily VMT in the region for 2012 was 124.4 million. Diverting traffic volume off the toll roads resulted in moving 5.9 million vehicle miles onto existing facilities, or 4.7 percent of the daily VMT. This resulted in 24.9 million additional person hours of delay per year, a 17.2 percent increase. The additional annual delay cost was about $549 million. Summary of Analysis Table 31 shows the daily VMT in each of the three regions as well as the diverted VMT that was moved from the toll facilities to the non-tolled roadway network. The percent diverted is also shown. The number of toll road miles included in the analysis is shown to illustrate the magnitude of the toll road network in each urban area. This is an approximate number of toll road centerline miles from which traffic was diverted for this analysis.

Table 31. Daily VMT and Diverted VMT by Urban Area. Diverted Toll Road Daily VMT Percent Urban Area VMT Centerline (Millions) Diverted (Millions) Miles* Austin 38.3 0.8 2.1 75 Dallas-Fort Worth 137.2 3.4 2.5 120 Houston 124.4 5.9 4.7 130 * The centerline miles are the approximate mileages of the toll roads used in this analysis. Source: TTI.

Table 32 shows the regional mobility impacts in terms of the increase in annual delay (person hours) and the increase in annual congestion cost in 2012 dollars. The percent change in delay is also shown. The percent change in annual congestion cost is the same as the change in delay because the two are linked. The greatest impact is in the Houston region where the diverted VMT is the largest and the cost of delay in both time and money is the most significant. This is not unexpected but rather indicative of the size of the Houston region’s toll road network and the availability of suitable roadway options to divert the traffic compared to the other two regions. Table 32. Regional Mobility Impacts of Diverted Toll Road Traffic. Increase in Annual Increase in Percent Change Urban Area Delay (Million Annual Cost in Annual Delay Person Hours) (Millions) Austin 3.2 8.2 $70.0 Dallas-Fort Worth 10.5 5.3 $230.9 Houston 24.9 17.2 $548.5 Source: TTI.

Table 33 shows these impacts by functional class. For each of the three regions, the percent increase in VMT and the percent increase in delay are shown. This illustrates the impacts of the toll traffic diversions on the roadway network as a whole. The decreases shown for other freeways represent the traffic diverted from the tollways. There is not necessarily a corresponding decrease in delay for the same classification because the diverted traffic was, in some cases, diverted onto other highly congested freeways, thus increasing the delay on those facilities.

Table 33.Toll Road Diversion Impacts by Functional Class. Austin Dallas-Fort Worth Houston Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Functional Class Change in Change Change Change Change Change VMT in Delay in VMT in Delay in VMT in Delay Interstates 7.6 22.7 1.1 1.1 6.8 30.4 Other Freeways −12.7 0.5 −11.6 −7.6 −21.7 4.7 Major Arterials 5.7 5.7 9.5 11.6 7.6 17.8 Minor Arterials 5.0 1.6 13.1 13.8 13.4 16.7 Source: TTI.

While this analysis focused on daily and annual impacts, it did reveal both an increase and widening of peak-period impacts. The peak periods not only worsened in terms of these mobility impact measures, but they also widened or spread, meaning the peak periods were lengthened because the existing VMT was placed on fewer roadways. This is shown generically in Figure 32

in terms of speed and time of day. The speeds are directly related to congestion.

Speed (mph) Speed

Midnight 2 4 6 8 10 Noon 2 4 6 8 10 Hour of Day

Existing No-Toll

Source: TTI. Figure 32. Mobility Impacts of Removing Toll Road Capacity.

This analysis represents an attempt to measure the mobility impacts of not having the existing toll road network in Texas’ large urban areas. While it is not a likely occurrence, this represents a best estimate of such a scenario. Doing so creates many challenges and assumptions on where the traffic would go and whether any of the demand in the vicinity of the toll roads would be where it is today to begin with if the toll road capacity did not exist. It is clear, however, that the absence of the toll road capacity would create an adverse impact on the mobility in each of these regions by increasing both hours of delay and costs associated with congestion.

References

1 Legislative Reference Library of Texas. http://www.lrl.state.tx.us/legis/BillSearch/billdetails.cfm?legSession=75- 0&billTypeDetail=SB&billNumberDetail=370

2 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/Search/DocViewer.aspx?ID=77RSB003424A&QueryText=%22S B+342%22&DocType=A

3 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=78R&Bill=SB903

4 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/BillSummary.aspx?LegSess=78R&Bill=HB3184

5 “Summary: HB 3588.” Texas Legislature Online. State of Texas. 26 Dec. 2013 .

6 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/78R/analysis/pdf/SB00716F.pdf#navpanes=0

7 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/78R/analysis/pdf/SB01464F.pdf#navpanes=0

8 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=79R&Bill=SB129#

9 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=79R&Bill=HB2139#

10 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=79R&Bill=HB2650#

11 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=79R&Bill=HB2702#

12 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=80R&Bill=HB570#

13 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=81R&Bill=HB3139#

14 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/BillSummary.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1201

15 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1274#

16 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=SB19#

17 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/BillSummary.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=SB246

18 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=SB469#

19 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=SB1420#

20 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=HB341

21 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=HB1123#

22 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=HB2585#

23 http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=SB1029#

24 Beaty, C., M. Burris, T. Geiselbrecht, R. Baker, and N. Norboge. “Examining TxDOT- Operated Toll Roads and Understanding the Impact of Specific Tolling Events.” FHWA/TX- 14/0-6737-2, Texas A&M Transportation Institute, The Texas A&M University System, College Station, Texas. 2014.

25 http://kxan.com/2014/05/16/new-expressways-opens-for-traffic-on-saturday/

26 USDOT Federal Highway Administration: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/tollpage/t1part4.cfm

27 https://www.ntta.org/whatwedo/fin_invest_info/financial_Info/Documents/2013_FINAL_BUDG ET_BOOK_11262012_v10.pdf

28 NTTA. 2012 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. https://www.ntta.org/whatwedo/fin_invest_info/financial_Info/Documents/NTTA_System_2 012_Comprehensive_Annual_Financial_Report.pdf

29 North Texas Tollway Authority. NTTA System Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports for FY 2005-2013. NTTA Special Projects Financials for FY 2011-2013. http://www.txdot.gov/business/investors/ctts-reports.html

30https://www.hctra.org/about_reports/?CSRT=17014504008545264670

31 Harris County Toll Road Authority. Basic Financial Statements for FY 2004-2013. https://www.hctra.org/about_reports/

32 Texas S.B. 370, 75th Leg. Reg. Sess., Chapter 361, Subchapter H on transfers and Section 7.26 creating North Texas Tollway Authority, (1997).

33 TxDOT. CTTS Reports. https://www.txdot.gov/business/investors/ctts-reports.html

34 FHWA. Project Profiles: Central Texas Turnpike System. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/project_profiles/tx_central_turnpike.htm

35 Rider 44 Report.

36 Texas Department of Transportation, Central Texas Turnpike System Actual Traffic and Revenue Reports for FY 2009-2013. http://www.txdot.gov/business/investors/ctts-reports.html

37 http://www.netrma.org/sites/default/files/files/FY%202013%20NET%20RMA%20Strategic%20 Plan%2011-2013.pdf

38 Texas Transportation Commission, July 26 Commission Meeting Minutes. Item No. 110996 TTA. http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/adm/2007/minutes/jul26.pdf

39 http://www.mobilityauthority.com/about/

40 http://www.mobilityauthority.com/monkeewrench/files/resources/Mobility_Authority_2013_An nual_Report_-_.pdf

41 Texas Transportation Commission Minute Proceedings, September 30, 2004.

42 http://www.fbctra.com/about-fbctra-general-business.html

43 Texas Department of Transportation, Official Statement Dated November 15, 2012. Retrieved from Electronic Municipal Market Access (EMMA) on July 15, 2014. http://emma.msrb.org/EP714402-EP555014-EP956159.pdf.

44 Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority, Official Statement Dated April 23, 2013. Retrieved from Electronic Municipal Market Access (EMMA) on July 15, 2014. http://emma.msrb.org/EA518673-EA404490-EA801462.pdf.

45 http://www.fbctra.com/about-fbctra-general-business.html